TOE Theory of Everything Archive
TOE Dark Matter Dark Energy Black Holes Creation
Expansion is Gravity EIG – Noel
Hodson http://www.noelhodson.com SW2000 Telework Studies
The Theory of Everything Archive
Noel Hodson SW2000 Telework Studies
Notes and speculations 1988-2004
Go to MAIN PAGE Short text of TOE Theory of Everything EIG
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
MAIN PAGE |
CONTENTS
Expansion is Gravity – the EIG model in a few words:
What is matter?
Hydrogen baryons at 10 million degrees.
Harvard’s
ghost-particles, negative gravity and dark energy.
Limitless numbers
of macro and micro universes?
Summary to date –
Oct 2003 – Is this the end of EIG?
Models of Reality
– before EIG
MAP, COBE and Some
Astronomical EIG Numbers
Six foot man
expands infinitely – says MAP and COBE
Dark Matter and Energy – Reverse Gravity.
QED – Feynman and the eightfold path.
Diagram relating to text below see:
Ed Fredkin at MIT and Cellular Automata.
Planck’s Quanta and Constant pertinent to EIG:
Newton’s Bucket
& Ernst Mach’s theory of inertia:
The Elements – EIG light-play.
Newton’s Law of
Gravity and Milgrom’s MOND theory.
Radio and TV
signals – permanent patterns in Space - inertia
The really scary
implications of inertia and waves.
Clouds of mesons,
pions, photons, other virtual particles & EIG.
Casimir Effect and
a Vacuum starship.
Space Chimneys –
are better than Casimir space drives.
Casimir and EIG –
gravity within dense matter.
String Theory,
symmetry and super-symmetry & EIG.
Expansion is Gravity – the EIG model in
a few words:
My ideas
are, as far as I am able to judge, consistent with accepted science or at least
with current scientific speculation. I
cannot demonstrate or prove these ideas, but perhaps others can suggest
experiments that would test the theory.
As the
universe expands the omni-present electro-magnetic spectrum or light, the stuff
of the universe, attenuates at 2.304E-18% per second, and creates a total (supra) or partial (super) vacuum. Light
rushes in to the vacuum – at the speed of light – and in some zones or spheres
the light waves collide or merge at angles and at wave frequencies that
reinforce the “speed” and cause colliding waves to spin, maelstrom, hurricane
or tornado like; at 90 Billion Kilometres Per Second (KPS). This immense speed,
C2, creates a surface, and a fractal of primary matter (perhaps a
Quark) is created from energy; following Einstein’s formula Energy=Matter X
Light-Speed Squared (E=MC2 ).
The Hubble
universe constantly expands (the zone or sphere does not necessarily contract
after expansion) and inrushing energy feeds the spinning fractal. As in a
tornado, I speculate that, the spin draws in surrounding energy leaving a
depleted zone around the vortex-sphere. This third vacuum, a surface-vacuum,
attracts other fractals, while the constantly expanding spinning surface repels
them. The dynamic thus created between repulsive and attractive forces is the
dynamic tension that underlies all matter. At this pre-particle level no thing
exists that can interfere with the expanding and spinning vortex. Stability and
permanence and inertia are created by Hubble expansion.
What
is matter? Hydrogen baryons at 10 million degrees.
An article
by Brian D. Fields, astrophysicist at the
NB – To correct and re-write
texts below on “coloured light waves colliding”. What is an electron. Does the
atomic nucleus grow? Yes. ( ? Different particles and
perhaps elements result from primary fractals or quarks being formed through
the mutually reinforcing collisions of different wavelengths. Wavelengths that
do not match cannot combine with each other to form matter. This characteristic
of the electromagnetic spectrum to keep separate and to maintain the integrity
of specific signals, is evident in the transmissions and identities of millions
of radio, TV and telephone transmissions that occupy the same space. When
compatible wavelengths do combine, they create matter with a particular
vibration (colour) that in turn may be the foundations of a specific element.
?)
Harvard’s
ghost-particles, negative gravity and dark energy.
Does this
fit with EIG? A fluid (presumably Dark
Energy?) that stretches across the universe sounds like a definition of a field
force. It is also similar to the concept of long “strings”. The universe is
filled with a field of electro-magnetic energy (light) that can be detected at
any point we care to test. Why posit a new “fluid”. If the universe is not infinite, if it has
boundaries, and if the boundaries are expanding at my calculated 2.304E-18% per
second (which is an ever accelerating global expansion) then the field/fluid
will attenuate, as the Harvard team calculates. What might be drawing out this
attenuation is the total, unimaginable supra-vacuum of non-space time outside
our universe. Whether or not the stuff of the universe (light or fluid) is
being replenished (say, from one or more open singularities) does not concern
this speculation. As the field attenuates and as it does so unevenly (clumps of
matter, galaxies, matter-less lakes etc) it will feel the internal pull of
super-vacuums, at every point, on every scale, at all times. These
super-vacuums tug on the field which returns to fill them…. And so back to EIG, which still remains a
viable concept for expert consideration.
Limitless
numbers of macro and micro universes?
Leonard
Susskind, professor of physics at
EIG would
respond that for a bubble to form there must be a surface, and EIG justifies
surfaces as the membrane formed between an expanding zone, within which the
electro-magnetic spectrum (light) briefly attenuates, thus creating a partial vacuum,
thus attracting light to fill the vacuum, and the spinning that occurs when
light collides in such a manner as to reinforce the rate of propagation of
light to the degree that a vortex forms – one of the fractals of matter
(perhaps a quark) in the universe. Around the vortex, which compacts energy,
remains a depleted surface zone that feeds the compaction. This surface vacuum
attracts, while the spin repels – and thus stable inertia of matter, and
perhaps the cosmological constant, is created.
A major
divergence from String Theory occurs in my EIG ideas, where Prof Susskind (and
other physicists) seems to assume that the vacuums he cites are the cause of
the expansion of the universe; that they somehow counteract gravity and must
counteract gravity to prevent the collapse of the universe.
Whereas I
simply assume they are the cause, or one of the causes of gravity, but I fail
to ask what causes Hubble expansion. It just is; a given. The increase in the
pace of expansion (how this is measured by science I do not know) would be due,
in EIG terms, simply to the logical incremental addition of 2.304E-18% per
second to any zone being measured. The bigger the zone, the more it increases.
“To he who hath shall be given.”
The more I read of String Theory (ST) and try to put it into
context, the more I feel that ST is on the wrong tack and EIG is on a better
tack.
But it would help if I re-read everything I have on ST and
get to understand what the mathematicians are driving at. I’m sure that
Summary to
date – Oct 2003 – Is this the end of EIG?
With the recent (Oct 03) announcements,
of the discovery of the signature signals of Cold Dark Matter (CDM), from Céline Boehm and Dan Cooper of Oxford University, my
cherished “Expansion is Gravity” (EIG) theory may have to be abandoned. The
zones, perhaps with diameters of Planck Length the smallest scale in particle
physics, expanding at what I have calculated to be another minuscule rate
of 2.304E-18% per
second, were envisaged by me partly to fill in the knowledge gap left by the
mysterious CDM, that makes up 80% of the mass of the Universe. These
researchers are proposing that CDM is not virtual vacuums or attractive “holes”
in space time caused by expansion, as I imagine, but are particles with mass,
with a characteristic signal emanating from the centre of the Milky Way, and therefore
perhaps from the centre of all galaxies -
“….the ….sharp signal,
which has an energy of 511 kiloelectronvolts (keV), is believed to be due to
the annihilation of electrons and positrons the antimatter equivalent of
electrons.”
“…Says Hooper. "Since it's difficult to imagine how
they could be slowed to a standstill, we were forced to consider a surprisingly
light dark matter particle."
“By "light", the researchers mean one to 100
megaelectronvolts, which is between 1000 and 10 times lighter than a proton.
Such a light particle is surprising because particle accelerators routinely
create particles of this mass, so the particle should have revealed itself.”
The New Scientist report
by Marcus Chown tell us that if the findings are confirmed then – “If dark matter really is made up of such
light particles, every cubic centimetre of space in the vicinity of the Earth
must contain a few tens of them. So you should be able to detect them in
lab-based experiments.”
As I have little
understanding of the issues involved and only the haziest notion of what a
particle 1,000 times lighter than a proton might be or fit into particle
tables, and as my cyclotron is undergoing routine maintenance for the
foreseeable future, I’ll just have to wait to read a host of other scientific
opinions and wait to hear the almost inevitable death-knell for my interesting
idea EIG. But it is not quite dead yet. So it may be worth adding relevant
facts and fiction to the file below.
On second
thoughts, even if they do find CDM (see “Summary to date” next para) it still
doesn’t explain what gravity is. For that gravitons and gravity waves would
have to be found. So EIG still lives – but not in such rude health.
Creatures of Light
Introduction, pre-EIG
The
Universe is made of light, the electro-magnetic spectrum. Light is the basic
“stuff” of the Universe and all things in the Universe are a manifestation of
light. The serious gaze of the new born child, a creature, as we all are, made
of light, constantly reminds us that the greatest mystery of physics is how
life, intelligence, sentience and consciousness emerge from the
electro-magnetic spectrum.
Paul
Davies, writing in New Scientist on the
(1) What
makes the Universe Tick? (The Big Bang & Superstrings)
(2) What’s
the Universe made of? (Cold Dark Matter - CDM)
(3) Was
Einstein’s antigravity really a mistake? (An assumed repulsive force to balance
gravity)
(4) Why do
we live in three dimensions? (Mathematicians assume there are many dimensions)
(5) Is time
travel possible? (Probably not)
(6) Are we
living in a cosmic colander? (Of black holes)
(7) How
come I can ask these questions? (Consciousness.)
I would add
to his list:
(8) What is Inertia?
(9) How are surfaces and objects formed and
sustained?
(10) What is the organising principle and the
power of Life?
And
finally,
(11) Will Professor Stephen Hawking ever find his
God?
Everyone would
have their own list of universal wonders, each would be different and all would
be valid. The wonders of the universe are probably infinite – there are
certainly many times more questions than we have answers for. The way we answer
such questions depends entirely on the accurate or inaccurate information we
have and on the models we use to organise the information.
Models of
Reality – before EIG
The most
celebrated scientists, it seems, are those who produce the most readily
understood models of reality that stand the triple tests of experiment, attacks
from colleagues and of time. Such models include Empedocle’s elements;
Lucretius’s atoms of light; Alhazen’s Optics; Kepler’s & Galileo’s Solar
System; Gassendi’s photons; Newton’s Mechanics and Gravity; Casimir’s Effect;
Michelson & Morley’s constant speed of light; Maxwells’ electromagnetic
spectrum; Planck’s Black Body Radiation, Constant & Quanta; Heisenberg’s
Uncertainty Principle; Bohr’s collapse of the wave function; Bohr’s, Born’s &
Heisenberg’s Copenhagen Interpretation; Einstein’s Relativity and Special
Relativity; Bose’s Statistics; Fermi-Dirac’s statistics; Bell’s Theorem;
Shrödinger’s impossible Cat; Feynman’s Diagrams & QED; Hubble’s Constant;
Fred Hoyle’s Big Bang and Multiple Bangs; Crick’s & Watson’s Double-Helix;
Hawking’s Radiation; and many, many, many more models of the whole and of parts
of the system..
It is fair
to say that at every stage of advancement in understanding, there are hundreds,
and these days thousands, of brilliant scientists whose work contributes to the
latest discoveries and to the confirmation of theoretical models. But, as on
any stage, just a few of the actors get to share the spotlight of fame and
success. Truly, each star turn does
indeed “stand on the shoulders of giants” – and these days on the shoulders of
teams of giants.
Models of
reality are recognised as being just that – models. The more we delve down into
the atom and soar up to the vast spaces of the universe, the less are we able
to grasp and represent the reality of what we see. Just as an obituary of
one-thousand words may appear to be an accurate description of a person and of
their life, but be the slightest and palest shadow of the reality of that
person; so scientific models are metaphors and similes of the reality they seek
to describe. But models and labels are central and essential to our
understanding and to our ability to think – and from well tested theories come
practical applications. All the best models ultimately enable us to manipulate
the stuff of the Earth and the power of the universe; even if we cannot
complete the models and do not fully understand them.
From
reading hundreds of scientific books and articles over forty-five years, I have
come to a hazy understanding of how Life, The Universe and Everything is
thought to work. What I have been unable to find, or unable to comprehend if it
is out-there, staring me the face, is how the Hubble Factor that underpins the
expansion of the Universe and the Big-Bang theory, fits into the current
picture. Expansion is wholly accepted as the driving logic for the Big-Bang
theory but thereafter it seems to have no part to play. John Gribbin quotes Einstein as writing in
1951 “All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me no nearer to
the answer to the question “What are light quanta?” Nowadays every Tom, Dick
and Harry thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken”.
In like
mind, here is a model that I have consciously brooded on for nearly forty, not
fifty, years that attempts to tie-in Hubble while remaining faithful to
accepted facts and theories, and explores new thoughts about light and its
quanta and that other great mystery, gravity.
MAP, COBE and
Some Astronomical EIG Numbers
Stephen Battersby reported in New Scientist on
Age of the universe is 13.7 billion years
Shape is Flat
Age when light first appeared is 200 million years
Contents include:
4% ordinary matter
23% dark matter Nature unknown
73% dark energy Nature unknown
Hubble constant (expansion rate) is 71km/sec/megaparsec
Stephen Battersby also tells us that a megaparsec is 3.26
light years.
The MAP data supports the theory of INFLATION that imagines
a period of very rapid expansion shortly after the creation/appearance of the
universe.
If you work all this out and reduce it to a layman’s terms
it accords closely with the factor I had set out (below) based on the reports
that the edges of the visible universe recede from us at the speed of light.
The Hubble constant as stated above works out as the
universe expanding at a minuscule
percentage every second – of 0.0000000000000002303633783% or in handy
mathematical format
It is 2.304E-18% per
second.
My figure was
2.348E-18% per
second. Thus affirming some glimmering of understanding of the factors and the
issues.
If expansion is gravity – it must occur everywhere at all
times. EIG proposes that the rate of refilling the attenuated energy vacuums that
occur in matter, inside planets, for example, is held back momentarily and
strengthened by the shells or surfaces around the fractals of matter (perhaps
quarks) but such delay aside, let us apply Hubble to a six foot man.
Six foot man
expands infinitely – says MAP and COBE
To get down to small enough units required to allow EXCEL to
show the calculation, the man’s height, in his six foot high and six foot wide
bubble of expanding space, had to be converted into millionths of millimetres –
which are pretty small. Using the Hubble factor I extracted from the MAP
report, 2.304E-18% per
second, our man would expand in a year by just 1.32 millionths of one
millimetre – ignoring the cumulative effect. This would be unnoticeable to most
of us and in fact is undetectable by normal measuring techniques as all the
measures also expand at precisely the same rate. Is this rate enough to make
him universally attractive?
Bear in mind the mechanism that would be at work: The
trillions of spaces – say Planck lengths (Planck’s Length is 10-35 metres,
Hubble expansion is 10-18 metres per second, or nearly twice the
decimal scale; about a billion, billion times larger – but to squeeze that
amount of expansion into Planck space, we can reduce the time to a billion.
Billionth of a second) – occupied by the man’s material body, expand by
this trivial amount. The QED or light energy attenuates creating virtual
vacuums, attracting energy (light) to flow into the vacuums. These in turn
partially evacuate the larger spheres around the space occupied by the man –
partially because the surrounding sphere is larger than the inner sphere or
spheres.
As sphere two goes into a partial vacuum state the
surrounding sphere/s, sphere three, transfers energy inwards, itself
attenuating but less than sphere two. This gives rise to the laws of gravity
where the pull lessens by the square of the distance. This rate of in-falling of energy takes a
second; the next second it occurs again. The process is inexorable and occurs
throughout space. Therefore any one zone, say a sphere of Planck length, is a
continuous conduit and pump for energy – from all directions and at the speed
of light (or gravity). Would this multi-directional factor account for the MOND
theory that proposes that at large distances gravity diminishes more rapidly
than the law allows?
Any reader following this paper will by now have realised
that the 23% Dark Matter and 73% Dark Energy – “Nature Unknown” – are explained
by EIG as vacuums caused by expansion.
They are holes not matter - QED and QED.
The MAP or more properly WMAP (W for Wilkinson) is a
satellite positioned 1.5 million kilometres further away from the Sun than the
Earth. It looks outwards into the blackness of space. If it looked at the Earth
or the Sun or even into the centre of the Milky Way, it would be blinded by the
microwave energy from those bodies. It reads microwave energies between 20 and
90 gigahertz and is sensitive to variations down to 1/25th millionth
of 1 degree of temperature. What WMAP is measuring is the echo from the Big
Bang that fills the universe with a back-ground microwave energy of 2.7 degrees
above absolute zero (2.7 degrees Kelvin). How it does this I haven’t the
faintest idea – but we just have to believe the astrophysicists.
PRE-MAP REPORT.
The sphere’s or zones that expand, range in size down from
the whole universe, with a radius of 12 to 15 billion light years, (at 12 Billion light years being 113,451,059,465,856,000,000,000 kilometres or 1.E+23
kilometres from me or you, at the centre of our known universe to the visible
edge.) and zones can have as small a diameter as Planck’s Length of 10-35
metres or (0.000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,001 metres). Measured at the farthest horizon, using 12
billion light years, the universe is thought to be expanding at the speed of
light, hence the invisibility of matter beyond that horizon. The percentage per
second of this expansion is 0.000000000000000264248267% or 2.6E-18 % per second. This minuscule
constant rate of expansion attenuates the fabric of the universe and underlies
the all pervasive, eternal tug of gravity. The super-vacuums so formed are
filled at the speed of light from the immediate surroundings that leaves a gap
to be filled, that tugs on the adjacent spheres ad infinitum, in all directions
at all times. This is at least part of the force we call gravity.
NB – build
in here that Einstein predicted that the universe would be found to be
expanding – but he withdrew from this position as it was too absurd, until
Hubble demonstrated expansion through his interpretation of observations. Then
Einstein embraced his own conclusions again. The key point from this
information is that it is the inclusion of gravity in the mathematical models
created to wind-back the universe from the present day to the Big-Bang that
dictates the need to propose a period of rapid inflation in the first
micro-seconds. It would be interesting to know what the models would tell us if
they were based on the EIG theory. If expansion is a major cause of or
contributor to gravity, then winding back or shrinking the universe would
switch off that factor – and remove the need to imagine an Inflationary Period
to account for the homogeneity of temperatures (background radiation) across
the universe.
Dark Matter and Energy – Reverse
Gravity.
Elsewhere
in this paper is mentioned Einstein’s theory about dark matter and dark energy
that he concluded ought to push rather than pull. EIG fundamentally requires the pushing force,
caused by expansion, that in turn creates the pull force that is gravity. EIG
is based on the idea that between these two forces is a dynamic tension that is
inertia and that binds fractals together to form particles. This dark energy conundrum is again raised in
a new book Echo of the Big Bang, by
Michael Lemonick,
QED – Feynman and the eightfold path.
Diagram relating to text below see:
.http://www.noelhodson.com\index_files\9Spheres\9Spheres.ppt
QED is
Quantum Electro-Dynamics, largely developed by Richard Feynman and his
colleagues and described in his book QED – which contains 3 lectures on the
subject. QED examines the behaviour of light such as bending (refraction),
bouncing (reflection), scattering, colour (wavelength) etc and creates the
mathematics that describe the processes occurring beneath the observed
phenomena. QED is as proven and reliable
as any scientific theory can be. It is
beyond reasonable doubt that QED is correct.
Feynman’s
lectures devote much explanation to, for example, reflection, telling us that
contrary to common-sense, light shining onto and into reflective glass is
reflected from all parts of the glass. QED maths follows all the paths taken by
the photons and by “summing” all such paths the maths arrive at the most
“probable” path (as in probability theory) that concurs with common-sense
observations i.e. the light is reflected at an angle of 90 degrees. What
becomes clear from QED is that the photons that arrive from the light source
are NOT the same photons that emerge from the reflective glass. En-route the
photons have changed to electrons, then to other particles that create photons
that emerge from the experiment.
There is
much more to QED than that, but I want to try to relate the unpredictable QED
behaviour of photons (and electrons etc) to EIG.
Expanding
EIG spheres of equal size (say Planck Space/Length size
of 10-35 metres) thought of as billiard balls will I think
“nest” in 3 dimensions in groups of 9. This is the central “target” sphere,
surrounded in the plane by 6 more spheres (actually in 2 dimensions) and if
turned sideways to our view, with a sphere on each side – all in contact or
contingent relationship with the target sphere. Interpenetration of adjoining
spheres is avoided here for simplicity.
In EIG as
the (imaginary) target sphere expands it attenuates its interior material
(light) and the electro-magnetic spectrum rushes in to fill the partial vacuum
– strengthened by the directional energy of the incoming light source. This is
a virtual photon created in a measurable standard quantum in, say, Planck
space.
The
universe continues its inexorable (and energetic) expansion. The virtual photon
in the imaginary target sphere, formed from both the ambient energy in its
vicinity with the incoming energy of the light source, is surrounded by 8
imaginary contingent spheres that all attenuate with expansion, each tempting
the particle in the target sphere to fill their partially vacuumed space.
The virtual
photon in the imagined target sphere dissolves and moves (at the speed of
light) into any of the 8 imaginary contingent spheres. The movement is not entirely random however.
The directional energy from the source of the incoming photon is a factor and
also the polarisation of the incoming photon/s is a factor.
The
probability of a 90 degrees reflection is maintained by these two factors. But
where any particular photon will be absorbed and re-emitted within the matrix
of (Planck sized?) fundamental quantum spheres can only be predicted to be one
of eight directions – with the possibility of scattering in another 8
directions occurring at every “newly defined” or observed target sphere.
Coherent
materials such as certain crystals may be based on coherently organised
fundamental 9nest-spheres and hence the routing of incoming energy is far more
predictable.
The routing
along the probability path (90 degrees of reflection) surely must occur as the
incoming photons (waves and particles) create electrons in matter that in turn
are more restricted as to direction than are photons. As the electrons emerge from the mirror-glass
into “space” they create photons that we observe.
The Planck
spheres are described here as “imaginary” as no such sphere’s or bubbles
actually exist. It is a convenience for modelling and imagination to conceive
that Hubble Space is expanding in spheres and at a rate “per second”. In fact
the process must be ubiquitous and smooth excepting that at a fundamental level
of scale, which is perhaps the Planck Length 10-35
metres, EIG speculates that the universal expansion “pauses” for a virtual
moment as attenuation occurs and “waits” for infinite light to redistribute
itself to refill the attenuated space/s. As the spheres are an imagined
construct, then there are no nests of 9 such spheres with a target sphere at
the centre, and therefore the number of directions that the inflowing light
might take “next” is not limited to 8.
Unless the very process of Hubble Expansion acting on the
electromagnetic energy spectrum does indeed structure the fabric of the
universe to the Planck scale or another regular scale and thus gives rise to
the observed quantum states of particles physics.
Ed Fredkin at MIT and Cellular Automata.
David L
Chandler reporting in New Scientist 21 June 2003 page 32, on cellular automaton
cites John Conway’s 1970 game Life where simple rules determine if a square on
a flat grid should be black or white – resulting in complex patterns. What
struck me about the report on Ed Fredkin taking this system to ever more
sophisticated levels, referred to as The Rule, and into 3 dimensional grids,
was Fredkin’s idea that a subatomic particle is just a pattern of many bits of
information that travel through the grid (representing empty space)
together “sort of like a swarm of
gnats.” A swarm of a few hundred bits
being enough to make a photon or electron.
It is just
the kind of image I have been struggling with to visualise how a number of EIG
fractals might (A) join to form a particle and (B) propagate through space –
see Feynman and the Eightfold Path above.
“When it
comes to quantum mechanics, Fredkin doesn’t get it.” says Pierre Noyes of the
SLAC accelerator at
So who do
we believe?
Planck’s Quanta and Constant pertinent
to EIG:
Watch this
space
Newton
Briefly,
Newton observed that when a bucket full of water is suspended on a rope and set
spinning, the water at first climbs up the sides of the bucket, as expected of
centripetal forces, becoming concave at the surface, but then flattens out
again and the water does not spin at the speed of the revolving bucket, or at
all. This observed example of inertia
(the water stubbornly remaining inert) could not be explained. Austrian 19th
century scientist Ernst Mach suggested that all matter in the universe is
connected and that the water was staying in its place in relationship to the
mass of the universe, rather than following the local spin of the bucket’s
sides. Einstein used Mach’s Principle as
the basis for his thinking about curved space, where space bends in the
presence of massive bodies (stars and planets etc).
Can the
Water Bucket experiment be bent to accommodate EIG, or vice-versa?
Pre-matter,
EIG relies on the stuff of the universe, the electromagnetic energy field,
being just that - a field. A field has no parts and logically therefore
everything in the field is instantly connected to everything else in the field.
Logically, the primary energy field contains the ingredients for all phenomena,
including sensation and intelligence. It is a given therefore that all zones of
the universe are in contact. When matter condenses “out of” the energy field,
it is actually condensing “in” the energy field. Matter is still part of the
field, albeit bounded and defined by a surface. EIG assumes that surfaces hold
out against internal vacuums (attenuated energy) caused by expansion being
refilled by energy, for longer than do spheres in open space. And thus matter is a stronger attractor than
a similar sized zone of “free” energy in the space/time continuum. However, all matter is condensed from the
field and is therefore connected to the whole field, albeit cloaked to some
extent.
While able
to find agreement that the water is connected to the whole universe – this does
not advance any thoughts on why the water should “choose” to stay in its
inertial pattern as related to the universe, rather than to get along and spin
along with the friendly old bucket. But I know some people who seem to act like
the water – ignoring most local forces and remaining largely inert. The Bucket requires much more thought.
PS – Why do
dark colours absorb more heat from the sun than light ones? Are the light colours “full”?
Wave Particle Duality & EIG:
The double
slit experiment and experiments with polarised light give results that lead to
the conclusion that light is both waves and particles. Whether the waves or the
particles predominate is thought to depend on how we, the observers, look at
the experiment and how we measure the results.
The Expansion is Gravity (EIG) model allows for light propagating
through the almost total vacuum of space at 300,000 KPS travelling in waves.
The word “propagate” describes a wave function. Bullets “speed” from place to
place and bullets of light or photons would also speed from source to target.
But we cannot track the path of a single photon through vacuum nor air.
In another
form, as an electron in a copper wire for example, the particle seems more
predictable and traceable – but even here the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle
governs and we cannot know its path, other than as a statistical
probability. But imagine an energy wave
moving forwards or propagating from expanding sphere to expanding sphere, at
the rate of 300,000KPS, and from time to time as it arrives at a vacuum, or is
drawn back on itself to a vacuum, it is focused inwards or meets another wave,
they collide and in some cases the collisions are at precisely the same
wavelengths that reinforce each other, at which point a fractal forms and
becomes a permanent or temporary particle. A photon that we can detect may need
numbers of such fractals to combine, to give it its characteristics.
In other
words, a light wave, from an energetic source, propagates across space at about
300,000 KPS, never faster, never slower, regardless of the speed of the source
or the destination. The rate of propagation is tightly governed. Wherever along
the path of light we care to measure, we find that light is “travelling” at the
same constant speed. What is in error here is the use of the word “speed”. What
we are intercepting and measuring is propagating not speeding and our
instruments are converting a frequency into “speed”. What is actually being
measured is vibration. It is the ultimate vibration of the universe and of all
that emerges, including life. What is implied by the rate of propagation of
light is that the zones or spheres that light propagates into are
pre-conditioned or pre-set in quanta that control the speed of that propagation
to 300,000 KPS. It is fundamental to physics that different colours “travel” at
different “speeds” (giving rise to Red Shift for example), as do other
wavelengths such as X-Rays. The average electromagnetic wavelength is that of
white light which is “allowed” to propagate at the rate at which the universe
expands – a pulse of 300,000KPS.
As the wave
propagates from expansion vacuum to expansion vacuum, light will swirl and
react to vacuums in far more complex patterns than is seen in water. Rays of
light meet in super-vacuum spheres and at times collide to form fractals/quarks
that combine to form photons – permanent or virtual. Thus when science examines
a ray of light, it finds waves that give rise to particles that in turn might
be robust and remain as particles, or may unwind and return to the wave of
light.
QED - 13
March 03 – It occurred to me while re-reading QED (Qunatum Electro-Dynamics) by
Richard Feynman that the particle nature of light could be accounted for by
assuming a standard smallest unit for all zones of expansion – perhaps the
Planck Length - and requiring that light flows in to fill the partial vacuum,
the super-vacuum, created by expansion, and that a standard amount of light is
required to balance the depleted zone with the surrounding ambient pressure of
light. The standard amount would be a single photon. Such photons will migrate
along a chain of standard zones towards a stronger vacuum, such as one in the
midst of matter, where the virtual, momentary surface holds back the incoming
field fractionally longer than in open space, with a consequent increase in the
super-vacuum within the zone or zones or spheres. In this manner a wave of
light would be divided into billions of photons, each of which flows or
propagates, at the speed of light, into the next zone. The photon is eternally
deconstructed as it leaves a zone and reconstructed in the next zone, which may
be in any direction – at the speed of light – and is thus un-track-able, random
and exhibits quantum behaviour, being intact for only a micro-second.
The
repeating cycle of partial reflection of light, incident at 900,
from a clear glass surface that repeats between 0% reflection going step by
step to 16% reflection as layer upon layer are added to the thickness of the
glass, averaging 8% partial reflection, implies that on average 92% of the
light goes through the glass. Feynman asks “Can it be that the (added) back
surface exerts some kind of effect on the ability of the front surface to
reflect light?”. In this EIG theory, could the observed reflection, that is
unpredictable for any single photon, be due to the actions of the expanding
zones or spheres? . Is a sphere at the top sheet glass surface touching 8 other
spheres? (a cluster of 9?) If so, which way will the virtual photon, forged in
the target sphere, jump next? One of the 8 contingent spheres lies in the
direction we expect to see reflected light, as if from a mirror. If the photon
moves in that direction and continues on that trajectory (why should it follow
a straight line? – Inertia?) we observe the average eight-in-a-hundred result.
We must remind ourselves to consider here that the photon/s we are following
are visible photons, i.e. they are at particular visible wavelengths; whereas
any single expanding (Planck) sphere that creates a super-vacuum in this case
within or at the surface of matter, may draw in energy to refill the
attenuation from any wavelength of the electro-magnetic spectrum and from any
direction. The experimenter is however interested only in the beam or photons
of visible light aimed at the target area on the glass sheet. Also bear in mind
that Feynman tells us that 100,000,000 (one hundred million) cycles of 0% in
steps through to 16% requires glass 50 metres thick. If we can assume the steps
are 1% each, then a cycle requires 16 layers of glass. 100M cycles therefore require
1600M layers of glass, divided into 50 metres, makes each sheet of glass (50 x
100 = 5,000 centimetres x 1M = 5,000, 000,000 millionths cms) divide by 1600M
(5000/16 = 312.5 millionths of a cm. ) and 312 millionths of a cm is pretty
thin.
It seems that
the cycle starts at 4%; so with (visible) light striking at an angle of 900
the cycle is as follows:
Glass reflected light
1) 312M/cm 4%
2) 624M/cm 5%
3) 936M/cm 6%
4) 1268 M/cm 7%
5) 1580 M/cm 8%
6) 1892M/cm 9%
7) 2204M/cm 10%
8) 2516M/cm 11%
9) 2828M/cm 12%
10) 3140M/cm 13%
11) 3452M/cm 14%
12) 3764M/cm 15%
13) 4076M/cm 16%
14) 4388M/cm 0%
15) 4700M/cm 1%
16) 5012M/cm 2%
17) 5324M/cm 3%
CYCLE TWO
18)5636M/cm 4%
etc. etc.
It is likely in the EIG theory that expanding spheres in
space behave differently to expanding spheres in matter or on the surface of
matter and that the deeper embedded in matter a sphere is the longer its
surface will hold out against inflowing energy, will therefore create a more
powerful super-vacuum, which when it pops, attracts light more powerfully than
an equivalent zone in “empty” space. So the depth of glass effect on incident
light could be due to this embedded quality of EIG zones. Mathematically, how many spheres are in a
cluster where the central sphere is in contact with exactly the same size of
contingent spheres around it?
The zones might be interpenetrating as we are not here
talking of matter fractals (quarks) until we get below the surface of the glass
– when we are of course dealing with matter fractals whose surfaces repel each
another while the local or surface vacuums attract. But what is observed in reflection has to
emerge from the surface – so more thought needs to go into the glass/space
interface.
The Elements – EIG light-play.
The
fractals or Quarks formed by collisions of light in supra or super vacuums may
form only between precisely matching wavelengths. They may be specific
wavelengths that make specific quarks, that make specific protons and neutrons
that make specific atoms that make specific elements that in turn can be
detected by their absorbing/emitting specific light colours/spectra. If so,
there are as many types of these fundamental fractals as there are wavelengths
in the electromagnetic spectrum, as there are elements in the periodic tables.
Are
elements infinitely divisible – calculus like – or are they truly limited to
the list we have in the periodic tables. Are, for example, isotopes of an
element, subtle differences in the wavelengths of the light (
The
wavelength signatures of the elements as detected in light from stars,
interstellar gases and elsewhere would be explicable in terms of the fractals
that combine to make the atomic particles in elements being “spun” or “wound” from specific wavelengths from the
electro-magnetic spectrum. As light
from, say, a star, strikes an interstellar gas, the light adds energy to the
atoms in the gas, atoms made from spinning spheres of for example blue-light,
and the element emits that colour; it can emit no other wavelength. Similarly an excited Laser or Maser emits the
colour or wavelength of the ruby or other element in the barrel of the machine.
Atomic Shells
and EIG
The
electron shells around atomic nuclei are in effect event-horizons; not in this
case signalling the existence of the singularity of a black hole, but created
by the energy hungry fractals, spinning in the protons and neutrons at the
nucleus and drawing in energy as they do so, while simultaneously expanding,
attenuating, creating short-lived super-vacuums, that attract more energy to
fill the partial voids. Thus the shells are created at boundaries between the
forces of expansion of a zone, the in-pressing of energy being wound into the
fractals and the in-rushing of additional energy to fill super-vacuums.
Switch-off Hubble expansion and the process winds down and halts. Gravity lets
go its grip and the universe starts to unpick itself.
But the
constant Hubble expansion, barely perceptible though it is, ensures that the
atomic shells survive as they continually expand – and, as Einstein
established, at whose surfaces the forces of accelerating expansion are
indistinguishable from the effect of gravity.
The acceleration comes from a simple adding of a constant percentage to
an ever larger zone. The radius of such a zone grows longer by a larger
fraction each second by a process of accretion.
Newton
A single
atom, thus formed, or a single primary fractal or quark, would in theory have
or “emit” ever fainter shells that would fill the universe, as Professor
Milgrom’s MOND theory, which proposes a slight variation to the Law of Gravity,
predicts. At the centre is the particle, it spins and draws in energy, it
expands and draws in energy, the spinning surface repels other matter. Energy
falls in towards the centre, moving in at the speed of light. The larger
sphere, larger and thus containing more energy, immediately beyond is then
partially depleted of energy and that sphere draws in “free” energy. The inner
sphere is created and stable and is protected by the outer sphere – ad
infinitum until all the energy of the universe is structured into one great
spherical pattern – ever fainter shell within shell within shell in accordance
with the law of gravity that the force diminishes with the square of the
distance – logical as each shell is a sphere surrounding the smaller inner
sphere. But, this perfect sequence does not happen. The adding of sphere’s to a
particle stops when it comes into contingent relationship with another
particle. And the universe is full of particles either permanent or temporary.
The
electron shells are waves of light. As in all circumstances, in all regions of
the universe, the zones the waves occupy are expanding. Super-vacuums result,
energy rushes in and particles form, then disappear and form again. The
wave/particle duality is preserved, in fact is created by, Hubble expansion.
Try to track an electron and it is likely to vanish. Wait patiently by an atomic
shell and one or more will appear. The number of possible scintilla is dictated
by the energy in that shell, that is governed by the number of protons and
neutrons in the nucleus, that are made from the primary fractals or quarks,
that are spun from energy at specific wavelengths.
Some
elements are so constructed as to be incapable of being a lone atom. Hydrogen
atoms, for example, always travel in pairs. A hydrogen molecule is effectively
two interpenetrating outer shells sharing energy, surrounding two nuclei of one
neutron each. At the outer shells surfaces, chemistry takes over and ensures
that atoms combine with other elements to form molecules and so on until life
itself emerges from the broth. No particle can be alone for long.
A new EIG
fractal, spun from light, has its attractive outer surface-vacuum and its inner
repelling surface. The surface-vacuum attracts energy, which attempts to enter
the zone at the speed of light that in turn pulls on adjacent energy etc, etc
until another fractal arrives. If the second fractal is suitably aligned it
will join the first, and the surface-vacuum increases. The Hubble expansion
continues and creates super-vacuums aligned in all directions. If the second
fractal is misaligned to the first, they will repel each other and move away at
high speed until they encounter matter – where the process is repeated.
Radio and TV
signals – permanent patterns in Space - inertia
Radio
signals persist in intelligible form for decades – in principle for ever, if we
have sufficiently sensitive receivers. How can this be? It implies that once
patterned the electro-magnetic spectrum holds that pattern across vast
distances and across eons of time – How? It implies that radio wave patterns
are not interfered with as they cross air and space by uncountable numbers of
other patterned waves – How? It is not due to immense power of transmission as
this applies to the faintest signals from the early Voyager etc space craft now
at the edge of the solar system and beaming out decipherable data with the
millionth power of an ordinary torch battery – How? How does the EM spectrum
record and carry and preserve all the messages, all the TV programmes, all the
radio, all the satellite phone messages ???
Discuss.
I am
increasingly of the view that the basic stuff of the universe, the
electromagnetic spectrum or the Aether, that Einstein worked without, was
conditioned at a very early stage and may still be subject to conditioning,
that cannot be undone except perhaps by energies as powerful as those that set
the conditions in the first place. This
alleged conditioning creates the characteristics and capabilities for (1)
Inertia and (2) legible and sustained radio signals – in the apparent chaos of
signals that manifest in every part of the universe. String theorists and other mathematicians
predicting multiple dimensions in this universe, need look no further than the incredible
multiplicity of radio signals crossing the same spaces, and yet being
distinguishable one from another, unique and untouched by their millions of
mutual “collisions”. For such a legible signal, must we in fact account for the
whole system – the sender, the receiver, the observer and the power source?
The really
scary implications of inertia and waves.
Just as radio
transmitters, driven by immense or minute electrical power, ranging from
fading, feeble satellite batteries to supernova and colliding galaxies, emit
waves and patterns that persist in space for eons of time and across infinities
of space, so too does the human brain, indeed any nervous system of any animal,
also transmit detectable radio waves into this most mysterious recording
medium, that we call Space. The
implications of such brain waves being permanently recorded are staggering for
all conscious beings.
The
capability to record and retain a pattern in any medium, be it light, radio or
in solid rock, is a feature of the power of inertia. It is inertia that keeps
the Moon cycling the Earth, the Earth moving round the Sun, the Sun and solar
system travelling within an arm of the Milky Way and the Milky Way travelling
in a predictable relationship with other galaxies. Equally, it is inertia that
maintains the shape of a table, or a person, and it is inertia that confines
atoms to their position or course of travel and maintains their spin and
elemental identities. This most subtle and little understood of all universal
phenomena is also the power, or diverse powers, that maintains a radio wave.
But in what medium is a radio wave – an electromagnetic or light wave –
created, transmitted and maintained.
Make a
broadcast on BBC Radio of, for example, a recording of Churchill’s famous lines
from 1942, after the Battle of Britain had been won, “Never in the history of
human conflict has so much been owed by so many to so few”. The broadcast adds
its electronic pattern to the millions of simultaneous patterns on the
“airwaves” from other radio and TV stations, from mobile phones, from computer
screen emissions, from events on the Sun and in the galaxy, from millions of
engines’ spark plugs and of course from millions of human brains. And yet,
among this uncountable host of patterns, hundreds of miles from the emission, a
simple wire whisker, touching on a common crystal is able to isolate the
pattern of Churchill’s voice and, powered by a small battery, channel it to a
speaker.
Race out
into space, faster than the speed of light, and position yourself with suitable
receptors a mere sixty light-years away from London, and you will be able to
hear the original live broadcast – still discernible – among the billions of
radio patterns propagating, from every point around you, at 300,000 kilometres
per second, passing through your location in the infinity of space. What medium
is it that maintains the message with such extraordinary integrity?
What is
inertia?
Everything
we experience, be it solid, liquid, gaseous or in waveform, is formed from
light into objects or phenomena that acquire and retain identity.
Their
identities are predictable. We can subject them to external forces and reliably
predict what will occur. Their lives or, on the atomic scale their half-lives,
can be forecast with accuracy. Yet they are all made from light, that most
ephemeral and ubiquitous substance. Is light a substance? If light had no
substance how then could it confer substantiality. Prise an element apart, such
as uranium, and it explodes into light, almost completely converting to that
purest form of energy. But uranium’s near cousins, gold, silver and lead refuse
to be dismantled by chain reaction. They are also made of light but light held
in such strong patterns that we cannot overcome the inertia of these heavy
metals with mere explosions. It requires atom-smashers, vastly expensive
cyclotrons with huge electrical energies, firing particle bullets at near the
speed of light to displace even one electron or neutron from a lump of lead.
Inertia protects us from chain-reactions in all but the unstable elements –
frustrating our unceasing efforts to destroy our planet – or at least all our
neighbours on the planet. The radio-wave
patterns of a lump of lead, or the vibrations of the atoms and molecules of
lead, are just as much patterns in the electromagnetic spectrum as are radio
waves. There is no essential difference between them – and they are all
manifestations in the field of light.
Einstein
put a damper on such speculations that still raged merrily among scientists in
Victorian times and right up to Albert’s demonstration that, to understand
quantum physics, we do not need the “Aether” – as in “ethereal”. But to
understand the medium that carries radio waves, we do need the aether or
something like it. For convenience we shall resurrect the term and refer to the
mysterious stuff of the universe, as the aether – always recognising that it is
constituted of light. But to be the
remarkable building material and recording medium that it is, the aether must
be light that has been conditioned in some way.
Into this
pre-conditioned aether all of mankind pours its conscious and unconscious
transmissions. It has been sufficiently demonstrated that we broadcast our
moods, our condition and our vibrations to others. We are able to hunt
together, cooperating by subtle signals. We can feel the atmosphere in a room
through the same kind of signals. We can measure and photograph electrical
activities in the brain, powered by the electrical circuits of our bodies –
sufficient to light a 40 watt light bulb. These brain waves are constantly
being broadcast. It is arguable as to whether our conscious or unconscious
thoughts are broadcast in a form that is most legible. It seems that our
strongest instincts, to survive for example, are unconscious and operate in
spite of our conscious efforts. For example,
could a person commit suicide, however strongly motivated, simply by holding
his or her breath? The brain does its job of keeping our autonomic responses
and nervous system working without any conscious effort from us. These nervous system signals are broadcast
from our heads into the aether. Menstruating women living together align their
cycles – unconsciously. Crowds
experience mass joy, fear and panic – that is almost irresistible to any one
individual. Our brain broadcasts are palpable – and can now be recorded by
man-made receivers.
All
transmissions, all broadcasts are somehow structuring the aether. This
structure or condition remains in the aether and can be detected, isolated and
replayed. Radio broadcasts, however banal or profound, go out into space to
infinity. So do mobile phone text messages, and so do the messages we broadcast
from our brains. Every object in the universe is, at its most fundamental
level, a pattern of light, imposed on the aether, held in that pattern by
inertia. Every broadcast that propagates across the universe has some impact on
the patterns underlying the objects, the manifestations, in the universe. We,
we humans, play our part in conditioning the aether, the stuff of the universe,
with the broadcasts from our brains.
This is a truly scary thought.
We
broadcast our brain waves and in doing so, just as all broadcasts do, we alter
the basic structure or conditioning of the essential stuff, the very essence,
of the universe. We collectively make our own environment. Such conditioning is
not merely local. It goes out from us and propagates to the furthest reaches of
the universe. And, if the universe is curved, our messages, our trillions of
minute hammer strikes on the chisels that form and reform the universe,
ultimately return to us. If the universe is flat, we are nevertheless
conditioning the aether at an essential level, where we live.
It is
comforting in some ways to imagine that mankind is collectively responsible for
whatever conditioning effects our brain waves might have. But just how subtle is
the aether. Is it capable of recording, of accepting the shaping that comes
from a broadcast of the impulses of a single human brain? In a world where every human being, all six
billion of us, can be envisaged as one day having our own unique mobile phone,
operating on a unique wavelength, with the tiniest traces of battery power and
yet still be uniquely identified as our vital messages pass through satellites,
space, air, water, wires, exchanges and aerials – how difficult is it to
imagine that our far more personalised brain waves remain legible. If we
concentrate – does this concentrate and increase the power of a brain-wave
transmission. Panic focuses our energy and seems to transmit fear very
strongly. (NB Power of prayer,
mediation, sympathetic magic).
Quite soon,
in terms of scientific development, we will be able to scan for brain waves,
for human brain waves, and be able to identify and in due course to locate a
person by their unique signature. Travel twenty light years out from the Earth
and, with suitable receivers, you will be able to pick up the thoughts
broadcast twenty years earlier by an individual. This astonishingly robust and
coherent pattern in the aether will be streaming across space, at the speed of
light, unchanged. What is the aether made of to enable such structure to
survive in this turbulent Universe. Why don’t all the massive radio signals
from galaxies colliding with other galaxies for example, smash into the tiny
pattern of a brain wave – or a mobile phone signal – or an episode of The
Archers – and erase it forever from the aether? The massive swamping radio
waves occur everywhere, all the time, but they do not eradicate the subtle
recordings.
Perhaps,
when the aether is so conditioned, so full of patterns that it can take no more
– the end of the world will indeed be nigh. But before that fateful day, what
are my brain waves doing to the medium. How am I restructuring the universe?
This
conditioning of the aether, this meticulous recording of the merest signal
wave, does not occur only in Space. There are familiar parallels scientists
have studied – of sound waves in air and in water. Immense whales navigating
the oceans sing to one another and their songs can be heard half-way round the
globe. How are these communication vibrations maintained in water? The waves
the whales transmit are broadcast, similar to a radio wave in the aether. The
whale does not spout or blow out water in modulated waves that propagate as
water waves. Such waves could never survive intact; they could not carry a
coherent message.
When a
choir sings its chorus rings out and, even from far away, with focused
microphones, we can hear the whole effect or we can discern individual voices
and groups of voices. What we hear are not air waves being blown into our ears
by the singers; we detect the intricate and durable structuring or conditioning
of the air in extraordinary complexity as sound waves propagate in ever
widening circles from the source. How are these patterns maintained?
Let a fire
engine race past, bells and sirens blaring and swamping all other vibrations –
but immediately it has passed the choral music will ring through, as pure and
as delicate and as accurate as before. And, with exceptional recording
equipment and clever filtering, the singing can be isolated from the great
passing noise – sharing the same air space, its identity assured through the
mysterious power of inertia.
Clouds of
mesons, pions, photons, other virtual particles & EIG.
The “clouds” of particles that are thought to be constantly
created and destroyed around and presumably within the spaces in each atom
compare to the local vacuum at the surface of each EIG fractal particle. Local
vacuums are created when matter forms from energy that collides and, tornado
like, locks energy into a sustainable shape (inertia) and, due to Hubble
expansion, continues to expand, thus requiring more energy from the immediate
surroundings, and thus depleting the immediate shell of energy. This dynamic
system is akin to the dance of virtual particles required by quantum theory.
Casimir Effect
and a Vacuum starship.
Roland
Centre of
Space Chimneys
– are better than Casimir space drives.
This idea
for a trans-space drive is to build a saucer shaped space craft that has an
outer rim that spins rapidly. No! this is not a spoof, saucer shaped really
does work the best. From the rim hundreds of laser beams point upwards and can
be angled to point coherently in the desired direction of travel. Under the
craft within the spinning rim solid lasers point downwards/backwards. The
spinning laser beams form a circle within which is a chimney. The beams are
charged to attract all particles and energy from within the chimney to the
beams, or the sides of the chimney. Thus
the centre of the chimney becomes a partial vacuum and, like a fire chimney on
Earth, the higher pressure below and the low pressure above, lifts the vehicle.
This is easy to visualise in Earth’s atmosphere, as simply creating a powerful
vacuum in the air above a saucer would lift it – and the creation of the
chimney vacuum is well within current physics.
In “empty” space it is more difficult to visualise but would
nevertheless be a real effect. The
chimney power would reach out as far as the charged laser beams remained
coherent. Ultimately, the vehicle would come close to the speed of light.
Steering is achieved by pointing the chimney in the desired direction as the
craft must follow the flow of matter “up” the chimney. Think of it as building
a very, very long lift shaft. What
happens at the “end” of the chimney is anyone’s guess. Work on such lasers,
designed to nudge nuclei into place, is currently underway in a team managed by
Misha Ivanov of the National Research Council Canada,
Does EIG
have anything to offer this idea? To be
addressed later.
Casimir and
EIG – gravity within dense matter.
The Casimir
effect can be illustrated by two completely flat machined plates – say of a
relatively inert material such as pot electrical insulator material – brought
together to within the wavelength of at least part of the electromagnetic
spectrum. The plates are drawn to each other, or more accurately they are both
drawn to the partial vacuum between them caused by the exclusion of some
energies. Imagine the plates being held apart by inert washers inserted in the
gap. The vacuum force will continue to pull and the washers will deny the pull,
holding the plates in stasis – apart. From the EIG perspective this is very
interesting as for EIG it is necessary to explain why dense matter, say within
a planet, exerts a stronger attraction (gravity) than do spheres of expanding
space. If all are expanding at the same Hubble rate it would seem logical that
the temporary vacuums would be consistent. However, if the Casimir Effect
operates between particles or even molecules of matter that is dense (in close
proximity) then just as with the experimental Casimir plates, some energy
wavelengths will (always) be excluded and the relative vacuum between or within
such particles will not be refilled by the whole electromagnetic spectrum of
wavelengths in the way that occurs in open space, or as quickly. It can be
imagined that the Casimir Effect creates a “permanent” stronger vacuum within
dense matter – say in the heart of a star. Such “permanent” differentials
between the ambient energy fields (the stuff of the universe) and matter will
be stronger attractors and could be part of an explanation for Hubble expansion
acting more strongly within dense matter. It might even be scientifically
testable in a laboratory.
It is
interesting that the Casimir Effect exists at all as in the popularised
explanations there is no mention of sealing the edges of the gap between the
two plates so as to preserve any partial vacuum. Presumably the Casimir
experiment takes place in an air-vacuum chamber? It must simply be that longer
wavelengths cannot exist between the plates and that the lack of these makes
the density of the energy field between the plates less than the ambient
density of the surrounding (complete) field. If so, this is exactly the type of
phenomena that EIG needs for it credibility.
.
String Theory,
symmetry and super-symmetry & EIG.
String theory is a mathematical proposal and search for a
TOE or Theory of Everything that would integrate the laws and formulas of the
four forces, the weak and the strong nuclear forces, the electromagnetic force
and gravity, together with quantum theory and relativity.
Strings are improbable mathematical constructs being one
dimensional, having only length and no thickness, and looping back on
themselves to make the smallest particles in the universe – smaller than the
Planck Length – and therefore forever undetectable by any known probe. To
explore small objects requires even smaller things (particles or wavelengths)
that can probe into the nooks and crannies of the object under scrutiny and
return to our monitoring equipment with information. Paradoxically, strings may
also be some of the largest things in the universe, being thought by some
theorists to stretch across the whole universe, still as one dimensional lines
or strings. Strings vibrate, like violin strings, in an infinity of possible
vibrations.
The parallels with EIG include the concept that the enclosed
fractal zones (quarks or whatever) are the smallest particles of matter and are
indestructible, because they are untouchable. Also, as I postulate above, the
EIG fractals might only form when matching wavelengths (colours) from the
electro-magnetic spectrum (light) collide at angles that reinforce the spin and
multiply the spin to C2 thus forming a surface. These matching and mutually
reinforcing wavelengths might, EIG postulates, match and create the macro world
of elements as identified in the periodic tables. However, as we learn from
allocating ever narrower bandwidths for communication technologies, wavelengths
may be almost infinitely divisible – limited finally by the Planck Length. Just as String Theory relies on slicing ever
thinner sections to eventually arrive at an infinity of one dimensional
objects, so EIG fractals may be infinite slices of the electromagnetic
spectrum, forming an infinite variety of elements, most of which are grouped
into the familiar elemental forms. Thus calculus-like slicing is a theme common
to both theories.
The creation of gravity in EIG by Hubble expansion that
brings Supra and Super vacuums, might also be a parallel for the
multi-dimensional aspects of String
Theory. It is impossible to depict
multi-dimensional space and or time in models or drawings – mathematicians
portray such extra dimensions in formulas that very few people can follow.
Those who can follow the logic belong to a peer group and accepted view that
non-mathematicians can only gaze at in wonder.
String theory requires up to 10 and some think 11 dimensions, in place
of the familiar 3, plus time, that are relied on by most other theories. Due to
being both enfolded and below the Planck scale
(one-millionth-billionth-billionth of a metre) these extra string dimensions
are undetectable and, some think, incredible. EIG may be thought to utilise at
least one extra dimension, as energy pours or explodes into space-time at the
beginning of the universe, from an equally inconceivable place of “non-universe” and according to EIG,
attenuates then turns back on itself, creating space/time ripples that are the
first conditioning of the universal energy AND, perhaps tearing the fabric to
create Supra-vacuums that give glimpses beyond this universe to another place
or non-place that by definition is “in” another dimension.
Appendices
Definitions
Supra-Vacuum – a glimpse from the space-time continuum to the No-thing
that existed “before” the universe. These supra-vacuums would occur in the
first few moments of expansion from a Big-Bang singularity and would cause the
expanding energy to arc back on itself to fill the vacuums; causing many
collisions between rays of energy (light) and creating the majority of matter
fractals.
Super-Vacuums – are vacuums caused by Hubble expansion of the universe
when the electromagnetic spectrum, the “stuff” of the universe, expands
momentarily and Light rushes in, at the speed of light, to fill the vacuum.
Surface-Vacuum - the zone around a fractal of matter that is
depleted as the energy is utilised and drawn into the spinning fractal .
Surface Vacuums create an attraction between fractals while the spinning
surfaces repel each another, thus creating a dynamic tension.
Letters to science magazines
GRAVITY MATTERS – my
letter to Scientific American
Mordehai Milgrom’s excellent
article Does Dark Matter Really Exist (SA V287No2 Aug02), together with the
panel by Anthony Aguirre, clearly informs me, an amateur, for the first time,
of the factors that stimulate CDM theories and Professor Milgrom’s 20 year old
alternative theory MOND that arises from the observation that a space shuttle
falls to Earth at one hundred billion times the acceleration that Earth and its
Solar System fall towards the centre of the Milky Way. I can only speculate, as
I have not the training to calculate, that the Hubble constant for the
expansion of the universe (extrapolated from observed Red Shift, not
light-speed, thus mitigating the wholly circular arguments that universal
expansion might otherwise be reliant on) is, while mentioned in the article,
not given as prominent a place in these theories as it may deserve. Hubble
expansion measured at the visible horizon of the universe, a horizon that
recedes from us at the speed of light, is approximately 2.64E-18 or in laymen’s terms 0.00000000000000264% per
second. This endless, minuscule
expansion of every sphere, large or small, represents a constant acceleration
of the surface or horizon of that sphere. Einstein postulated that constant
acceleration is indistinguishable from gravity. It is therefore worth spending
some thought on the idea that gravity may be partially driven by Hubble
expansion. Professor Milgrom cites as an exciting possibility, “The vacuum. The vacuum is what is left when
one annihilates all matter (or equivalently energy) that can be annihilated
…….. the interaction of the vacuum with particles might contribute to the
inertia of objects ….. the vacuum also enters cosmology as an explanation for
cold dark matter.” I believe that the vacuum of any sphere in the universe
is momentarily increased by Hubble, as the stuff inside that sphere (radiation,
plasma or particles) attenuates, before being refilled from the omni-present
background radiation. I have further speculated that sphere’s of matter – say
at the centre of large planets or stars – or in any element, have formed
surfaces that hold back the incoming radiation for fractionally longer, and
thus have a stronger, attractive vacuum for a microcosm of time. It is these
ubiquitous Hubble vacuums, varying with the density of matter, I believe, that
are the reality behind CDM as they pull on each another.
Opinion Letters, New Scientist Magazine
………… and an earlier letter to New Scientist.
…………..
The three articles on black-holes in New
Scientist 1st April 2000; by
Marcus Chown, on atom sized black holes and by Nigel Henbest and by Stephen
Battersby on quasars, radio jets and galactic sized black holes tacitly assume
that black-holes are collapsed very large objects, compressed by gravity – a
force that, as Newton’s apple demonstrated, is self-evident but, as the
continuing search for gravitons and CDM illustrate, is not yet understood. The
observed and theoretical characteristics of black-holes, particularly the
emission of immensely energetic radio jets, might better fit with Hubbles’s
expanding universe than with the concept of matter crushing itself into the
total annihilation of a singularity and quitting the universe.
Einstein demonstrated in his constantly
accelerating windowless elevator thought experiment that gravity and constant
acceleration are indistinguishable from each other. If Hubble expansion is to
be incorporated into universal theories then every zone (e.g. sphere), at every
scale, sub-atomic through galactic to universal, must logically be expanding at
a constant (or variable) rate of acceleration. Einstein tells us that we would
not know whether our experience of weight was due to gravity or expansion – if
we were to stand on the surface of a sphere in Hubble’s ever expanding
universe. We must ask ourselves just what is expanding in Hubble’s universe –
just what is the fabric of the universe that stretches and grows infinitely;
and what local effect does such expansion have on attenuating energy and
matter.
The existence of galactic and atomic black holes
implies that black holes may exist at any scale in any part of the universe.
If, as Fred Hoyle postulated many years ago (before recanting), the universe is
being constantly created at all points and if, as Einstein demonstrated, we
cannot distinguish between expansion (acceleration) and gravity and if Hubble’s
interpretation of red-shift being evidence for universal expansion is correct,
the ubiquitous black holes could be caused by expansion – and they could be
spawning not destroying matter.
Thought of as vacuums created by the attenuation of
the stuff of the universe as it expands, black holes would exhibit exactly the
same behaviour and characteristics as collapsed gravitational objects. The
power of expansion would attenuate the universal fabric and nature, abhorring a
vacuum would rush to fill the void – with energy and matter. As the void of a
black hole was filled, bearing in mind that the zone is constantly expanding, a
pulse would occur of expansion, void, fill, expansion. The in-rushing or
in-falling energy and matter would collide, become plasma due to the impact and
recoil. It may be postulated that the collisions of energy in these zones
created and still create primary particles.
Thus paradoxically, zones of Hubble expansion would
attract matter and energy as the zones push out their boundaries. This
expansive, attractive force would in all ways be indistinguishable from
gravity. CDM would be explained by the existence of innumerable, invisible
black holes. Black holes, rather than being The Great Annihilators of Nigel
Henbest’s article, would in fact be the fundamental unifying force and the
creators of the universe.
Noel Hodson
14
To Letters@newscientist.com
Expansion is Gravity (EIG)
The continued searches for Gravity Waves
(First results on gravity waves; New Scientist 19th April 2003) and for the
missing Cold Dark Matter and Dark Energy - being 96% of the mass of the
universe, still leaves room for other hypothesis such as, Expansion Is Gravity
(EIG). A "hypothesis" as your reader Brian Myers correctly points
out, is not advanced as a "theory".
The Hubble universal expansion constant
calculates as a minuscule 3.0336E-18% per second. Applied to a six foot person,
he or she, ignoring the compound effect, grows by an undetectable 1.328
millionths of a millimeter per year. If
Earth's 16ft per second gravity field
were to be due to the expanding globe it would represent a rate of growth of
9.1448E-07% per second; still very small but an immense 11 decimal places
difference from the universal percentage; but perhaps dense matter develops
different expansion properties than do zones in open space. As the search is
for a tiny, ubiquitous field force that cannot be shielded and that acts in
every direction, on every scale, simultaneously, Hubble expansion could be the
culprit.
Yours truly
Noel Hodson
PS - if NS editors (or readers) would like
to check the fairly simple arithmetic, I'd be happy to forward my EXCEL
calcs. The sums above are however
correct. The EIG hypothesis is expanded on my web site
-http://www.noelhodson,com
Noel Hodson
Tel 00 44 (0) 1865 760994
Business Projects Manager
Telework Consultant
http://www.noelhodson.com
31 May 03
New
Scientist Letters
Dump Quarks
From Tom
Lockyer
Your
article on protons shows quite clearly that the standard model, after 40 years,
still has not revealed the structure of these subatomic articles (3 May, P34).
When is science going to give up on quarks as a lost cause? In retrospect, the
quark model never has had any results to recommend it. The quark has failed
miserably to answer the simplest questions about the proton, such as its mass,
charge or magnetic moment. Worse, the theory has had to postulate unprecedented
fractional charges, and envision proton quarks as three thingies in a bag.
Following the discovery of a third “strange” quark, someone noticed that the
bagged three quarks violated the Pauli exclusion principle. Theorists got
around this by postulating quark colour forces called red, blue and green that
combine instantaneously to form a colourless combination. The fact that the
quark model consistently failed has resulted in the postulation of many crazy
“patches” to shore up the theory. For example to hold the quarks together,
gluons were postulated and given the unprecedented ability to be stronger at
large distances and “asymptomatically” free at short distances. And to explain
our failure to detect quarks, it was postulated that if you break the gluon
“strings”, quarks form on the free ends.
The sad
fact is that particle physicists are stuck with a very bad model, and seem
content to maintain the status quo, just to feed their wives and kiddies.
This
letter, I assume written by an expert, Tom Lockyer, points up the great
difficulties of creating a model that works and passes the peer pressure test.
And it leaves hope that new ideas might be explored as not all the answers are
known yet.
“Quark” is the name currently given to the
“fractals” of matter from which all matter is thought to be made. In the EIG
concept these fractals are formed by colliding fields of light (electromagnetic
spectrum) that spin to form basic particles. The colliding light waves or beams
reinforce the rate of spin and wind-in or pack-in energy to the point where it
becomes dense. These spinning fractals have surfaces formed by the immense spin
rate of the energy and a depleted outer zone, a local vacuum, created by the
inner pull, due to Hubble expansion, and the inward spin of energy – the
syndrome of the ballet dancer drawing in her arms and spinning all the faster -
similar to vortices that can be studied in the macro environment. The rotating surface repels other fractals
while the local vacuum holds them together.
This dynamic tension between push and pull is, I imagine, the
fundamental glue of the universe, constantly reapplied as long as Hubble
expansion continues.