The sentient universe. TOE Theory of
Everything, TOE, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Instantons, QED, Quarks, Universal
Fractals, Universal Theory, Universe, an alternative to String Theory, Hubble
Expansion, Gravity, Fundamental Forces, Not String Theory, spinning straw into
gold, matter from energy, forming surfaces, double-slit experiment, prime
matter, prime numbers, QED, DNA transmission.
New Model of the Universe – V7 – copyright
–
<a
href="http://www.tinycounter.com" target="_blank" title="counter"><img
border="0" alt="counter"
src="http://mycounter.tinycounter.com/index.php?user=noelhodson"></a>
Updated
12
April 2010
TOE
Theory of Everything
TOE
EIG Expansion is Gravity
&
The sentient
universe
Email:
CLICK for TOE
Archives, articles and work notes
TOE
Theory of Everything
TOE
EIG Expansion is Gravity
Home Page - http://www.noelhodson.com
CONTENTS
12 April 2010 –
Quarks – Rest Mass – Protons – Neutrons – EIG still works, OK !
What this website discusses – an executive summary.
Expansion is Gravity - 2007 – the EIG model
BROOKHAVEN - ECHO OF EIG’s VORTICES
22
February 2010 – Quark-Gluon plasma forms vortices.
NOT NEARLY THERE – QUESTIONS TO EXPLORE?
25
January 2010 – Bouncing photons and constant in-falling.
1 DEC 09
– The Electric Universe - A dilemma:
The Electric Universe by Wallace Thornhill &
David Talbot - 3 Nov 09.
Heavyweight empty space. 28 Sept 09.
Is the Casimir-Vacuum gravity? – 20 August 09.
Melvyn Bragg & Co - vacuums or not? – 30 Apr
09
“Ooops” Change to the expansion of the universe
constant – 11 March 09
“Spooky” action at a distance – 21 Feb. 09
“All the
world’s a hologram” – 17 Jan 09 & 19 Jan 09.
Three
illuminated thoughts - 2 November 08.
Wikipedia
- Massless particles
The LHC
and a contradiction - 12 September 08.
The
sentient universe and how humans alter it. 15 July 08
Is this the EUREKA moment? 28 March 2008.
Frank Close, The Void & that pesky Aether –
18 January 2008
Particles or Waves – 24 March 2007
(An unpublished) Letter to New Scientist –
“Inflation” 1 March 2007
Dark Energy – Cosmological Constant –
Quintessence – 15th February 07
Reconciliation – mathematical task – 25th
September 06
Aether or Ether or neither – 12th
September 06
Bubbles & Black Holes – 24th July
06
Making dark matter – 15th July 06
Water is the most likely laboratory to test EIG -
10th April 06
Descriptive Essay on EIG – how it might work
Gravitational Repulsion at Long Range – Stephen
Battersby NS 24th Sept 05
7 DEC 05
– A diversion into Intelligent Design & Is the LIFE FORCE the 5th
fundamental energy?
Instanton – reproduced from New Scientist 6
August 2005.
The holographic universe – thoughts on the
Aether.
Memo on March 05 Scientific American article,
Misconceptions about the Big Bang. - 17 March 05
Memo on the double-slit experiment – 15 March 05
Memo on Matter and Anti-Matter – 25th
November 04
Note on the Music of the Primes – 27 October 04
MAP, COBE
and Some Astronomical EIG Numbers
Six foot
man expands infinitely – says MAP and COBE
Sloan
Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)
Radio and
TV signals – permanent patterns in Space - inertia
Casimir
and EIG – gravity within dense matter.
Letters to science magazines (not published)
As I have just completed 10
weeks learning about particle physics and The Big Bang, and before I take up
the post offered to me, as CEO of CERN, I am in an authoritative position to
further speculate on the moment that and the process whereby straw is spun into
gold – or energy becomes matter …and how C2 is possible, in
contradiction to the law that nothing can travel faster than light-speed. One of the factors that leapt out my
student’s notes was that the rest-mass of the 3 Quarks, 2 Up Quarks and 1 Down
Quark, that reside inside a proton are a small part, less than 15%, of the rest-mass
of the proton. This mirrors the equally baffling mystery of the missing mass,
Dark Matter, in the star-studded universe.
Protons are very reliable
bits of atoms which last for almost all time – as near to an infinite (half)-life
as we humans can imagine. If the Quarks
are, or themselves consist of, my rapidly spinning fractals – which EIG claims
as the fundamental building blocks of matter (see below) - then I can imagine
that the 85% of missing mass of the proton is the energy created by their
spinning at C squared – which is 90 billion kilometers per second – and the
consequent attraction between the fractals as the spins continuously wind-in
and lock-up energy (see the three vacuums below) – and as the Casimir Effect
further binds them together. The dynamic
between (1) the intertial forces that would tear apart the spinning fractals
and (2) the depleted energy field surrounding them, which by its nature must
reach out infinitely; is the very essence of matter. Even after 10 weeks of particle-physics, EIG
could still be a viable idea; or am I a blindly stubborn student.
1) That gravity is due to Hubble Expansion of
the universe – a stretching or attenuation of the universal energy fields at 6.819E-19
%
per second that creates diverse
vacuums which attract matter and energy on every scale, everywhere.
2) That the Aether exists –
being a structure made by the criss-crossing of fields and waves and particles,
everywhere. The Aether connects
everything to everything. Any change
requires “permission” or accommodation from everything else that exists.
3) Dark Matter is the
combined pull from the momentary vacuums.
4) Dark Energy is the
depletion, reduction of field power, mutual letting go which occurs in the
electromagnetic field when matter is formed and precipitates out of the field
at E=MC2.
5) That the momentary
vacuums, of diverse strengths, attract field energies (light) which collide in
the vacuums and sometimes make a fundamental particle, quark or basic fractal
which are spinning tornado like entities binding the energy. These are too
small to be disrupted by most of the other phenomena in the universe; and they
bind together through mutual vacuum and Casimir type forces – maintained by
Hubble Expansion. This contributes to Inertia.
6) That the universe, the
Aether, is holographic and these holograms at every scale from the size of the
whole universe down to the minimum Planck scale, contribute to Inertia.
7) That all sub-atomic
particles act in a similar way to electrons in a telephone wire, converting
from electric current to magnetic wave and back again, infinitely. This implies
that every particle coalesces onto a centre at a density of E=MC2,
and expands back to field-energy, to at least fill the space occupied by that
amount of energy and probably to the edges of the universe – and then
reforms. This is the pulse of the
universe, organised by we know not what; acting on all matter including us
humans. We re-posit ourselves
continuously.
8) That consideration ought
to be given to a new force in physics alongside the nuclear, gravitational and
electrical forces – the Life-Force - which organises complex systems and
energies (Chaos Theory) up to and including intelligence and sentience,
wherever we look in the universe.
(NB - This concept is NOT following the
Einstein thought-experiment that if the surface of, for example, the Earth is
expanding, that the upward or outward movement of the surface under our feet
would be indistinguishable from gravity; however valid that thought may be. Nor
is it String-Theory or Multiverse or
Curled-up-Hidden-Dimensions theory).
As the universe expands, as found by
Hubble, the omni-present electro-magnetic spectrum or light, the observable
boundary of the universe, and every imaginable sphere therein, attenuates at 2.304E-18% 6.819E-19
% per second, and creates a total (supra) or
partial (super) vacuum. Light moves 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
in a vortex, at perhaps 90 Billion Kilometres per Second (KPS). This immense
“speed”, C2, creates a surface between the vortex and its
surroundings, and a fractal of primary matter (perhaps a Quark) is created or
spun from the energy; following Einstein’s formula Energy=Matter X Light-Speed
Squared (E=MC2). All zones or
spheres of every size, attenuating with the “quantum-pulse” of
expansion-and-pause, create the subtle and minuscule force of gravity –
everywhere.
The Hubble universe constantly
expands (all zones or spheres, some of which might be as small as the Planck
length, do not necessarily contract after expansion) and inrushing energy feeds
the spinning fractal. As in the vortex of a tornado, 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 (Hubble expansion) 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, fractal level no thing exists that
can interfere with the expanding and spinning vortex. Stability and permanence
and inertia are created by Hubble expansion.
Dark matter, and its theoretic “extra” gravity, may not be matter – but
the temporary attenuation of the every part of the field.
This event is the moment when energy
from the energy field (light) becomes matter. As it requires a great deal of
energy to make a small amount of matter, the immediate impact on the energy
field is to deplete or partially reduce the energy of the field. This reduction
of and locking-up of power in matter weakens the inter-attraction of the
electro-magnetic field, which then further expands. The more matter that is created
the more the field expands locally. Thus Dark Energy – the mysterious repulsive
force - is in fact the releasing of the brake as the field, which is or which
contains the universe, is depleted and its mutual attraction is weakened.
The rapidly spinning fractals thus
created, throughout the universe, may initially be spinning on any axis of
orientation, until their surface vacuums draw them together and from many
collisions they harmonise their spins.
Solo fractals may spontaneously unwind and revert to energy. Fractals in stable and mutually reinforcing
relationships may persist for long periods. I would like to explore the neat
thought that clumps of fractals (say Quarks) which are made of prime numbers of
fractals, persist.
A single fractal made or held in,
say, a single Planck sized sphere is in contingent relationship with all
adjoining (empty) spheres which are expanding-pausing with the quantum pulse.
The solo fractal may unwind – or be drawn in any direction at the speed of
light into any adjoining sphere, as it expands. Thus, to fit the Heisenberg
Uncertainty Principle, fractals of matter may appear and disappear, or may move
in any direction at any time – but, one can imagine a preferred direction being
created from sphere to sphere by the original orientation of the field – which
the fractal is likely to follow.
To complicate the calculation
“quantum-expansion-pause” arithmetic further, each (imaginary) Planck sphere is
not only surrounded by interpenetrating spheres of the same size, but each
sphere is also at the centre of an
infinite (imaginary) set of ever larger nested spheres, like Russian Dolls,
expanding out to the extremity of the universe. The calculations of the vacuum
powers of these ever expanding zones, of every size, are truly bewildering.
This New Scientist article
and the useful visual video (complete with commercial sponsor) has several
similarities with the basic physical theory expressed in EIG (as to how energy is converted to matter and
how C2 is possible, in contradiction to the law that nothing can
travel faster than light-speed). It
is worth duplicating in full. I will
consider the implications when time allows.
BROOKHAVEN VIDEO - Quark Gluon Vortices FEB 2010
Atom smasher shows vacuum of space in a twist
17:27 15 February 2010 by Rachel Courtland
Magazine issue 2748.
Ephemeral vortices that form in the vacuum of space may have been spotted for the first time. They could help to explain how matter gets much of its mass.
Most of the mass of ordinary matter comes from nucleons – protons and neutrons. Each nucleon, in turn, is made of three quarks. But the quarks themselves account for only about 1 per cent of the mass of a nucleon. The remainder of the mass comes from the force that holds the quarks together. This force is mediated by particles called gluons.
A theory called quantum chromodynamics is used to calculate how quarks and gluons combine to give mass to nucleons, but exactly how this phenomenon works is not fully understood.
One possibility is that the fields created by gluons can twist, forming vortex-like structures in the all-pervasive vacuum of space, and when quarks loop through these vortices, they gain energy, making them heavier.
STAR find
Now the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at the Brookhaven National
Laboratory (BNL) in
To find the vortices, a team used a detector called STAR to analyse the particles created when the collider smashes gold or copper ions head-on at high energies. This process creates a fireball that is about 4 trillion kelvin at its core, a temperature high enough to form what's known as a quark-gluon plasma.
So what has this got to do with vortices created by gluons in the vacuum of space? If two ions collide off-centre, the ensuing fireball starts rotating, creating a powerful magnetic field. If gluon-created vortices exist, this magnetic field should cause quarks in the plasma to separate in accordance with their electric charge, says Dmitri Kharzeev, a theorist at BNL who predicted the effect.
That is exactly what the STAR collaboration saw: more
positively charged quarks moving in one direction and more negatively charged
quarks moving in another, says Nu Xu, spokesman for STAR. The findings
were presented on Monday at a meeting of the American Physical Society in
Direct manifestation
"It's a direct experimental manifestation of a property of quantum chromodynamics that has never been seen in the laboratory before," says Krishna Rajagopal of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "It confirms our understanding that gluon fields can have twists."
The evidence of the vortices in the vacuum of space is best seen in a quark-gluon plasma, which requires high energy collisions. The effect can be confirmed by studying the extent of quark separation at lower energies, so later this year the RHIC team plans to begin smashing ions together at lower and lower energies (Physical Review Letters, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.251601).
But it's not yet clear whether gluon-created vortices – also called instantons – appear frequently enough to account for most of the mass of nucleons.
The key lies in measuring with greater precision the separation of charged quarks in the fireball seen at the RHIC. The more vortices created by gluons, the more the charged quarks should separate. This measurement could help pin down exactly how prevalent these instantons are in the present-day universe, says Kharzeev.
Last week at my first
evening class on particle physics I asked what space is occupied by the “pure
energy” which results when two particles collide and annihilate each other; and
I asked what the pure energy is.
Pure energy is photons or
electromagnetic radiation or light.
Where the energy is in space-time was more problematical and did not
elicit a simple answer. At first the lecturer said that the liberated energy
did not exist in space and time, before saying it was more complicated than
that – and moving on.
We also learned about
Recently (Oct-Dec 09) I
read in New Scientist or Scientific American that some physicists now ascribe a
mass to the mass-less photon.
Thinking about these matters
leads me to an extension of EIG:
1) The gravitational force
is an ever present ubiquitous force of matter tugging on matter, which EIG has
so far explained as due to Hubble Expansion.
2) Very recent articles
speculate that weightless photons do in fact have rest-mass of the photon
divided by the speed of light C2 (some say it is 1.8 x 10-42 grams). See photon-mass below at Three illuminated thoughts - 2 November 08.
But
photons are never at rest. I want to
explore the idea that E=MC2 actually means what it says – and that a
particle or an entire atom is indeed made of light compressed onto centres (by
the original EIG mechanics below). The
space/sphere which the light occupied before compression (or precipitation like
a crystal forming) is calculable by a variant of E=MC2, requiring a
certain number of photons or light waves to make up the mass of the
particle. Thus the particle of matter is
at the centre of a system where photons in-fall and congregate and come to an
uneasy resting place (NB quantum fluctuations). But to be a gravitational
effect the in-falling must be continuous. This could be caused by Hubble
Expansion continually expanding the space occupied by the particle AND by the
photons compacting down over the lifetime of the particle due to the continual
bombardment by incoming photons. Ultimately the compacting mass, like cosmic
black holes, explodes, liberating the photons.
THE BIG BOUNCE – just as Rutherford
demonstrated that helium nuclei can bounce off gold nuclei, then in-falling photons
might bounce off nuclei and as they bounce, fluctuate from waves to particles
like electrons to magnetic fields (the essential conversion of energy to
matter), bouncing out to the margins of the (relatively empty, vacuum) space
previously occupied by photons, now congregated at the centre of the particle.
This bounce and in-falling process is the characteristic wave-length of the
atom (or of the particle) and it creates the electron orbit/s diameter/s of the
atom /particle. An implication is that
the bouncing process might apply to all the photons (each in turn, leaving an
attractive mass at the centre) which expand in waves out to the margins of the
space from whence they came – to collapse back again into a singularity
(photon) within the mass. The space
affected by a single particle is limitless as an emptying sphere would draw in
energy from neighbouring regions to infinity – but definition and boundaries
would be defined by neighbouring matter.
However, the signal would theoretically reach to the edge of the
universe.
THE BIG SPACE – DARK ENERGY
– DARK MATTER – C squared, is 90 billion kilometres per second and expressed in
metres is 90 trillion metres per second. Even in fractions of a second, e.g.
the half-life of a particle, the radius from the centre of mass of the sphere
of electromagnetic energy which in-fall to create the particle – is large. As speculated below, this emptying, or
partial depletion, of a space of its light energy, reduces the mass of that
space – which counter intuitively could let-go-of and allow the faster
expansion of space-time – the Dark-Energy of astrophysicists. The in-falling process, initiated by Hubble
Expansion, is the missing Dark Matter which some astrophysicists seek to hold
galaxies together.
3) NB – The photon as a
wave/particle is almost certainly the basic transition phase between pure
energy and matter. It is true that all
matter is made of light and the EIG concept could indeed be a mechanism for
spinning the straw (energy fields) in to gold (particles of matter).
Will Microsoft Office EXCEL
cope with 10-42? I doubt it, but it’s worth a try.
Let’s see if we can
calculate how many photons make the mass of a quark, a person etc – and the
size of the energy sphere which needs to be compressed. It will surely show that I have a
commandingly large presence in the universe.
25 Jan 2010 NB – New Scientist
23rd Jan 2010 reports confirmation of an electric-magnetic field on the
outskirts of our solar-system – which is a basic claim of the Electric
Universe. Magnetic mirror A mysterious "ribbon" of
particles at the edge of the solar system has been explained. The ribbon,
spotted by NASA's Interstellar Boundary Explorer spacecraft last year, is the
reflection of the solar wind in a giant magnetic field in the interstellar
space next to the solar system (The Astrophysical Journal Letters, DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/708/2/L126).
The Electric Universe, by the
self-professed scientific heretics Wallace Thornhill and David Talbot, makes
very large claims for electricity as the primary universal force, “…a thousand,
trillion, trillion, trillion times more powerful than gravity” (page 8). 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
( 1030 )
One of the major components
that the established Big Bang gravitational theories lack (in my view), is the Aether
– a universally connected field. I surmise that the Aether does exist as
holographic spheres / zones on every scale, each one unique due to the differing
angles of interception, from each of which the whole universe can be seen –
courtesy of light / electromagnetic waves and particles – and the spheres have
substance, due to the pressure of the waves and particles exert on each another
as they cross or collide. (See more on Holographic Universe below). This
holographic matrix may underpin Inertia.
As I read The Electric
Universe my Aether starts to look like their all pervasive plasma. Traditional physics demands absolute vacuums
of space, with one or two stray hydrogen atoms etc per cubic metre, but
incapable of transmitting anything other than gravity – a force which nobody
understands. Thornhill & Talbot
claim that electric currents fill the universe and link all celestial
bodies. I thought about the Earth, with
its known magnetic-field, and thought about it hurtling round the Sun, through
the heliosphere and other planetary forces and fields and realised that a
moving magnetic field should create an electric current – and vice-versa.
So I will read on and
reconsider 40 years of received Big Bang wisdom.
I am probably a good subject
to be on the horns of the Big Bang or Electric Universe dilemma – two theories
which may of course not be mutually exclusive.
I have never seen an atom smasher, a cloud chamber, a cyclotron – and
must trust the reports and interpretations published in popular science
magazines and books. On the other hand,
I have never seen a plasma chamber, alive with coloured electricity, doing
amazing things – and must trust the reports and interpretations I read about
those events.
My EIG paradigm, on which this
webpage rests, may have to change.
More - later.
I am reading The Electric Universe (www.thunderbolts.info) which popped-up as I was searching for “Physics,
I am reading these theories and looking at the
accompanying videos with great interest not least because my thinking (see
Heavyweight empty space 28 Sept 09 etc - below) has led me to a ‘dynamic
interpenetrating electromagnetic holographic universal matrix at every scale
(DIEHUMES)’ – which could be the long lost pre-Einstein Aether – a universal
field which in my view ought to exist to account for Inertia.
TEU theory might solve or dispose of several mysteries
including Hubble Expansion & the Size of the Universe, Dark Matter, Dark
Energy, Anachronistic Stars and Galaxies, Life Cycles of Stars, Scalding Hot
Solar Corona on our Cool Sun, Dirty-Snowball Asteroids, Lost Spacecraft,
String-Mathematics, Math-a-mystic Multiverses, Aurora Borealis and
Self-Cleaning Solar Panels on Mars Landers.
However, good old gravitational calculations and quantum
& celestial mechanics have accurately put men on the moon and satellites in
orbit round planets – without being electrocuted, yet, - so they must be a bit
right.
I am drawn to read more of TEU by my natural inclinations
towards the familiar – we all know what a lightning bolt looks like but we do
not know what gravity is – and towards conspiracy theories, where noble
geniuses are silenced by sinister great powers – which every child has suffered
sometime – and by TEU certainty in the face of wishy-washy incomplete hesitant
speculations – we deserve to know it all – Now!. And I like the central idea that the whole
universe is interactive and self-regenerating – maybe not doomed to Heat Death
after all. And, TEU aside, I like the
role of electricity in the Life-Force, where I imagine it perhaps builds the
templates that tissue cells follow as they develop into organisms. TEU does of course highlight other unsolvable
mysteries, including how and why does magnetism create electric currents and
how and why do electric currents create magnetic fields.
Deeper reading – deeper thinking and perhaps deep editing
of EIG - to come.
*****************
NB – for next time. Light does not travel – it propagates; the implication being that like electricity it agitates something that is already there waiting to be agitated. Could this be so for all particles??? Back to the Aether and Inertia.
The virtual spheres of empty space which accommodate the holographic universe (see below) do have weight or mass. Erect a globe shaped screen in any sphere and it will reflect or capture a picture of the surrounding universe. The picture is formed from electromagnetic radiation or light, which does create pressure (mass). Think of the principles of “solar sails” capturing sunlight. The radiation propagates or in-falls from every direction; if the imaginary screen is removed, the radiation from one direction will criss-cross with and impact on the radiation from another – such collisions might create fundamental motes of matter (maybe quarks); Tenuous, yes, but non-existent, no. To recapitulate the characteristics of the spheres:
1) They are expanding with Hubble expansion. This attenuates the field and attracts (allows in-falling) like a vacuum.
2) The smaller the sphere, the more wavelengths are excluded and thus the less dense the internal energy field. The lower density inside a small sphere is surrounded by higher density – which will form “bubbles” in the field. This is similar to the Casimir effect – which has a more energetic role to play later as matter forms.
3) The contents of the spheres have some mass.
4) The spheres nest inside each another like Russian Dolls. And the spheres interpenetrate each other.
We are back to the Aether - I am afraid – which enables Inertia.
17 Sept 09
To: Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe,
Cardiff Centre for Astrobiology,
Email: Wickramasinghe@cardiff.ac.uk
Dear Professor Wickramasinghe,
Harmful Viruses - Helpful Viruses
I have been a fan of your published work for several decades; so
I apologise for burdening your in-tray with the following speculation
- I hope it interests you enough to consider it:
Most people accept that a person infected with a flu' virus, a
cunning packet of DNA, may walk into a crowded room and within an hour, all
will be exposed to the virus and many will become ill. Science can test
for the presence of such harmful viruses or mark their past visits.
Given the virus/DNA soup around us; is it not just as
logical that helpful viruses spread just as rapidly as harmful ones? Are we
simply too masochistic, paranoid and depressive to allow that helpful
viruses, or other packets of DNA, can affect us positively? I think this
is scientifically testable.
Below are my rambling notes on the topic.
I am building a Dawkins proof bunker.
Best wishes
Noel Hodson
17 Sept 09 – Another note:
We know where to look for malevolent viruses, such as the search for the
1918 Spanish Flu’ virus by digging through frozen corpses in graves and
bone-yards in
13 Sept 09 – And another note:
This speculation could be tested by looking for benevolent viruses. Also – malevolent viruses such as flu’ do
spread through populations at amazing speed – and so might benevolent viruses. Can we rapidly cure large numbers of people
by releasing a benevolent virus?
Another note: this time to think about DNA in the context of the
Life Force, having watched a TV programme “The Cell”. A “seriously clever” heavily bearded, Harvard
scientist, intent on making the 2nd Genesis – a new lab created living
cell different from THE CELL which spawned all life on Earth, was filmed mixing,
with a simple swish of the merged solutions, DNA strands, which make glow-flies
glow, with animal cells. When the cells multiplied, the mixture glowed green
showing that the introduced strands had attached to the cell’s DNA and were
multiplying with the cells.
Another interview was with a
DNA – 4
September 2009. We accept the fact that complex, e.g. flu,
viruses are manufactured in our cells, escape when we sneeze and cough, and
insert themselves into the cells of other people. Let’s class them as malevolent strands of
DNA. It is testable by experiment and
equally probable that “benevolent” strands are passed from person to person.
When listening to the Dalai Lama at the crowded Sheldonian in
DNA – 5 September 2009. ….and we accept that
mumps, measles, scarlet fever etc, in fact all communicable diseases, are
passed from person to person or beast to beast as prions, viruses, bacteria etc
– which have been reproduced with their DNA in others’ cells. We do not know
what “junk DNA” which is 80% of the genome, does or why it exists (just as we
don’t know what 80% of the universe is made of). My speculation is that the
entire history and evolution of the life form is recorded in the Junk DNA, and
may be reactivated by extreme pressures.
Does the transmission of non-malevolent DNA enable the carrying of
Dawkin’s Memes from person to person? Is our DNA changing from moment to
moment? And do we pass it around the human race – thus all share in the new DNA
patterns? If so, it makes more sense of
our longevity, well after our allotted reproductive cycles decline.
On reading Black Stars, Not
Holes, by Carlos Barcello, Stefano Liberti, Sebastiona Sonego and Matt Visser,
SCIAM, October 2009; and revisiting my own thoughts below, here’s another crack
at a synthesis.
Holographic:
I envisage the universe as
a set of boxes or interpenetrating spheres, each in-formed by criss-crossing
electro-magnetic radiation from the entire universe, apart from wavelengths too
small to impact a smaller sphere – down to Planck’s minimum (n.b. Casimir
Effect). The original, matterless,
universe consisted of energy, and it expanded and continues to expand as per
Hubble.
GRAVITY
ONE - Attenuation: The expansion of what can
be imagined as a featureless energy field creates a universal attenuation of
the field of 6.819E-19% per second.
This is the underlying tug of gravity ascribed to Dark Matter.
Matter: As matter is formed (see below), massive
“volumes” of the energy field are crystallised onto points, subatomic
particles, thus depleting the energy field. The removal of these immense
volumes creates a letting-go of the energy field, which drives expansion in the
manner ascribed to Dark Energy.
GRAVITY TWO – Casimir: I asked below what could create the walls or
plates to bring the Casimir Effect into being.
The tamed, small waves between two large ships on a stormy sea are often
given as a Casimir analogy. The exclusion
space between the ships is only closed from 2 of six sides/planes. The answer to
forming the excluding plates may be simply – matter. Matter could shield areas inside matter
formation from wavelengths. Below is a SCIAM
report that Casimir does operate inside atoms. We thus have two ways in which
wavelengths are excluded. Firstly, long wavelengths by-pass smaller,
holographic spheres, which may cause the spheres to form as bubbles in the
whole (stronger / heavier) energy field.
This would give the holographic universe a real rather than merely
theoretical structure, which would give us the Aether.
Secondly, as matter forms, the matter acts like the
sides of the ships to exclude certain wavelengths and creates the Casimir
effect. While Casimir is the in-pressing
of more (heavier) wavelengths on the outside of the plates as compared to the
inside wavelengths, and is not strictly a vacuum, it nevertheless is a
persistent and relentless in-pressing force which must logically, in a field,
reach back infinitely – until lost in the complicated forces of surrounding
spheres and matter.
Thus, when calculating gravity, there would be two
vectors to apply; the first, Hubble, immensely subtle and barely detectable
(and probably not testable); the second, Casimir, stronger and more
measurable. These two forces, might
explain the anomalies discovered in the speeds of space-vehicle flights.
QED. (For now).
A self-reminder to think more about The Casimir Effect and the holographic universe (see paragraphs below). In the smallest Planck space of 10-33M, most wavelengths are excluded as they are too large to impinge. The criss-crossing effect (read below) will be limited to the smallest possible waves and thus the Planck space, say a sphere, will be relatively empty and its “sides” will be compressed together by the denser, larger spheres (accommodating more and longer waves) around it. …And so on up the wavelength scale. But what on Earth could the “sides” of the spheres be made of? Would the relative vacuum inside a Casimir-Planck sphere tug on surrounding energy and matter – or are these simply excluded without any forceful effects?
More thoughts on energy
fields crystallising matter at the rate of
E=MC2 , and thus about
inertia with, perhaps, particles continually, rhythmically expanding back to
energy and then contracting back to matter – perhaps expanding to the limits of
the universe; lead to thinking about reversing the process.
An exploding atom bomb
converts matter to energy, which manifests in heat, light, radiation and
sub-atomic particles. The explosion makes room for its expansion by pushing
other stuff aside. In this sense it demands to be accommodated in its new form
– expanding from matter to energy – and the universe has to adjust – despite
the reluctance and resistance of inertia.
Does this liberated energy add mass to the electro-magnetic energy field
and does such extra mass have the counter-intuitive effect of increasing mutual
attractions within the energy field and thus, momentarily, slowing the
expansion of the universe? How far from the centre of the event is it felt? Is
there a limit to the effect of the explosion?
In the case of a supernova
such as the Crab Nebula, we can see that the explosion is occupying an ever
increasing volume of space. The fact that we can see it, millions of light-years
away, demonstrates that some of the liberated energy has travelled as far as
our Solar System and - as the supernova occurred a long time ago – we could
figure out the distance limits of its visibility. Does the effect eventually
reach the boundary of the universe - if a boundary exists?
From thoughts about dispersal and contraction of energy and the inertia which provides stability, arise more thoughts about organisation, sentience and life – which is evident everywhere we look. Chaos Theory with its compelling Mandelbrot fractal pictures, had its popular day a couple of decades back and no heathen Richard Dawkins types rose up in anger – or even to now look back in anger – to scoff and scold. Basically, if enough energy is poured into a system, Chaos Theory predicts points of bifurcation where the system spontaneously re-organises itself into what humans recognise as meaningful patterns and “strange attractors” around which matter and energy swirl in artistic mathematical forms. In direct contrast to the allegedly immutable laws of thermodynamics, it seems that the stuff of the universe does not even itself out to become a bland soup or cold dead planets drifting in a dark universe – but it continually takes new forms and creates or produces new organised phenomena – including intelligent life such as humans and tadpoles and grass-seed. Such self-organisation, of energy processing systems, seems to occur at every level, from energy fields to sub-atomic particles, to matter. Is the basic stuff of the universe sentient? Is it not now an appropriate time, in the evolution of the recently born field of “the scientific method” that the Life Force was elevated to a fundamental force worthy of being ranked with and studied alongside the physical forces? Life is all around us and as yet there is no evidence that, or how, physics creates life – perhaps the reverse is true.
Melvyn Bragg on BBC Radio 4
at 9am this morning asked his panel of particle and astrophysicists if there is
such a thing as a vacuum, either in the vastness of space or within atoms. Several interesting metaphors and
clarifications emerged in the conversation.
1) The Aether has been
recently replaced by “the Higgs Field” which is deemed to wobble as
electromagnetic waves pass through. I
knew we would get the Aether back eventually, but why ascribe it to Higgs
instead of Hertz or Maxwell or Faraday or Thomson & Co?
2) The inverse square law
of gravity works at a lesser rate inside atoms, which is due to the Casimir
effect. Casimir (1950’s) figured out
that waves inside boundaries can only be as large as the boundaries allow, e.g.
small waves between two large ships on a stormy sea.
3) It was said that the Red
Shift of light travelling across large distances of space is due to the Hubble
Expansion of space stretching the light. This is a new thought for me; I have
always understood the red-shift to be because the source of light is moving
away from the observer – and a blue-shift when the source is moving towards
us. I suppose it amounts to the same
thing. But does it have implications for
the speed of light?
4) Dark Energy – the force
pushing galaxies etc apart – is happening and is a mystery. I have my ideas about this.
5) As electromagnetic
wavelengths get shorter the energy in them increases. I suppose this is another way of saying that
if a long-wave signal is sent with say 10 tonnes/second of energy, then
shortening the wavelength does not reduce the overall energy – thus each peak
& trough has greater energy from the point of view of a target of a
particular size (a human for example) which may not notice, be affected by, a
long wave.
The talk was around the
idea of a cubic meter of black empty space. Is it a vacuum or is there
something there? And ditto about the
relatively huge empty spaces inside an atom – the size of St Andrew’s golf
course with the nucleus the size of a golf-hole; what connects the “orbiting”
electrons and is the space empty? The
consensus was that the cubic meter of empty space is filled with
electromagnetic waves (they are getting there), virtual particles which pop in
and out of existence in defiance of the laws of conservation (borrow Friday and
Payback Monday and no-one notices) and a very few resident atoms (hydrogen
etc).
The radio discussion
inspires me to write a “what this site discusses” summary – for busy
executives.
Various recent 2009
articles in New Scientist & SCIAM have quietly introduced the data that
while the Age of the Universe is indeed about 13.7 Billion years old, and that
at the speed of light it might therefore be assumed that the edge of the
Observable Universe is also 13.7 Billion Light Years distant – making that the
radius of the observable universe – in fact,
due to factors beyond our control, the radius of the observable (not
necessarily the greatest distance we can currently see to the edge of the universe, but somewhat further) is 47.5 billion
light years, which is therefore the radius.
This buggers-up the
constant for the percentage per second that the universe expands, which I have
calculated and have been using since 2002.
You will find it below, cited as 2.304E-18% per second. The new number is 6.819E-19% per second, which is a far
smaller percentage and rate of expansion.
I apply this rate of expansion to all, any and every sphere of whatever
dimensions. What this change might mean
to all the ideas set out below – if anything – I will have to take time to
consider. The most immediate thought is
that this even smaller rate of expansion (which through attenuation/momentary
vacuum IS gravity) makes the process even more subtle and difficult to
detect.
Letter to the Editor
Scientific American
21 FEB 09
THE PULSE OF THE UNIVERSE.
The article by David Z Albert and Rivka Galchen, A Quantum
Threat to Special Relativity, SCIAM March 2009, discussing locality, leads me
to speculate on and to reflect that a telephone signal travelling via the
undersea cables from, say, England to America, is a series
of "travelling" electrons, creating magnetic fields, creating
electrons, creating magnetic fields, and so on. The magnetic fields exist outside
of the cable but are guided by it. This endless pulsing is highly accurate in
re-creating the data carrying electrons from the re-condensing magnetic field,
as demonstrated by the communications they carry. There must be a powerful
force of inertia maintaining such accurate pulsating between matter and energy
field states. If all particles of matter similarly fluctuate or pulse, which
accords with matter condensing energy as in E=MC2, and if magnetic fields
pulse outwards to fill the universe, it would provide a mechanism for particles
to be, by our time reckoning, in both states simultaneously; and would make
accurate measurement of particles impossible.
Such a pulse, governed by inertia, would not necessarily
always re-create the expanded energy field when it condenses back to matter,
precisely as it was before. This potential evolution from moment to moment
allows for the mathematicians’ findings of multi-verses, not existing
simultaneously but from micro-second to micro-second, exploring all possible
universes sequentially. If the expansion of particles into energy fields is a
momentary return to pre-matter existence, the state before the Big-Bang when
matter is deemed to have been created, then the expanded energy fields perhaps
exist in a timeless dimension and as such their communications are not
time limited, allowing action at a distance or non-locality. Fields are
inherently non-local as they have no parts.
The inertia which so accurately recreates the particles
from energy might come from the energy of the magnetic fields interpenetrating
across the universe, forming a matrix which is robust in that every field and
re-condensing particle has its place in the universe, as every other place is
occupied; every particle and field is nudged into its proper place by every
other particle & field. This matrix, which we might for example call the
Aether, would also allow for a holographic universe, in which every sphere of
all sizes, from the sphere of the whole universe (if it is bounded and not infinite)
down to an eyeball sized and down to minimum Planck sized spheres, are
criss-crossed by electromagnetic pulses from every physical object in the
universe and from every immaterial force field. Place a recording screen or an
eyeball anywhere in the universe and its screen will see the whole universe at
whatever size the screen allows. Each holographic sphere image, made of real
electro-magnetic forces, will differ and is unique due to the different angles
from the positions of “fixed” matter and due to the exclusion of long
wavelengths from smaller spheres. Is
this the source of inertia? The
philosophical implications and the responsibility for our personal actions in
such an instantly evolving, interconnected, interdependent universe are truly
terrible.
Noel Hodson (Mr)
16 Brookside ,
This headline, on an article by Marcus
Chown, New Scientist, 17 Jan 09, promised to echo or at least straighten-up my
thoughts on a holographic universe (below 28 March 08 & 18 Jan 08). But it
seems that Craig Hogan, Director of the centre for particle astrophysics at
Fermilab, of whom Chown writes, is using “holographic” differently to me. Hogan
speculates that interference or “jitter” detected by the gravitational wave
detector GEO600 at
What I do imagine is that in or from any
given sphere of space, every body in the visible universe can be “seen” –
imagine the sphere as a head with eyes looking in all directions, feeding the
images to one retina. And that if that sphere had some physical defining characteristics
such as gas or dust or a glass marble, the whole universe would be seen within
it. In that sense the sphere would be a
holographic image of the universe. I now go on to imagine that in the absence
of any screen, marble, gas or dust, what else might reflect or fix the
minuscule image of the great universe?
The unending stream of particles and waves, including tiny neutrinos,
criss-crossing the universe could be the ephemeral spherical screens on all
scales which capture images (or are informed by) of galaxies, supernovae,
stars, planets, and even smaller phenomena. In fact, there is no logical reason
to limit the sensitivity until the spheres are so small that wavelengths pass
them by and will not fit into the space.
And this imagining of an infinite number of images, at all scales, made
of light (just as the source bodies are made of light) leads me back to the pesky
Aether – which in turn supports the wavelengths. And the whole complex is
growing with Hubble expansion at my calculation of 2.304E-18% per second. (now 6.819E-19% per second)
Yes, I am so old fashioned, stubborn and
traditional that I will not yet ditch the Aether.
The matrix of the
holographic Aether will depend partly on the size of the nominal
viewing-spheres compared to the wavelengths of electromagnetic forces and
partly on the angles of intersection as the waves criss-cross. For example, if
there exists a wavelength as large as the known universe then only a
viewing-sphere as large as the whole universe can contain that wavelength. Take
an imagined quantum step down to a wavelength that is half the size of the
known universe, then two holographic viewing-spheres can be contained in the
universe, which contain this half-length and all smaller wavelengths; the two
viewing-spheres differ due to their different angles of intersection of all the
wavelengths of signals from all the universal bodies (bodies of every size from
galaxies to atomic particles). Another
halving of wavelengths excludes all longer wavelengths and allows four
viewing-spheres containing all smaller wavelengths; the four will be different
and unique due to the angles of intersection. This scaling will continue
downwards until a minuscule viewing-sphere size is reached that excludes even
the shortest wavelengths – is that the Planck Length? Within each of the larger
viewing-spheres are smaller viewing-spheres whose perimeters are governed or
defined by wavelengths. Thus, the
universe can be depicted as one all encompassing reality, of material objects,
made from compressed lights as it happens, which contains zones, bubbles or
viewing-spheres of invariably regular dimensions dictated by included and
excluded criss-crossing wavelengths. The sizes of these viewing-spheres are
quantum jumps in scale, though the quantum may vary with wavelengths. Each
viewing-sphere has unique characteristics. A major and fundamental question is,
do the criss-crossing signals of electromagnetic forces create a tangible
stable matrix – however ephemeral, insubstantial, shadowy, ghostly and fluid it
may be? If so, it could be the Aether. This entire complex is rescued from being
eternally static by Hubble Expansion – and …according to EIG, the expansion of
the stuff of the universe attenuates the matrix, everywhere, at all times and
that attenuation or momentary vacuum is gravity. Another thought; the
viewing-sphere ethereal matrix, if it has any substantiality, will in its turn,
influence the “real” matter in the universe either by containment, wavelength
reflection and deflection, or both. Given the regularity of this holographic
matrix, it should be possible for real mathematicians to calculate the numbers
of viewing-spheres.
1) Is everything quantum? Are ALL physical things at every level and
size, built in quantum steps – or phase changes; emergence out of chaos
etc. It would make sense if this were
so. Even at the massive scale of
lumbering animals – say human beings – evolution seems to proceed in leaps and
bounds, not smooth gradients. Are these
leaps and bounds of a standard size if observed over particular time scales?
2) The New Scientist 1 November 08 article
by Mark Buchanan, Shedding light, says that Mitchell Feigenbaum, Rockefeller
University, New York, has published mathematics arriving at the same
conclusions as Einstein but without invoking light. The article also says this new maths makes it
possible to allow that photons have mass – albeit a minute 10-49
grams per photon. If they do have mass,
and travel in waves – the (rigid framework) Aether once again rears its useful
head – and it is a step nearer claiming that all matter is made from light.
Spinning straw into gold or light into material looks more logical and adds
credence to the vital step between energy and matter postulated in this EIG
theory. If photons do have some mass –
does this explain dark matter?
NS 2002 - Now the researchers, along with Richard Woodard
at the
According to quantum theory, a vacuum is not really
empty: instead it's full of pairs of particles created from nothing. Normally
these particles collide and annihilate each other immediately after they form.
But in the first fraction of a second after the big bang, the Universe is
thought to have exploded outwards incredibly fast, a period called inflation.
For pairs of particles that can feel the pull of inflation, the rapid expansion
of space would have pulled them so far apart they wouldn't have been able to annihilate
each other, and would have filled space.
The Higgs
boson can't affect photons, but these charged particles can. It would have
taken more energy than normal to create a photon amid this sea of particles.
And the particles would have dragged on the photons. In effect, the photons had
a mass of about a hundred-billionth of a gram each. After inflation stopped,
the extra energy associated with this mass would have created magnetic fields
that evolved into the fields that exist today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon
…Instead, physicists generally accept the
second-quantized theory of photons described below, quantum electrodynamics, in which photons are quantized
excitations of electromagnetic modes.
***********************************
In relativity, all energy moving along with a body adds up to the total
energy, which is exactly proportional to the relativistic mass. Even a single photon, graviton, or neutrino traveling in empty space has a
relativistic mass, which is its energy divided by c². But the rest mass
of a photon is slightly subtler to define in terms of physical measurements,
because a photon is always moving at the speed of light—it is never at rest.
If you run away from a photon in the direction it travels, having it chase
you, when the photon catches up to you the photon will be seen as having less
energy. The faster you were traveling when it catches you, the less energy it
will have. As you approach the speed of light, the photon looks redder and
redder, by Doppler shift (the Doppler shift is the relativistic formula),
and the energy of a very long-wavelength photon approaches zero. This is why a
photon is massless; this means that the rest mass of a photon is zero.
Two photons moving in different directions can't both be made to have
arbitrarily small total energy by changing frames, or by chasing them. The
reason is that in a two-photon system, the energy of one photon is decreased by
chasing it, but the energy of the other will increase. Two photons not moving
in the same direction have an inertial
frame
where the combined energy is smallest, but not zero. This is called the center
of mass
frame or the center of momentum frame; these terms are almost synonyms
(the center of mass frame is the special case of a center of momentum frame
where the center of mass is put at the origin). The most that chasing a pair of
photons can accomplish to decrease their energy is to put the observer in frame
where the photons have equal energy and are moving directly away from each
other. In this frame, the observer is now moving in the same direction and speed
as the center of mass of the two photons. The total momentum of the photons is
now zero, since their momentums are equal and opposite. In this frame the two
photons, as a system, have a mass equal to their total energy divided by c2.
This mass is called the invariant
mass
of the pair of photons together. It is the smallest mass and energy the system
may be seen to have, by any observer. It is only the invariant mass of a two-photon
system that can be used to make a single particle with the same rest mass.
If the photons formed by the collision of a particle and an antiparticle,
the invariant mass is the same as the total energy of the particle and
antiparticle (their rest energy plus the kinetic energy), in the center of mass
frame, where they will automatically be moving in equal and opposite directions
(since they have equal momentum in this frame). If the photons are formed by
the disintegration of a single particle with a well-defined rest mass,
like the neutral pion,
the invariant mass of the photons is equal to rest mass of the pion. In this
case, the center of mass frame for the pion is just the frame where the pion is
at rest, and the center of mass doesn't change after it disintegrates into two
photons. After the two photons are formed, their center of mass is still moving
the same way the pion did, and their total energy in this frame adds up to the
mass energy of the pion. Thus, by calculating the invariant
mass
of pairs of photons in a particle detector, pairs can be identified that were
probably produced by pion disintegration.
3) Referring
to paragraph 2 immediately above, and to the thoughts below about the
holographic universe being in every place, on every scale: Is light already
there; everywhere? And so does it simply get activated when we measure its
“speed” – activated like twanging or vibrating a taut string (not string
theory) between the point of measurement and the source – and activated at the
rate of 300,000 KPS? If light
criss-crosses all zones at all times – and has weight – then it could serve as
the ubiquitous, now you need it, now you don’t, Aether. And thus be the carrier
of Inertia. This would not contradict
the essential point of this website, that Hubble expansion causes gravity – and
that light flowing into momentary-mini-vacuums collides with light to create
fundamental particles.
How many photons are there
in a cubic centimetre of “empty”, “dark” space; what
do they weigh and how do they retain their content of information about their
source and their journey – which we can analyse – and how do they allow another
electromagnetic beam to pass through the (already crowded as it contains an
image of the entire universe) cubic centimetre, without mutual annihilation? Maybe the beams thread their way past each
other by taking the paths of least resistance – e.g. circumnavigating a minimum
Planck sphere or a larger sphere. The beam that we suppose to be straight would
thus disappear and then reappear from our view, breaking up a continuous stream
of energy into quanta. Maybe there are
so many photons - infinite numbers - that billions of mutual annihilations do
not detract from the information the infinite number of survivors carry.
CERN switched on the Large Hadron Collider
(LHC) yesterday morning at around 9.30am UK time. Those who believed the LHC
would create Black-Holes which would suck the Earth and possibly the solar
system into their event-horizons, may have felt a slight tug towards
ONE OR BOTH OF THESE PROPOSITIONS IS/ARE
WRONG:
By coincidence, or perhaps by Intelligent
Design, a week earlier I travelled with a renowned physicist who analyses data
from probes on distant planets. How, I asked, could such very feeble
electro-magnetic signals with less power than an AA battery, cross the millions
of miles of space between Mars and the Earth, suffer interference from the Sun,
from stellar-novae, from many billions of galaxies, and 300 million vital
mobile phone conversations and TV shows, penetrate the Earth’s magnetic field
and atmosphere and maintain their coherence and legible data? I was given a
wave-particle answer; from which I formulated my own excuse for the feeble yet coherent
signals; inasmuch as the billions of diverse particles/waves signals are so
very, very small that even criss-crossing in space they have plenty of room to
avoid collision and annihilating each other. Space is very large and all
electro-magnetic signals are very small. I did not press the point by citing
minuscule Planck spaces and holographic universes; as explored below.
But here is the contradiction. Anil
Ananthaswamy, writing in The New Scientist, tells us that the LHC will crash
two contra-flow beams of proton bearing laser light and produce 600 million
collisions per second. Suddenly space, albeit inside the CERN tunnel, seems
very crowded, with barely any room for wave/particles to avoid each other. And,
some of those collisions will smash the protons into each other and produce
firework displays of primary particles from their debris. So it seems that
space isn’t so large after all and that the coherence of data flows from Venus et
al remains a puzzle – invoking incompatible thoughts of The Holographic
Universe, of that damned Aether and of Inertia. And taking us no nearer to
answering how (pure) energy turns itself into solid matter and maintains its
diverse characteristics and shapes – in relationship to all the other matter
and energy in the universe. How does the
universe spin straw into gold? How does a tadpole remain tadpole shaped? How
does a table’s surface prevent teapots falling through it?
The undefined and indefinable Higgs Boson
doesn’t provide a satisfactory theoretical answer. But at 79 years old,
Professor Higgs may mercifully learn of all the universal truths from other
worldly, forgiving dimensions, before the $9B LHC fails to find his boson. It
seems to me that the colliding wave/particle beams may well be drawn to each
other by the Expansion is Gravity mechanism (EIG) imagined here (below) and
that the resulting fractals (quarks?) then attract each other and cluster to
form the many different particles identified in the “particle zoo”. The Higgs Boson will be found to be
Hubble-Expansion vacuums – a temporary partial absence or attenuation of
energy.
I have been re-reading The Goldilocks
Enigma (2006) by Paul Davies, taking particular interest in his final chapters
where he draws on the ideas of John Wheeler, who with other theorists posited
‘meaning circuits’ in the ‘participatory universe’. How might such feedback from intelligent
observers function?
Given the architecture or scaffolding of
interwoven light, the Aether, the ubiquitous, highly robust, energetic holograms
on every scale, which inhabit the entire universe, as sketched out below; and
given the observed inertia of the universe, which enables material objects to
retain their characteristics, despite innumerable hugely energetic events such
as supernovas etc, which might be supposed to be powerful enough to disrupt the
holograms and destroy all lesser electro-magnetic signals, but do not in fact
obliterate even the most feeble information streams reaching our observatories;
then how does the inertia of the universe become flexible enough to accommodate
changes, including the emergence and destruction of matter?
There may be a feedback mechanism in the
holographic universe which, for example, reports the emergence of a particle of
matter (or a supernova), created from the energetic field, to the entire
electro-magnetic field – and, as a field has no parts, the feedback is
instantaneous, so that the necessary warping or bending of space-time around
the particle is allowed by inertia; and the holographic scaffolding adjusts
instantaneously, everywhere. If this feedback mechanism is allowed; it means
that every particle or cluster of particles of matter and their behaviour and impact
on the universe are felt, or known by the entire universe, simultaneously –
across the energy field which has no parts. Thus the robust, holographic,
stable light and matter fields adjust the holographic architecture for each and
every material event.
Some such clusters of matter and energy are
gathered together in such subtle patterns and interactions as to generate life,
sentience and human intelligence - ourselves. In the holographic universe the
activities of these complex life-nodes also feedback into the all encompassing
energy field, just as the existence of a massive planet bends light and so
alters the architecture of the entire universe (every light-woven holographic
bubble changes, as it must to allow for inertia), so does the universe alter
due to the information (can I be pedantic here and type “in-form-ation”) which
flows from the sentient cells in the universe.
As we are referring to the characteristics
of space-time adjusting to the presence of sentience – then such changes might
well be timeless; and so affect the past, present and future. Do we, after all,
make our own universe and our own heaven and hell? What an awesome self-responsibility.
Russian Dolls, implicate dimensions: With thanks to mad String Theorists. I am alive,
I exist. In DNA terms I may even be unique. I am as real as any test of reality
requires. I was just as scientifically
real as an embryo in my mother’s womb. I was partially but still scientifically
real as an unfertilised egg in my mother’s fallopian tubes/egg sac. That half-me was just as scientifically
detectable inside my mother as an unfertilised egg in my grandmother’s egg sac.
The scale is already becoming so tiny as to defeat human instruments – but the
reality is logical. And we are only two generations (and a couple of determined
spermatozoa) back in the sequence – historically back to about 1897. And so on into endless regress – the Russian
Dolls getting ever smaller but the “long body” that results in me, in reality,
is undeniable. These many implicate
dimensions seem to be analogous to the many (from ten up to infinite) curled-up
dimensions of String-Theorists.
Many Worlds – Multiverse – Probability:
However, in following the eggs, within eggs, within eggs, within eggs back to
Eve, we are conveniently ignoring the equally real existence of Adam and his
spermatozoa at each juncture. And now it gets really complicated for Adam was
implicit in his mother’s egg sac etc. as were his numberless male descendants
in their mother’s egg sacs. And many of these nameless mothers and fathers would
have been the same parents of many sons and daughters. (We are all linked).
Because males produce vast quantities of sperm, much of which is sinfully and
biblically “spilled on the ground”, my direct line of descent cannot be deduced
by reference to specific spermatozoa. So we enter the fields of probability. If a mathematician were unconsciously
grappling with this ancesteral complexity, he/she might start to spin out Other
Universes in which to accommodate all the possibilities, all the in-potentia,
unique persons or DNA that might have emerged in the present – in my
place. BUT, the reality is that I am
here, the probability fields and equations have collapsed and my unique DNA
rules – OK! So this ancesteral search, blending the maternal and paternal
probabilities, is analogous at any moment of fertilisation to the many
universes theorems of the Multiverse lobby. Maybe.
As I have two daughters, from ova fertilized
40 and 37 years ago respectively, they now carry these probabilities and
Russian Dolls on to the next generations. As my DNA was passed on decades ago
and yet I still exist and persist, I am reminded of the joke about the tourist
asking the way in Ireland …after complicated up hill and down dale instructions
the Irishman says, “…and 3 miles before
you get to the pub, turn right”. My DNA
has already passed the turning three miles back – but what about Time
Dimensions and Dawkin’s Memes? – for another time perhaps.
So – here below we have the fact of a
holographic universe with representations in light at every possible scale and
every possible focal point of the whole universe, observed from different
angles. And above we have the fact of implicate multi-dimensions conjured by
String Theory and finally the many Universe/probability theory beloved by
Multiverse proponents.
The logic of the historic existence of me
in my Russian Dolls form and half-form is inescapable – back unto the Nth
generation. And I have absolutely no memory of those earlier forms of me and
can barely imagine them beyond the moment of my recent birth. However, the
scale of matter, atomic, particle etc, it seems would remain the same
throughout. If we reverse the process and look forward into my personal future
– is there an equally unimaginable dimension or dimensions ahead in time which
the essence of me might emerge into? This
is more than mere intellectual speculation as I have passed the age of 65 and I
am making my final turn for landing. Richard Dawkins – your comments on a
postcard please.
Needs more thought and synthesis - and we
must not omit the Hubble expansion. But at least I have got these notes down
before they drifted away to some other reality.
28 March 2008 - NB – From a recent New Scientist article I find I am a
Bohmian. The NS report explained the
double slit experiment Bohmian style as the (visible) light being a
carrier-wave and centre (particle or photon) – and it is the wave that creates
the characteristic shadows and light patterns.
However, even accepting this idea, the
essential mystery for me remains; how does energy convert to matter and how
does matter take and retain its form in a tumultuous universe (inertia).
A 5 minute look at articles about Bohm’s
holographic and wave theories give me confidence to now speculate:
Yes – the energy waves in the universe
extend as effectively-infinite spheres, which criss-cross at every point in the
universe (see paragraphs below). Thus large and minuscule holograms of the
universe are created on every scale and every location throughout the
space-time continuum. One paper on Bohm says he believed the material of the
human brain was also such a holographic organisation – and that therefore we
(some of us) can, in theory, access knowledge of the universe.
These carrier waves pulse and fill the
universe one moment then congregate at their centres as what we perceive as
particles. This makes, say a human eyeball, eye-crossingly complicated with
billions of particles expanding to the edge of the universe in wave form and
coalescing back to points (black-hole-like) while retaining a coherent,
relational and functioning form – but some such inertial mechanism must exist
to enable the eye to have its continuous existence and stability. And think of an infinite progression of future
human babies implicit in a single human egg – it is very complicated.
I think the inertial matrix of these
criss-cross energies, where every thing and non-thing are connected an infinite
number of times and locations, creates the stability and inform-ation that
confers form. We creations of this process can change the universal inertia by
feedback or reprocessing the energy - but only rarely – but shifts in the
energy patterns underlying our DNA are possible and we can and do adjust to our
energy-wave environment.
The HOW – how does matter emerge from the
energy field/s? still seems to me to give EIG a fighting chance of being one of
the ways of explaining the transition from energy fields to particles.
I’ll tidy this up next visit.
6 Feb 08 – NB – Do all primary particles
constantly fluctuate between point like and wave like states? Just as the
electric signals, electrons, along a telephone wire, such as an undersea cable,
create a magnetic field “at right angles to the wire” which then in turn
generates a current, which generates a field and so on, ad-infinitum, so do ALL
primary particles. What the electrons are doing is pulsing from a point
(particle) of matter to a globe (halo) of field energy (non-matter) and back
again to matter. In fact the definition of a primary particle must be that it
has this property, this pulse or flux. Photons, Electrons, Neutrinos, Quarks
etc and of course my primary fractals have this characteristic or capability.
This solves the wave-particle double-slit conundrum; the electron “shells”
surrounding the nucleus of an atom are fluctuating. Each outburst into a
globe-halo energy field fills the (extremely large) space of the energy
required to make that particle and, as it re-condenses, the space is
momentarily depleted of energy and is a void. To expand into a halo-globe the
energy must come into a contingent relationship with the existing all pervading
universal field and affect the whole field. Are all primary particles in effect
“tunnelling” at the speed of light through the wavelength-matrix of the
“Aether” (see Void 18 Jan 08 below) and to do this do they dissolve and
re-condense endlessly? IF electrons, photons, quarks etc are assemblies of my
vortex created fractals, then the halo-globe could be a cloud of fractals
(still matter) or could unwind back to pure energy. HOWEVER, the implications
for inertia – the power that (accurately) restores the status-quo – are
fantastic (is the universal field sensate?).
– Read more and re-visit and write-up.
Professor Frank Close,
CLICK A descriptive overview. How EIG might operate
Is the Void - empty, matter-less space - empty? Frank Close
says it is not and I agree. I gather
that Professor Close contends that empty space is a seething ocean of quivering
zero-point-energies, short-lived quantum particles and energy fluctuations –
which mathematically can be demonstrated to cancel each other, indicating that
the entire universe emerged from nothing and nowhere.
I cannot disagree with the science, the reported findings
and interpretations from cyclotrons, or the mathematics; all of which are
entirely beyond me. But, it does seem that The Void as described is closely
skirting previous speculations about the Aether – an Aether which seems to come
and go with the fashions of physicists’ training and thought-experiments.
Space or The Void is not empty. Take an emptied, evacuated,
particle-free cube of any size and at any place in the known universe, erect a
screen or an aerial or a human eye ball and it will “see” or record the whole
of creation. How does it see the universe? The cube is criss-crossed by light
travelling from all the galaxies, stars, planets, comets, dust and magnetic
storms etc which are capable of emitting an electro-magnetic signal, beam,
wave, photon, electron or any other energy. In our cube, passively receiving
information from every direction in the form of wave-particles (light); as the
electromagnetic beams zip through the cube, say from north to south, they do so
in the same manner as electricity travels, generating magnetic-fields at
right-angles to their routes – which in turn re-create electric current at
right angles to the magnetic-fields.
Thus, our cube is literally criss-crossed with energy and,
astonishingly, the energy is coherent. This complex multi-directional
pre-matter matrix forms, I imagine, the inertia of the universe. The energy
(signals, information, wave-particles) persists, perseveres, retains discrete identity,
etc across 14 billion light-years, across trillions of other space cubes,
wriggling through potentially massively disrupting signals from quasars, black-holes,
supernova, whiffs of hydrogen, wisps of helium, TV soaps, mobile-phones, human
brain signals and a host of other universal events, and can still be detected
and accurately analysed when they reach Earth.
Is this coherent, robust matrix anything other than The Aether?
EIG posits that within such a matter-less cube – note that
the smaller the imagined cube the more wavelengths will be excluded from the
observing screens (Casimir) - the miracle of transforming energy to matter
occurs. A very large “volume” of energy spirals into a minute particle. This
precipitation is triggered by the ubiquitous Hubble Expansion, which extenuates
the field-forces, thus “cools” those energies, creates mass (primary-fractals,
quarks etc) which combine to form “the particle zoo” and ultimately form human
scale elements and molecules.
Dark Matter is the continual Hubble Expansion of every zone
(sphere or cube) of space – which we measure as background gravity.
Dark Energy (the expansive force) is the release of mutual attraction
in an energy field as matter precipitates from the energy (light). The
remaining energy attenuates and expands.
(Is there a reverse of this when matter reverts to energy, as in an
atomic explosion?)
Inertia (stable universe) is initially from the light-matrix
described in the imagined space-cubes, above.
Inertia of matter (and surfaces) result from the binding
forces between the EIG primary particles, as described in other paragraphs in
this paper.
Sorry, Richard Dawkins, but we still need God to kick-start
it all.
Are photons and electrons particles
or waves and what is the speed and direction of travel? EIG would explain this
at the Fractal level (a primary Fractal of matter) as waves of electromagnetic
energy being drawn to an expanding Planck sphere where it collides with another
incoming wave, spins and forms a Fractal which fills the vacuum and is then
drawn to another vacuum in a contingent expanding sphere. The second sphere can
be in any direction from the first. The just formed solo Fractal only
stabilises when it joins with other Fractals; alone it may remain as matter,
with a spinning surface, or it may unravel in sphere 2 and return to wave form.
Thus any observed Fractal may appear in one millisecond to be matter (a primary
particle) and in the next millisecond as energy – and it may travel with equal
facility in any direction. All this occurs at the speed of propagation of
light. “Quantum” is created as Fractals combine to form larger particles. These
conglomerations of Fractals rely on their surface vacuums to hold them
together. Small sets may be dissolved back to energy but larger sets may gain
or lose specific numbers of Fractals – creating the quantum effect.
Inflation of the
early universe, as reviewed in "Boomtime - NS, 3 March 07, by Peter
Coles" and Dark Energy as explored by Stuart Clarke in NS, 17 Feb 07,
might be explained if Hubble expansion and gravity are thought of as
opposite sides of the same coin. From the first moment of the Big
Bang an energy field containing the whole universe started to expand. This
matterless field, in which all zones were/are interconnected, as a field
has no parts, has a wave front. As the wave front advances it attenuates
the field, creating partial, momentary, Planck-sized vacuums that tug
on the field and check the advance of the wave front. Within some of
the Planck spheres energy collides and forms the first
particles of matter - I call them Fractals. The Hubble-Expansion of
the ubiquitous, momentarily attenuated, Planck spheres is the
basic power of gravity - and thus along with the non-radiating
material Fractals, is interpreted as Dark Matter. As Fractals (or
Quarks) are formed, they compress great amounts of energy (E=MC2) and thus
deplete the energy field, further attenuating the remaining
energy; causing first a brief vacuum-induced pause in the advance of
the wave front and then, as the matter-formation attenuation spreads
throughout the field, the binding strength of the remaining energy is
lessened and the wave front expands more rapidly. Thus Dark Energy, the
expansionary force or Einstein's Cosmological Constant, may
be the counter effect of Fractals of matter being formed,
locking away energy from the field - allowing the attenuated field to
accelerate. The Fractals are also centres of gravitation but behave
differently to gravity-like Planck-spheres in the energy-field.
In a very
small, early universe, compressed, cooling energy would, logically, precipitate more Fractals
than would a widespread field and would lock-up a significant amount of
the total energy. The sudden weakening of the binding forces of the
remaining field might account for rapid-inflation. I refer to this concept
on my website as EIG.
EIG came into being to attempt to account
for Dark Matter; hoping to avoid tangling with Dark Energy. But as Stuart Clark in New Scientist describes
Dark Energy as the biggest problem in cosmology (NS 17 FEB 07), it will somehow
have to be knitted into trying to build a Theory of Everything such as EIG.
The Big-Bang still needs a God
factor to kick it into life from the original singularity, which miraculously
manifested in the No-Thing prior to Time & Space. Given that the fabric and
energy field of the universe then leapt into Hubble expansion and expanded into
the pre-existing No-Thing, EIG proposes that the expanding energy field had and
still has a wave front, which as it expands attenuates or stretches the
energy-field. This attenuation acts as a momentary brake on the expansion and,
as an energy field has no parts and is a continuum, the attenuation acts on all
zones of whatever size, simultaneously. At a quantum level, probably in spheres
of Planck size, the attenuation creates vacuums in the energy field, which is
the electro-magnetic or light field. It is these vast numbers of Planck zone
vacuums that we register as the force of gravity and as Dark Matter.
As light rushes in to fill the vacuums
and in rare instances makes a primary particle of matter – maybe a quark – the
process concentrates light from the surrounding field and locks it into matter.
E=MC2 informs us that a very large amount of light (energy) is
locked into a very tiny piece of material.
It is this continuous precipitation
of energy into matter at a quantum level which may be interpreted as Dark
Energy. Each particle of matter is a
massive amount of energy – permanently (as far as human time scales are
concerned) depleting the energy field – and locking into the store of material
vast numbers of minuscule, previously freely expanding, Planck Spheres of
energy. The energy field adjusts to the creation of matter by diluting the mass
of the non-material field. The combined affects of fewer Planck Spheres; which
are no longer expanding, creating vacuums and thus gravitational pull –
together with the depletion or dilution of the everywhere-connected energy-field,
reduces the moment by moment check on the out-rushing, expanding wave front.
Thus the wave front, the edge of the observable universe, will expand more
quickly and constantly accelerate. Thus Dark Energy is in fact the letting off
of the braking effect of gravity (vacuums) allowing the universe to more and
more respond to the original impetus that we read as Hubble Expansion. QED and QED.
The “expansive force” of Dark Energy
is also known as Quintessence (a neat label) and is Einstein’s Cosmological
Constant that he invented in his calculations to stop the then static
pre-Hubble universe from being crushed by its own gravity back into a
black-hole or singularity; and later, post Hubble, lamented as “my greatest
mistake”.
This EIG explanation of Dark Energy
seems to imply that the energy-field is finite – not infinite. But that needs
some more thought.
I need to calculate the partial
vacuum force created within a Planck sphere (or any sphere?) as it expands via
Hubble Expansion at 2.304E-18% per
second; and compare it with the Gravitational Constant applied to that sphere.
Notes:
Vacuums “Do not Suck” they allow particles to spread out.
Cellular
Automata theory, so far gets closest to my own picture of the fundamental
structure. Authors calculate a 3D sphere has 26 (presumabaly identical)
neighbours – how? Do these neighbours touch (or interpenetrate) the
focus-sphere?
Light
speed – is this constant a function of the (changing) size of the universe? It
seems to be as utterly fundamental to QED as to Relativity.
From: Noel
Hodson [
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 10:46 AM
To:
Subject: The Aether
Glenn Starkman's
search for the ether (Ether returns in bid to oust dark matter - NS 26 August
06) as a field force, "not of light" but as "something that
boosts gravitational pull" is interesting. Space-time and the universe
logically is something rather than nothing. 'Nothing' may have preceded the
universe. The most remote and empty spaces, wherever we may imagine placing a
telescope, detector or screen, are criss-crossed by field forces, including
electromagnetic radiation that we can, or may attempt to, interpret; from
hot-regions, cold-regions, galaxies, super-novae, stars, planets, NASA space
probes, mobile-phones, atoms, particles, molecules and Fred Hoyle's wandering
viruses. We can observe the whole universe, on our minuscule retinas, from any
point in the universe. In this sense every location is a holographic
representation of the whole**. The fact that the signals, weak and strong,
remain reasonably coherent across vast distances and billions of years is
astonishing but undeniable. Therefore any zone, a cube or sphere, in space,
however empty it may seem and of any scale, is perhaps "conditioned"
by such intersecting fields. Matching and intersecting wavelengths result in
blank spots. Such persistent intersections may be the underlying structure, or
ether, of the universe and the source of the inertia we experience in the
material universe. Given such a universal matrix - imagined as spheres of
Planck Length diameter - where intersections occur may be points in 'empty'
space at which fundamental particles of matter, quarks or photons, are created,
as a proportion of field waves collide rather than co-exist. The unexplained
given force that pulls the signals into collision - the God factor in this idea
- is Hubble expansion, which, in expanding and attenuating every zone in the
ether at 2.304E-18 percent per
second generates the extra gravity which
astrophysicists detect everywhere. Speculating on EIG (expansion is
gravity), the mathematics become fiendishly impossible as the (rare, new)
fundamental particle moves randomly into any neighbouring, expanding Planck
sphere, which are each themselves at the heart of a Russian Doll set of
expanding spheres, ultimately as large as the accelerating Hubble universe. If
the ether is resurrected by Starkman, and is a field, then as a field has no
parts, all regions of a field are connected, which may allow for 'spooky'
action at a distance.
**PS – 2 Oct 06
– Each holographic representation of the universe is in fact unique. Imagine a
10metre diameter screen on one side of the universe capturing all the
electromagnetic signals and thus displaying a picture of the entire (visible)
universe; then imagine another screen billions of light-years away on the
“other side” of the universe. The 2nd screen will also capture a
picture of the whole universe but the angles to objects will be quite
different. There will be two different pictures of the whole. Similarly, every
hologram will be different from every other – and thus unique. If each DNA
pattern were to be influenced by “The Stars” then those DNA patterns will also
be unique.
Noel Hodson
16
email noel@noelhodson.com
+44(0)1865 760994 Fax 769384
website www.noelhodson.com
Zeeya Meralis reports in New
Scientist magazine 22nd July 06, on the
work of physicist, Anatoly Svidzinsky, at Texas A&M University, who
speculates that galactic Black Holes may be mistaken identity, being in fact axions
(see next item below) that have formed bubbles at the heart of the Milky Way
and other galaxies. If axions exist, Svidzinsky calculates they would expand in
the centre of the galaxy to weigh between 1 million and 2.5 billion solar
masses – masses predicted for galactic black holes. He also assumes that very
strong gravitational fields form a surface tension that repels rather than
attracts. Periodically its expanding
surface pulls the bubble back. Thus he imagines a period of attraction, then
repulsion, then attraction – and speculates that this occurs every 20 minutes –
the pattern of X-ray flares as observed at the centre of the Milky Way and
previously thought to be from a black hole.
If such bubbles and surface-tensions
can theoretically exist; the information adds significant support to the basic
EIG idea. Perhaps EIG would complete Svidzinsky’s theory.
(PS - An Aspergers-savant, Daniel Tammet, reports that Prime Numbers are like large “smooth
pebbles”. (His book ‘Born on a Blue Day’, Hodder & Stoughton) .This may tie
in with the report below – imagining primes numbers of fractals/quarks as
stable primary particles. Note on the Music of the Primes – 27 October 04)
New Scientist magazine 15 July 06,
reports the efforts of Giovanni Cantatore at the Italian institute for nuclear
physics, to manufacture particles which might be the missing mass in the
universe. They fire a laser beam across a magnetic field which is 100,000 time
stronger than the Earth’s, and bounce the laser beam 44,000 times back and
forth. This creates an anomaly in the calculations for the expected
polarisation of the light – and in turn the mathematical anomaly may be caused
by some of the light being converted to 1 millielectronvolt ‘axions’ – thought
to be the missing dark matter required to glue the universe together. To test the theory a laser will be fired
through a polarising magnetic field at a wall, with a receiving polarising magnet
on the other side. Some of the photons will convert into axions, cross the
impenetrable, opaque wall, be reconverted to photons and recreate the original
laser beam.
Apart from the imagined particle,
the axion, this speculation fits well with EIG.
In the expanding universe a sphere
of Planck Space, the smallest zone possible, expands, creates a vacuum that is
filled by light, at the speed of light – formed as, say, a photon, some of
which are polarised as expected. The photon may quit the first sphere, at the
speed of light, by one of 6 exits (into one of the next interpenetrating zones
or spheres). If the photon is energised as part of a laser beam it is more
probable to exit the sphere on the continuation of its straight line trajectory
– but the beam may be dissipated by photons taking one of the other five
routes. The one-sixth, say, of the
original photons that continue in a straight line through the wall, being drawn
by vacuums from Planck Sphere to Planck Sphere, will be reduced by 5/6ths at
each layer of spheres, but some will get all the way through the wall;
travelling while in the wall as electrons. They then encounter the
re-polarising magnetic field, which gives the electrons enough energy to
convert back to photons – and re-polarises them in accord with the original
polarisation. At the wall interface,
some will escape as electrons before reaching the magnet. A very few photons
will collide in Planck Spheres with other photons and a few of such collisions
will result in a primary fractal of matter being formed by EIG. So, a tiny
fraction of the units emerging from the wall will be such fractals of matter
(maybe Quarks).
The missing Dark Matter with
gravitational pull is of course the combined affect of the Planck Spheres
nominally existing for human mathematical convenience in the electromagnetic
field, expanding due to Hubble Expansion and attenuating the stuff of the
universe, thus creating vacuums and therefore “pull” in every direction, at all
times, which cannot be shielded.
1) Awareness exceeds the speed of light
– the anthropic principle again: If I
can claim to be a representative sentient being, and if I stand between two
light sources – say two stars, each one-light-year distant, the light from both
stars reaches me simultaneously. Both are propagating light at 300,000
kilometres per second – and nothing can travel faster than light – but I know
beyond all reasonable doubt that my awareness is seeing light from sources 2
light years apart, in one light year. I “know” what is happening to both stars
at double the speed of light.
2) The photons and/or wave fronts of
the propagating light meet at the place I am situated as an observer. Photons
are mass-less; as entities in the electro-magnetic field they have energy –
gained through their rate of propagation but no weight and no substance. They
are not “matter” they are not material. Let us assume that two photons from
these distant stars collide at my location. Their impact “speed” is 600,000 KPS
but as nothing can exceed 300,000 KPS and as photons are more than “nothing”,
as they are “something”, then at the
instant of collision they must halve their speed to stay within the laws of
physics; or put another way, one of the photons must lose all momentum just
before the collision. Does the halted photon become matter at that moment? Or
maybe their electro-magnetic charges repel each other and they swerve to avoid
the collision. Or maybe they embrace and enter mutual orbits – travelling at
300 KPS. Is this the spin that creates a surface that matter requires to exist?
3) Light structures – An article in New
Scientist last week told of organising nano-particles of polystyrene beads into
crystal like structures by shining laser beams on them. Depending on the type
of laser, the beads formed into hexagonal or square lattice formations which
collapsed as soon as the light switched off. The experimenter cannot explain
what is happening – and nor can anyone. Is this a visible manifestation of
underlying structures in the electro-magnetic field? Or are these structures perhaps
mega-examples of the self-organising capabilities of the EIG fundamental
particles? Can it contribute to the explanation of how the merest beam of power
from, say a fading mobile phone, retains its coherence over vast distances – in
the Bedlam created by 60 million mobile phones in the UK alone and despite
existing in the same milieu as solar flares, Stella-novae and other hugely
energetic events.?
An article last week in New Scientist
revisited the claims that water has “memory” and that pure water, with no
residue of diluted medicines, not even a single molecule, can nevertheless
homeopathically cure patients. While on behalf of the respectable scientific
community the article dismisses such far fetched claims as unworthy of study,
it expounds on the quantum mysteries and memory capacity of water, describing
it as the “magic ingredient that transforms chemistry into biology”. DNA is inert without water and what has been
found is that water approaching life-chemistry such as proteins and DNA,
responds to the shape and conditions of the DNA, selects “good” DNA and
catalytically enables the bases to bind (e.g. in the double helix). The recipe
to create life seems to be ‘Take a bunch of dried up old elements and
molecules, add water and shake’. The shaking (succussion) may configure the
water to undertake its catalytic tasks.
All of this life enabling magic is
in turn enabled by the strange properties of water, including – easily formed and easily broken bonds; expanding into its solid state which is less
dense than as a liquid; becoming a gas
with very little heat added; and etc. These odd properties are enabled by the
“quantum-zero-point-vibrating energies (virtual-particles)” which bind the
hydrogen atoms.
What are these zero point energies?
They may include virtual neutrinos and gravitons (if gravitons exist). They
persist in popping in and out of existence, according to Heisenberg, even if
Hell Freezes Over and the Universe grinds to a dead halt at absolute-zero
temperature.
You can no doubt see where I am
taking this.
EIG addresses the conversion of
field energies into matter and postulates that the driving force is Hubble
Expansion. The first element created that we humans can apply any tests to, is
the most common and simplest element – hydrogen. Hydrogen is the visible bridge
between energy and matter. Hydrogen is the product when straw is spun into gold
– by Princess Hubble. As the most fundamental particles, the form of and links
between these tornado like sub-quantum EIG entities may, by the most outrageous
and unsubstantiated application of wild imagination, be dictated by minuscule,
the smallest possible, Planck spaces (spherical zones) accommodating the
wavelength/s of various energies in the electromagnetic field. Imagine there are six such EIG vortices
positioned around a Planck sphere. They each spin at C2, repelling their
neighbours, and each have a local, surface vacuum, attracting their neighbours.
The six will be packed as closely as the dynamics allow – cheek by jowl but not
touching. In the centre of the six is the highest vacuum, where a seventh
vortex is trapped; this 7th vortex is the corner of another
hexagonal group – and so on ad-infinitum. How many such entities are needed to
make a hydrogen proton? And to finally make a stable hydrogen nucleus?
The zero-point-quantum-vibrations
are of course, in this EIG concept, caused by Hubble Expansion, constantly
creating the tiny vacuums, at all Planck spheres, which first attenuate and
then draw light to the attenuated vacuum; where a virtual particle emerges and
then disappears (or vice-versa) even at absolute-zero. Warm it all up a little
and we get hydrogen. Clouds of hydrogen beget stars and galaxies and spawn the
heavy elements – which are more stable than gases. Mix these heavier elements
together and we get life-giving DNA chemicals – which function only in the
presence of water (and not the chemically identical heavy water, deuterium,
which poisons all but some very primitive life forms).
Water, being 2 parts hydrogen and 1
part oxygen, manifests in the macro world the underlying fluidity of our EIG
vortices, with bonds that are easily forged and just as easily broken. The
heavy elements pack the vortices in such combinations and such quantities (n.b.
prime numbers) as to be difficult to separate.
As such, perhaps water is the laboratory in which to devise experiments
to test the EIG proposition.
EIG – QED. 10 April 06.
“Oh, for a theory of everything”
writes Stephen Battersby, in an article revisiting Cold Dark Matter (CDM) and
WIMPS (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles) In particular he raises “What’s
more the LSST (large synoptic survey telescope) could reveal whether gravity
becomes repulsive at long range.” That much debated effect which pre-dates
Einstein.
My paper, here, explores whether EIG
could account for gravity and CDM and it should further follow the line of
logic of nested spheres, expanding and attenuating the stuff of the universe. Does
some flip occur as the field effect from any one centre of expansion (say from Planck
size) travels out to spheres of galactic size and bigger? It could be in the
form of a reaction to the ever weaker vacuum created – or as energy rushes in
to fill the attenuated space? For later.
From my NEWS page. The media has
recently given a lot of time and space to the debate of Darwinism-V-Intelligent
Design. At the extremes of the arguments, on the one hand wild-eyed, Godless,
white coated scientists insist that the universe is accidental and evolution is
chaotic, while on the other hand, rabid, thundering preachers claim every word
in the Bible is true and, as the Bishop or Armagh calculated in 1630-odd, God
made the universe sometime in 4000BC – or thereabouts – and seeded the ground
with fossils just to confuse us. As a brainwashed lapsed Catholic, once top of
the class in Religious Studies, what do I believe?
The universe does give rise to
intelligence, as defined and typified by our own intelligence, so intelligence
has existed, in potential, from the outset. The laws of physics (and chemistry
& mathematics etc), which we have so far discovered, are capable of intelligent
extrapolation and application; these laws and their interactions we would
define as intelligently, or at least logically, structured. So insofar as
intelligence and logic are defined by us merely mortal humans, I believe the
fundamental structure of the universe does manifest intelligent design.
However, Intelligent Design as preached by the most committed bibliophiles
comes perilously close to a belief in predestination – which is a heresy.
Predestination assumes that God not only made everything as it now is, but
avers that what will happen in the next moment, hour, day, week, year etc. is
also designed by God. It is God’s Will. As such predestination denies mankind’s
free-will, denying our ability and responsibility to choose good or evil or change
ourselves or our environment; it thus denies sin and, if the logic is followed
through, leads inevitably to despair. “Despair” is one of the Cardinal Sins
which condems Catholics to the burning fires of Hell for All Eternity – whoops.
So, to compromise as we enter the new epoch of intelligent cooperation, my
position is that the universe is based on vastly intelligent and immeasurably
powerful principles, but that these interact in extraordinarily complex ways to
manifest, animate and give existence and life to all the phenomena we observe.
In summary, the universe and all things in it, does evolve, split second by
split second, governed by fundamental laws – which can be interpreted as laws
of science or laws of God or both.
And finally, why isn’t the organising
principle of the Life Force, so much in evidence wherever we care to look,
defined as one of the fundamental laws of physics alongside Gravity,
Electromagnetism, The Weak Nuclear Force and the Strong Nuclear Force?
This article is so
close to the language and to at least one of the elements of EIG that I have
typed it out in full. The journalist is not identified (copyright - NS
Nothing is not what it seems. Or rather, the
vacuum that exists throughout space and inside every atom in not empty at all.
It has an intricate structure that determines how matter is built.
Sounds bizarre? Blame it on the fact that the vacuum is permeated by a
gluon field, which is the glue that binds quarks – the fundamental units of
matter – into protons and neutrons. This gluon field can stick to itself like
sticky tape, curling up into knots called instantons. These four-dimensional vortices
are distant relatives of wormholes the space-time “tunnels” that could act as
short cuts through the universe. Instantons create the distorted vacuum-scape
that quarks have to navigate.
E cannot directly observe all this; so how do
we know instantons exist? So far, they’ve onlty been seen in computer
simulations. But new findings from Brookhaven National Laboratory in
At least, the researchers assume this is
happening, because a major effect that instantons have on the quarks suddenly
disappears.
What else do we know about instantons? They got their name because they
blink in and out of existence, like twinkling stars or bubbles in soapy water.
But despite their elusive nature, they have a powerful influence on quarks.
Quarks have a property called spin; some spin to the left, others to the right.
The equations that govern them stipulates that a left-handed quark can never
turn into a right-handed quark , and vice-versa – a rule called chiral
symmetry. When a quark that’s spinning one way passes through an instanton, it
swirls around in the vortex and becomes so disoriented that it emerges spinning
the other way round: imagine a right-handed glove swirling through a tornado so
twisted that it comes out left-handed.
Why is this so important? Well the result of all that twisting is that
the quark gains mass. Quarks start out virtually massless, but when they loop
through an instanton they gain energy, making them up to 60 times more massive.
Since quarks make up the mass of protons and neutrons, which in turn comprise
most of the mass of atoms, that means that more than 95 per cent of visible
matter owes its mass to instantons. End
What might instantons
mean in the EIG construct? EIG asks how matter (inertial
“permanent” matter) is formed from energy. EIG posits zones or spheres in the
electromagnetic energy field – perhaps equivalent to the gluons in the
gluon-field cited above. Hubble
expansion attenuates these zones at the rate of Hubble-Expansion, momentarily
reducing the internal vacuum and attracting (the glue) an inflow of light (at
the speed of light). In most instances the light energy simply fills the
partial vacuum, the zone disappears and no further event follows. The blinking
into and out of existence of these fallow zones, creating momentary partial
vacuums, could account for gravity, dark matter and dark energy. In a few cases
the inflowing light arrives from different directions and collides in the zone
(gluons). In collision the energy spins at 300kps x 300kps or 90billion kps. It
is this spin which spins straw into gold and forges the particle from energy
(is this energy equivalent to the 300 million times the heat of the surface of
the sun as above?). The spinning “quark” or swirling energy meets no resistance
and gains inertia and permanence as a particle because once spinning its
“surface” repels other “quarks” - which are the only particles small enough to
interfere with each other – while a surface vacuum, as exists at the “surface”
of a tornado, attracts other “quarks” which are thus “glued” together in groups,
spaced apart by their spin, creating a push/pull dynamic – which ultimately
form “permanent” matter. Only an
equivalent energy – maybe 300 million times hotter than the sun, can “melt”
these spinning structures and return the matter to pure energy. The article
above says that quarks start out virtually massless then in an instanton they
gain 60 times more energy and become real quarks. This seems to me to be a very
similar description as EIG, where the Hubble-expansion zones suck in light –
which, in the right conditions – creates a particle of matter. Will Brookhaven factor the Hubble Expansion
rate into their maths – just to see what it says?
PS – once formed the tiny particles
e.g. neutrinos or photons, will move through space attracted by the infinity of
expanding Hubble zones. Each zone they enter, they fill and kill the vacuum
nullifying the attraction, then the particles may leave in any direction – I
like to think they have 8 alternative routes out of a zone/sphere – which neatly
accounts for probability and the difficulty of predicting their paths. Hey Ho!
Wherever I position myself in the
universe the retina of my eye – of both eyes – will capture images of near and
distant objects, large and small. If I make a larger or smaller screen and
erect it anywhere in the universe it too will reflect or record such images.
What is actually happening is that the light, electro magnetic radiance from
stars and planets – and the relative darkness of “empty” space, is transmitted
across the sphere occupied by the retina or screen – no matter where I turn my
gaze. If I move a few hundred yards or a few hundred light years, light will be
found crossing the new zone I have decided to occupy. Every zone or sphere, of any size, greater
than the shortest wavelength, is criss-crossed with light – which my eyes or brain
see as coherent. This implies that every sphere is a holographic representation
of the whole universe. How real is this representation – has it the
characteristics of energy and perhaps matter?
It certainly means that no zone exists where the radiation is not
visible. How does the electromagnetic energy retain its original information
despite many collisions and impedances across vast distances? The Aether it
seems is extant – even if Einstein didn’t need it.
Dark Energy – is not energy and not
necessarily dark. Martin Rees prefers to call it lambda the Cosmological
Constant, which isn’t constant. Scientific thought progresses through; Ideas,
Speculation, Conjecture, Theories, Calculation, Observation; Experiment, and
into Technologies (does it work?). We
learned that vacuum energy is not a vacuum; the background radiation, shadow of
the Big Bang is 3K above absolute zero (I speculate that this might be the
“heat” created by the movement of energy into a depleted zone which has
expanded – expanded due to Hubble expansion – but see next item below.). Mostly
they focused on the “force” – is it a force – that is causing the expansion of
the universe to accelerate, namely Dark Energy. As I am taking Hubble Expansion
as an observed given fact, what might be driving the expansion is not directly
relevant; it could be angels pulling on the circumference. We need a repulsive
force.
In EIG, what acts as a repulsive
force? It is the surfaces of the spinning fractals or basic entities of matter.
Inside the vortex is dense energy – so dense as to be matter, at the surface
the C2 spin repulses other fractals (think of spinning tops bouncing
off each other), just beyond the surface is a “constant” partial vacuum from where
energy is taken to feed the vortex – a kind of meniscus of energy. It is the
dynamic balance between the forces that brings inertia. And thus stabilises the
universe.
These and other scientists seem
never to picture the universe as teeming with energy, everywhere. Hold up a
mirror or radar dish anywhere in our (visible) universe and it will record or
reflect energy – light – electromagnetic spectrum energy. It is undeniably
there. It could be seen with the naked eye crossing that area of space. What
EIG addresses is how that energy, that infinite (as far as we know) field,
produces matter. Did it only do so in the BB or does the process continue when
light beams collide? Either will work for EIG – but space is NOT empty. Are scientists
hung up on being labelled as believing in, the aether which Einstein found no need for in
his equations?
Very clear article by Charles H.
Lineweaver and Tamara M. Davis which is worth archiving for EIG. New to me is
the statement that “objects inside the expanding universe do not expand.” They
cite as an example of an object, a Galaxy. This is perturbing as I have to date
assumed that everything, every spheroid zone, in the universe expands at the
same rate 2.304E-18% per
second. However, EIG still works if a fractal of matter, formed in the C2 vortex
from pure energy, ceases to expand once it has been formed. The “extra” gravity
in dense matter would then have to be explained – not by the surface shell of
the vacuum holding out to create a stronger vacuum – but perhaps that to feed a
collection of fractal vortex’s which have come together in a stable union –
billions of them to make a particle – the shared or merged halo of depleted
energy at the surface of the fractals, is a stronger vacuum relative to the
number of fractals – Thus denser matter = more fractals = more pull.
In some
ways this is neater than my earlier idea as the energy is spun into matter
(straw into gold) by the C2 spin and as it is transformed, it passes a threshold which makes it
permanently matter; reassuring if you don’t want your universe to evaporate one
day. This none expansion of material
objects also removes the need for me to work out how much a six foot man
expands in his lifetime – a compound interest formula of a very small number
that my EXCEL can’t cope with.
See article in NS 5 March 05, Page
14, Peter Rodgers, on the double slit experiment, demonstrated across a time
lapse. Consider and revisit.
There is renewed speculation about
anti-matter, whether it exists, where it exists and what it is; alongside ideas
that diverse forms of matter might have different forms of gravity. This EIG
idea has also posited that matter may behave differently when it is compacted –
yet still expanding. On my next visit to this EIG theory I want to think about
a “Matter Line” like the Number-Line in maths (does a matter-line already
exist? R Feynman maybe?). At one end would be the densest of materials – down
to the merest wisp of ephemeral forms – then extending beyond zero (pure
energy) into negative particles and anti-matter. EIG indicates that anti-matter
will be shown to be vacuums in the stuff of the universe – which has an
attractive logical simplicity to it. (NB which math formulas deal with
expanding spheres?? Pressure, gases,
liquids?? And particularly the sphere/s surrounding an object sphere of low
pressure – Weather systems perhaps).
The Music of the
Primes by Marcus du Sautoy is almost
completely incomprehensible to a non-mathematician such as me. But it triggers
a vague thought that I want to write down and thus crystallise.
The book is about prime numbers
(numbers that can only be divided by themselves or one without a remainder –
thus they are the indivisible building blocks of all other numbers) and The
Riemann Hypothesis. Bernhard Riemann (1826-66), conceived a “Zeta Landscape”
being a four-dimensional model of mathematical functions based on the
zeta-function, created “in Euler’s day” (1707-1783) into which Bernhard Riemann
inputted real numbers (numbers on the mathematicians’ “number-line”) and, as his innovative new
step, he also inputted imaginary numbers
(denoted by “i” of which the most usual example is the square root of minus
one).
Four dimensions can be more
pictorially thought of as four consequences – or four impacts – of a changing
number. For example, as the author explains by reference to the economists’
Interest Rate, changes in the birth-rate have impacts on a large number of
factors or dimensions of society – total population, housing required, schools,
hospitals, transport, clothing etc. and some of these factors have consequences
for the future on a time-line that is mathematically infinite. To draw the reality of all such “dimensions”
on a single graph or with a three dimensional model, from a single function or
formula, is impossible – but they are nevertheless real effects or dimensions.
Riemann bridged fields of
mathematics that had not before been linked and saw or conceived with the inner
vision of a mathematician and geometrician that his zeta-landscape map could be
extrapolated from peaks and valleys, including a single peak that rose to
infinity (for the number one), down to “sea-level” where the outcome was always
zero.
Here I am completely lost. But I
read and can only believe that from this sea-shore of zero results, stretching
north and south as far as imagination allows, these sea-level or zero results
for any and all numbers (East & West or positive and negative numbers) fed
into the zeta-landscape-function allow us to count – by counting the zero’s –
the occurrences of prime-numbers between values, say from 0 to 10 or from 0 to
100,000,000. And it seems that Carl Gauss (1772-1855) had earlier estimated
this same occurrence up to 100 million and his logarithmic based calculation
Gauss’s Prime Number Conjecture, checked in modern times by actually
identifying each prime-number on a computer (5,761,455 primes up to 100M –
excluding the number one), showed only 754 more primes than reality – a tiny
error of 100th of 1%.
Riemann did the same estimate on his
zeta-landscape and reduced the error to 97 extra primes – just 1000th
of one percent wrong.
Riemann then plotted where the
“significant” zeros lay on his map or landscape and found that they lined up –
on what has been termed a magical-ley-line. Not only do the zeros, representing
primes, line up but they occur in patterns that come close to predicting what
the next prime number will be. So far no recurring pattern has been identified
in the sequence of prime-numbers that allows the next prime-number to be
calculated from the sequence. Riemann then hypothesised that all the zeros,
however many primes there are to infinity, would line up. That is the Riemann Hypothesis – with a million
dollars still waiting for the mathematical proof.
What has this to do with music and
what is my point? Part of the basis underlying Riemann’s zeta-landscape is the
discovery by Pythagoras (ancient
Whole, indivisible numbers put me in
mind of the primary particles, the fractals and building blocks of the universe
– that EIG – Expansion is Gravity, speculates about.
Marcus du Sautoy continues his
narrative to include Probability Theory, Quantum Drums and Chaos Theory (which
is actually order-out-of-chaos theory). Many brilliant modern mathematicians
have and are contributing to the processes that bring progress – Marcus du
Sautoy particularly cites the work of Hugh Montgomery (Princeton, Michigan and
Cambridge) who followed Riemann’s zeros along the ley-line and found in 1971
that they would repel each other (space out) whereas primes tend to cluster or
attract each other. And he observed that the zeros distribution was not
random. His distribution graphs
uncannily mirrored similar graphs being drawn from experiments for the quantum
energy calculations of the 68th element in the periodic tables
Erbium.
What is fundamental to quantum
physics starting with black-body radiation and, as yet, not understood is the
quantum leap – the discrete changes – as if in sudden and not smooth steps –
between energy levels. Similar steps occur at a very detailed level in prime
number sequences “the prime number staircase”.
On a Cray computer Andrew Odlyzko at AT&T looked for Riemann zeros
up to 10 trillion and found 100,000 zeros. A not entirely convincing pattern
started to emerge. Odlyzko took the computations up to 1020 and
found that plotting the sequence of Riemann zeros almost exactly matched
similar patterns – quantum probability energies – found in the heavy nuclei of
complex atoms – as if “being produced by some complicated mathematical drum”.
Here at last is my
NB.
EIG posits an idea as to how matter
(particles) is created from pure energy (light
- the electromagnetic field) -
namely by Hubble expansion sucking in energy and spinning it to form a surface.
These primary fractals, as in string-theory, may be no larger than Planck’s Length which is 10-35 metres. These
universal fractals are, like prime numbers, by definition indivisible –
any division renders them back to pure energy. Like Riemann’s zeros they repel
each other and they seek even spacing – but, like the prime number sequences,
they are subject to forces that draw them together in patterns, like quantum
energies, and clump them together. Do these universal fractals bind together in
prime-number units? Are other numbers, non-prime numbers, of universal fractals
inherently unstable?
The most recently calculated primes
are 100 digits long. They are immense numbers; but even such vast numbers of
universal fractals clumped together – say in the heart of a super-massive star
or black-hole (but still Hubble expanding) – are not inconceivable. Just how many universal fractals can we fit
on the head of a pin?
Think on’t Lad !
The search for the Higgs Boson – an
alleged massive particle which would account for Dark Matter and Energy (85%
of the universe) – continues as does the
search for anti-neutrinos. An anti-neutrino is NOT the antiparticle of a
neutrino in the way that positrons are the anti-matter antiparticles of
electrons – electrons reversed as it were. An antineutrino, if any exist, would
be a sort of shadow neutrino, which has already been defined, at only 0.44
electron volts, as a “ghostly particle” so an antineutrino would be the ghost
of a ghost. Scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics in
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.
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.
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.
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.
200 astronomers from 13 countries collaborate in the SDSS
project. They report in November 2003 that from drawing a Galactic Map of
200,000 galaxies, about 6% of the observable universe, their calculations
confirm the existence of dark energy. They find:
70% is Dark Energy
25% is Dark Matter
5% is Ordinary Matter
This theory proposes that both
dark matter and dark energy are manifestations of the temporary weak vacuums
created by Hubble Expansion.
PRE-MAP REPORT Calculations.
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.
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.
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.
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
wavelengths. 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 its credibility.
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.
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 Brookside
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.
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|||||
TOE Theory of Everything
TOE
EIG Expansion is Gravity
Universal Model
|
SW2000 Telework Studies www.noelhodson.com |
2005 2005 |
2005 2005 |
|
|
||
|
|
DISPERSED TEAMS |
TELEWORK CLIENTS |
||||
|
BUSINESS TAX PLANNING WHAT-IF? FORECASTS |
OFFSHORE & TAXES |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SOCIETAL PAPERS Politics, Economics & Hobby-Physics |
||||||
|
BOOKS, POEMS Creative Writing, Art. |
http://www.altavista.com/web/results?q=TOE+Theory+of+everything&kgs=0&kls=0&stq=40
http://msxml.webcrawler.com/info.wbcrwl/search/web/TOE%2BTheory%2Bof%2BEverything