Hi James
Virtual particle do pop in and out of space as you described, particle physicist known this for years. According to what has been currently known it is described by Zero point energy where vacuum energy is the zero-point energy of all the fields in space. This zero-point energy in my believe may be caused by the bosons Bose Einstein Condensate field.
Ron
Hi Jim
Let me add to what was said above in how I think virtual particles pop in and out of space. If you look at the diagram here; see image here here is the link in case this doesn't work https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-D7yH3aaw5Og/UBXY6bb6pGI/AAAAAAAADfs/W7y87zD4BpM/standard-model-19.5.jpg you will see my interpretation of a higgs boson.
For example the higgs field which is claimed to exist everywhere may have a higgs boson in it but the field responsible for the effect we call the BEC is composed of all bosons that can occupy the same state but made mostly of gluons and the proposed axions, gluons are mass-less Democritus indivisible atom, axions are suspected of being dark matter. In the core of the higgs boson, the dense gluon field we call the strong force, I propose is a - lepton and a quark which add up to 0 charge as a result it has a 0 spin. If you break everything down to the smallest particle most quantum physicist will say that is a gluon.
What the great science educator, Carl Sagan once said "we are all made of star stuff," but if we look at it from Democritus indivisible atom point of view then we should say that we are all made of gluon stuff.
Ron
Bravo Ronald
Any mention of an aether makes peoples skin crawl, but if you say higgs field or dark matter or dark energy you get a different response. You provided an excellent way to attack this forsaken old Greek assumption.
Thanks
You would think that some credit should be given to Plato, Aristotle and Democritus for their future visionary work that describes the aether - higgs field and dark matter. Yes after 2400 years some of what they said is considered primitive by today's standards but these assumptions they made back then is still being debated today, just like what some of classic physics and relativity will be considered primitive 2400 years from now.
Dear Ronald
You engineers may yet save physics - Dirac's practical training in engineering may have helped him in his thought processes. Physicists can get too imaginative, for example in the business of Einstein's problematic banishing of the aether, and a more down-to-Earth approach is now sorely needed. I enjoyed reading your essay and found it refreshing for several reasons. Never mind that I found your insistence to bring in Plato et al into the picture nice but unnecessary, and that I do not agree with your use of the photon-as-particle concept.
What I liked are 1-That you find a universal aether model acceptable and necessary 2- That you advocate a smallest-aether particle, your a-particle as the uilding block of everything (am I right here? I got lost a bit in the discussions of standard model particles) 3- That you explain dark matter and energy in terms of this a-particle.
If you read my fqxi essay Fix Physics! and Beautiful Universe Theory you will understand why I liked your approach. I need to have my (BU) theory simulated - any suggestions or help is welcome. My programming skills do not go beyond BASIC, but since you mention the Strong Force, here is a simulation I made trying to get a grip on its attractive-repulsive nature in terms of magnetic (BU) universal ether nodes. Three Magnetic Dipoles Provide A Physically Realistic Simulation of the Repulsive Attractive Nature of the Strong Force and of the Cabibbo Angle.
Cheers
Vladimir
Thanks for the kind words Vladimir
In answer to your question - "your a-particle as the building block of everything (am I right here? I got lost a bit in the discussions of standard model particles."
Yes I am a strong believer in this, just as we can derive complex computer programs from binary numbers which is 0 and 1's, which incidentally a Bose Einstein Condensate can occupy the same state 0 and 1, we are building quantum computers that use this same Form, idea. The gluon being a mass-less bosonic particle fits that bill. With no mass the gluon by itself doesn't have to obey the laws of thermal dynamics, therefore as Aristotle said "was neither hot, cold, wet, or dry, was incapable of change (with the exception of change of place)."
About the gluon making all things and why I included the proton and neutron.
"A proton is composed of two up quarks and one down quark, with the rest mass of the quarks thought to contribute only about 1% of the proton's mass. The remainder of the proton mass is due to the kinetic energy of the quarks and to the energy of the gluon fields that bind them together."
Well that is where I included that progression of all the particles at it approached light speed in the illustration beginning with the gluon, the important thing about this is even though the gluon has a 0 charge it can still have two opposite charges occupying the same state which add up to 0. Notice 99 percent of the Protons mass is "due to the kinetic energy of the quarks and to the energy of the gluon fields that bind them together," (strong force). All the particles you see in that illustration are symmetrical, meaning for every - charge particle created there is an charge particle, matter and antimatter. It is no coincidence of the symmetry of the universe is this occurs because of the separation of the charges and gaining of mass as that particle is accelerated towards the speed of light. That gaining of mass is from the collapse of the bosonic condensate as that particle with mass is accelerated towards the speed of light against its will.
I might being over emphasizing Plato's contribution to modern science but it fit my thought patterns when I wrote this.
Vladimir I haven't read your essay yet but I will and leave you a post after I do.
In answer to getting some of your work animated a good way to do that is to approach an Engineering student at your local collage that had extensive 3D AutoCAD training. A good way to do that is contact a mechanical engineering instructor who gives there students problems to solve in a project engineering class. That instructor may assign or ask any of their students if they would like an assignment for one of their projects creating an animation for you. My instructor was open to that.
Note there are several other different programs other than AutoCAD that someone can make an animation for you, especially the gaming students.
Hopefully this helped.
New LHC Results: We Were Sure We Found the Higgs Boson, and Now We're Even Surer
A nearly 6-sigma result says we are now surer than sure that the God particle is real
Researchers at CERN and the world over were already sure they had found the Higgs Boson--five-sigma sure--but in case there were any lingering doubts a new round of results coming out of Geneva further backs the earlier findings. One team there now reports a 5.9 sigma level of certainty that the Higgs exists. That equates to a one-in-550 million chance that the results are incorrect reflections of statistical errors.
Ronald,
Peter Higgs must cringe every time he hears the phrase "God particle." :-)
I've only just scanned your essay, though I will come back for a thoughtful read, because I find it interesting that one would take this upside-down approach from the Greeks, basing fundamental physics on an indivisible particle while most physicists (including Higgs) pursue field theories.
At any rate, good luck in the contest. (I also have an entry.)
Tom
I agree for once Tom :), you know Tom , the sciences community seems loosing its foundamental road .
I ask me why ? perhaps that it is just due to business team around fearing to loose investments. So perhaps even that people invent false results.
I'm neutral on the choice of approach, Steve. I don't think there is virtue in preferring one over another. There is virtue, however, in trying to understand others' thinking, even if one thinks they are "false results."
Tom
Indeed Tom , but apparently a lot of scientists do not really love the critics. Tom, could you help me to be accepted in an university in USA? I d like have my doctorate in physics. I could imrpove my works.I d like also learn engeniering and computing. I do not know all you know Tom, I have never said that I knew all.I am arrogant indeed but you know I am just a young searcher wanting to be recognized for his researchs and wanting to learn more in the good universities with the good mentors and professors. I have found an improtant thing Tom, you know it, I d like learn more and I d like test my models and inventions with good partners. Belgium is frustrating. Ihave already had a business angel from Paris, I must admit that I am a little parano.
I d like find the good university. I have always dreamed to learn in an american university.Like I have already explained, I was in geology at the FNDP of Namur Belgium. But I have had neurological probelms.It was difficult you know after.I have learned by myself. I have always this dream you know.
Regards
Steve, this is not an appropriate place to discuss such things. It would be stealing space from Ronald. I will give you a reply in my own essay forum, if you want to take it up there.
Tom
sorry, you are right indeed, you know I forget always.
Tom
If you look in the book of the guy that coined the name "The God Particle" Leon Lederman you can see where I got my inspiration from. He has a moment at the beginning of the book where he imagines talking to Democritus about his "Atomic Theory" the indivisible atom. See even Nobel prize winning Leaderman believed there must be a simple reason why everything behaves like it does starting with the smallest indivisible atom but he couldn't put it all together. That is what I am trying to do.
Now there is nothing wrong with field studies, however what is in that Higgs field but bosons, Higgs bosons, -w bosons, +w bosons, z bosons, gluons bosons and maybe the yet to be detected axion boson, what some think is dark matter.
Thanks for the reply good luck in your entry, I will check it out.
Ron
Ron,
Oh yes, I know. I loved Lederman's book. I'll have to read your essay honestly, though, before I can make an intelligent comment on the technical content.
Best,
Tom
Dear Ronald
thanks for your comments - this and the one on my page which I will answer there.
What you say about proton mass being mostly kinetic energy makes sense - that fits in with my concept of ether nodes locked in polyhedral arrangements even while they spin in place. Being self-taught in current physics (as opposed to what I studied at University in the 1950's!) I studied things as I came upon concepts that fitted in with what I knew before. My approach started with optics, energy transfer in fields, and that gave me an approach to quantum mechanics and gravity as well.
Particle physics was something I mostly left alone till now - but with all of this excitement about the Higgs I will have to make a concerted effort to try to understand what is going on and how that might fit in with the rest of my theorizing. Axons may well be what I think of as ether lattice nodes.Is there any chance that the Higgs field is not something pervading all of space but is like a sheath around the nuclear particles?
Many thanks for your suggestions about asking someone proficient in 3D AutoCad to simulate my Beautiful Universe interactions. Good idea. That however would only show how the interactions occur as an animation reflecting my guesses about the physical situation. I was also considering a computational approach whereby each state of the lattice is calculated according to the physics of node to node interactions (diffusing angular momentum). There is an online group SciLab connected to Matlab I have been considering approaching but first I have to detail the physics of energy transfer in the lattice in quantifiable form.
Best wishes
Vladimir
One of the assumptions I tried to solve is what really is a photon, when an electron moves from a higher orbit to a lower orbit it gives off a photon. What happened, I used Randels Hulet explanation of condensation collapse to explain it in the image I provided on the essay another proof that an luminiferous aether exists which is a field made up of bosonic particles, Higgs field, reacting to a passing boson.
"The experiments led by Randall Hulet at Rice University (the attraction overwhelmed the zero-point energy of the harmonic confining potential, causing the condensate to collapse in a burst reminiscent of a supernova explosion where an explosion is preceded by an implosion). Alternatively, the additional atoms could trigger the rapid collapse of the entire condensate. Here, we're talking about the possibility of observing all the atoms in this coherent entity collapsing together at once," Hulet says. "This is similar to what happens in a supernova." Theoreticians predict that such an outcome is possible because of a process called macroscopic quantum tunneling, which makes possible a wholesale transformation of the condensate from a low-density gas to a higher-density state."
Dear Ronald
I understand a little about what you are saying but how do you explain wave theory, for example the two slit experiment. Does you essay explain this as a particle behaving like a wave or a wave behaving like a particle?
When the essay was announced I wrote over 18 pages for the contest, some of the ways I define light was edited out. Now some people think that since light behaves like a wave in the double slit experiment then light is a wave which if you saw another one of my illustrations I will make public soon on my website then you will see how I explain other ways this can happen.
One shortened example is if an deaf observer looked down from a bridge overlooking a river at the calm water below him, he was waiting to see his friend in a speed boat come out from the other side. His friend, on the other side of the bridge in the water below him was traveling very fast in a speed boat, particle, racing through the river when it suddenly hit the side of the bridge which had two narrow slit-like opening that water gently flowed that he went through many times before that supports the bridge, the boat sudden crashed in between the slits and sinks to the bottom of the river, whereas the wave emitted by the boat continues on past the wall of the bridge through the slits. The person on the bridge would see large interference-like waves propagating through the calm water below him much like you would see waves traveling through the two slit experiment, but he won't see what made that wave. The waves in this example transferred information from the particle, boat, to the observer that an event happened.
Now picture the same speed boat moving through the slits, approaching the slit the boat is traveling faster than the waves, however something happens when he gets between the slit and there is a wave bounces off the walls that suddenly slows him down, now the waves through both slits are traveling faster than the boat and moves out in front of the boat. When the speed boat comes out on the other side the waves creates a wake and an interference that moves the boat sideways where it settles moving forward at the peak of the interfering waves. That is what happens when the electron moves through the double slits that bounce off the wall on the other side. The pattern is similar to the pattern of binomial distribution also known as the quincunx or Galton box that a machine consists of a vertical board with interleaved rows of pins. Balls are dropped from the top, and bounce left and right as they hit the pins see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galton_board
Now when we measure the wave we interfere with the wave moving out in front of the particle, so the particle will move forwards as if it wasn't disturbed. Measuring the wave in a higgs field, alias aether, full of bosons we disturb the medium that the wave will pass through. Remember particles in a BEC can occupy the same quantum state therefore if one boson moves all other ones moves equal amounts like soldiers in a parade therefore wiping out the interference causing the particle to in move in a straight line.
Hopefully this will help.
Dear Ronald - nice example of the speedboat and the bridge! The analogy explains the particle double-slit interference as the interference of the wave-field surrounding the particle, but following SR I doubt the speedboat (particle) can travel faster than its bow wave (speed of light). The idea that a particle's field is what causes the interference has been part of my Beautiful Universe (BU) Theory see Fig. 32. A refinement was published last April in Physics Forum as per the attached figure. The same idea was mentioned in Q5 of my fqxi essay Fix Physics! . I did not know the name of the Galton Board you mentioned, but I used the idea to describe quantum probability (see Fig. 29 of my BU paper). Change is in the air, and great minds think alike :D
I have no doubt that with all our new interpretations of old ideas ripe to be discredited, a New Unified Physics will soon emerge along realistic and much simpler lines than at present.
Best wishes,
