Alternative Models of Reality

Dear James,

I am sorry it took so long to get back to you, but I wanted to look at your papers on FQXI to get an idea what your concepts are and I also had many other things going on at the same time. I do see that you understand the concept that the most basic constituents of the structure of the universe can only be rightly defined in units of their own quantity, amount or size, etc. and other entities that are derived from or are just relationships to those basic structures can then be defined in terms of these most basic structures.

We certainly both agree that one of these basic structures is space and that the measurement of an amount or extent of space is what we call distance and have divided it up into units like meters or feet, etc. Space also has other aspects that we can readily observe, such as three bidirectional dimensions that are joined together at ninety degrees to each other into a network that allows an entity in space to travel equally freely in any combination of those 6 directions. Space is basically the place where other entities can exist, move, and interact with space and one another.

This brings me to the concept that the next most basic structure is that of the entities that occupy space. Man currently tends to consider there to be 3 types of such entities, which are matter particles, energy photons, and fields. When I looked at the observational data, however, I found that it is clear that matter particles can be changed into energy photons (example, electron positron annihilation with low kinetic energy interaction) and energy photons can be changed into angular or linear motions (example, photon interaction with an electron in an atom that raises the electron to a higher level and photon interaction with a free electron which changes the electron's linear motion amplitude or speed). In both cases the photon disappears and is said to be absorbed by the electron. Since the only change in the electron is its amount of motion, it is obvious that what was the photon has been changed into the observed motion. If photons can be changed into motions then it is reasonable to consider that they are composed of motions that are in some way stored in such a way that it produces the photon. By extension, it is reasonable to consider that a matter particle is also composed of motions. If this is true, it means that motion(s) should also be able to produce photons and matter particles. This has also been observed. Example, An electron in an atom can change from a higher level or orbit in the atom to a lower one and in the process its total kinetic motion decreases. This freed up motion then generates or creates an energy photon, which then travels off into space at the speed of light. When two matter particles with great relative kinetic energy interact they can produce many matter particles that contain much more mass than the original two particles had. It has been demonstrated that the kinetic energy of the resultant particles is less than that of the original two particles by an amount that is equal to the amount that is necessary to produce the increased mass of the resultant particles compared to the mass of the original two particles. This means that this kinetic energy which is another way of saying motion has been converted into matter particles. These things are not hard to understand from the observational data. From this it is easy to see that motion is the next most basic entity and that all of the matter particles, energy photons, and fields are composed of motions in some way. If we start with simple motions because they are the easiest to understand, the next question that one is led to from this is: how do you construct an energy photon from simple motion(s)?

Simple motions possess only a few properties, which are:

1. A continual change of position.

2. The amount of motion it contains or its motion amplitude. This determines how far it will change its motion to in comparison to another motion that is chosen to be a standard motion.

3. Its direction of travel.

A simple motion can read its direction of travel to allow it to change its position in the right direction, but cannot access its direction of travel to change it (read only). It can only be changed as the result of an interaction. It can read its motion amplitude information and use that information to generate its amount of change of motion, but it cannot access it to change its motion amplitude (read only). Again this can only change due to an interaction. It can read its position information and can also change it. (read and write access). As mentioned above the changes that it makes to its position information are controlled by its motion amplitude and direction data.

So how do you use such simple motions to build an energy photon? The first part is rather easy. All energy photons travel in a single direction (each has its own direction, which is not the same as all other photons' directions) at the same motion amplitude, which is called the speed of light or C. This can be done by a single simple motion, although there is the question as to why they all travel at the same motion amplitude. The second part is harder. Each photon possesses a cyclical angular motion that operates at 90 degrees to its direction of travel. The problem is that cyclical motions must periodically reverse their direction of travel in order to return to the beginning point of their cycle and then again to begin the next cycle. This can only occur as a result of periodic interactions of some kind to change the motion's stored directional data. A simple motion cannot do this by itself. It is, however, required to make an energy photon. Since an energy photon can possess this motion even when it is traveling through empty space it must not be a result of interactions with other entities. Moreover if it was due to some interactions with some type of unknown and as yet unobserved entity, it would be expected that such entities would not be uniformly spaced and all traveling at the same motion amplitude so as to produce cycles that are always the same frequency and wavelength, but would be randomly spaced and would likely be moving around so as to produce cycles of varying lengths and frequencies. The easiest answer to this problem that I could see was the use of a small fourth dimension. The Fourth dimensional motion could travel back and forth in that dimension and interact with the ends of the dimension to reverse its motion to produce its cyclical motion. One problem with this concept is that the motion would instantaneously change its direction at each end of the dimension and then travel through the dimension at a single motion amplitude. This would create a cyclical motion with a square wave form, but photons have a sign wave form. If the motion is not always in our three dimensional world, but gradually enters and once it is completely in begins to gradually exit it, the sign wave form is created. This is just a way to explain the observed data concerning how energy photons work. Of course, if you can produce a better way please tell me about it. I am, of course, looking for a way that does not use such things as forces that cannot be explained as to how the work, etc. The way that I have given can do so. It can also explain why energy photons generally all travel at the speed of light because this can be viewed as the speed threshold at which motion is transferred from the lower three dimensions to the fourth dimension and vice versa.

This opens up the concept of another type of particle, which I call a sub-energy particle. It consists of a single simple motion that travels at or below the speed of light. If motion is added to it so that it would travel faster than the speed of light, that extra motion is transferred to the fourth dimension and it becomes an energy photon. Individually sub-energy particles have very little effect on energy photons or matter particles because linear motion even at the speed of light has little effect in interactions as can be observed in the very weak interactions of very low frequency photons, which still travel at the speed of light. It is the angular motion components that generate most of the interaction effects. Large numbers of sub-energy particles can be entrained in and by matter particles and under enough combined pressure they can interact. They are what all forces are composed of. As an example, in an atom the electrons travel centered on a low pressure sphere between two high pressure sub-energy spheres. If extra motion is added to the electron it tries to move up and increases its pressure on the high pressure sub-energy sphere above it. If the added motion is great enough it will pass through the sphere and settle in a low pressure sphere higher up above the nucleus of the atom. Since this higher up position is above the natural level it would be in due to its mass, etc. it will tend to be pulled back down causing it to place greater pressure on the high density sphere below it. This extra pressure can allow an interaction to occur between the electron and a sub-energy particle in the high density sphere below it and transfer enough motion to that sub-energy particle to cause it to be changed into an energy photon that carries the extra motion away from the electron which then goes back down to its normal level. This explains the appearance of energy photons without the need for weird vacuum states of space, etc. and also explains the structure of fields in a way that easily explains the causes and effects of their behavior.

The next problem is how to change an energy photon into a matter particle. Matter particles possess a frequency and wave length effect similar to energy photons, so it could be that a matter particle contains an energy photon in it. The main difference between them is that the photon always travels at the speed of light in a linear direction while a matter particle can travel at any speed from zero up to about the speed of light and the photon possesses only a dynamic variable mass that operates at ninety degrees to its direction of travel while a matter particle possesses a static mass effect that continues to exist even when the matter particle is at rest and it operates at ninety degrees to all directions about the particle. The question then is how do you change the observed effects from those observed in a photon to those seen in a matter particle? The easiest answer that I have found is to add another motion that causes the photon to take a curved path that encloses upon itself to create the matter particle. This path must be three dimensional in order to make the mass effect the same in all directions. The result is a change from traveling in some direction at the speed of light to traveling at the speed of light around the enclosed path. This generates great angular motion which operates in all directions about the matter particle to create the static mass effect, so it solves both problems. This motion must be cyclical, which means it must periodically change direction in all three dimensions (not in all at the same time) and it must vary in amplitude in a sign wave pattern. The motions introduced into each of the three dimensions must also be out of phase with each other in such a way as to produce the enclosed path structure. Again I used another (fifth) dimension to explain this motions operation. Maybe you can do better. Since it is not yet time for man to know how the fifth vector works in detail I have kept this part of the explanation vague and will not go into great detail about it.

My intent is to produce a model of the structure of the universe that explains the observed data in a way that can be completely understood and that produces the observed causes and effects without relying on concepts that are vague or don't make logical sense, etc. Instead of considering matter particles to be point objects, but at the same time possess angular motion (as observed) called spin which does not make any sense because a point particle would possess a point about which a spin could occur, but has nothing to spin about that point, I not only show how it can have spin, but also show how you can convert one type of particle into another one and even how fields work. I use two extra dimensions to do it, but I do not need multiverses, space that is not truly space, wave functions that must be observed to cause them to collapse to allow anything to happen, unexplained multiple results from interactions or unexplained probabilities of each of them occurring, etc. It breaks everything down to being composed of simple motions. Remember that all of the theories and math models are just at best a model that closely approximates reality. We cannot observe all of reality in such a way as to fully understand every aspect of it. If you can explain as much as I have about how things are structured without the two extra dimensions, please show me your way of doing it.

I must admit that I do not consider time to be a basic structural constituent, but just a relationship between distance and motion. It is just a way to compare one motion with another one. Its unit of seconds is one sixtieth of a minute, which is one sixtieth of an hour which is one twenty fourth of a day, which is roughly a measure of the motion of any particle of the earth through one complete cycle of its motion about the axis of the earth. It is much easier to just pick any convenient motion amplitude to be the standard motion amplitude and then compare all other motions with it. If you want to stick to the day as your standard motion amplitude then its motion amplitude would be 1 unit of motion amplitude and a motion that would travel around the earth twice during one standard day unit would have 2 units of motion amplitude etc. It makes things much simpler to understand. In this way you are looking at the amount, size, or quantity of motions defined in their own natural units, which is appropriate since motions are a basic constituent of the universe and are the entities which occupy space and interact with each other and with space.

Sincerely,

Paul

very beautiful reasoning dear Jedis of the Sphere

this is my theory - gravity waves going through space will change the size and shape of things and there will be a lot of things changing like mass electric charge all forces magnetic moment - because of this LIGO will not work - I do not know if I am the first person to say some of these things Kurt Stocklmeir

An alternative model of reality--

1. Roger Penrose in The Road to Reality emphasizes the importance of and wonders about the meaning of complex numbers in the basic equations of physics. The first section in the attached addresses his question.

2. Erwin Shrodinger raised questions about the identity of a particle, which is not covered by his equation. The second section presents such an equation.

3. Bohm and Hiley (The Undivided Universe) describe "active information" and "the holomovement." Active information is here described in terms of game theory, based on a game much studied in the laboratory. The holomovement is modeled by a stream that emerges from a non-wellfounded set.

4. Measurement of consciousness is an issue raised elsewhere on FQXI. Observation of the beginning and ending of self is suggested by a Petri net model of a stream-- as above, modeled by a non-wellfounded set. Which suggests a hypothesis that could be tested in a good neuro-imaging lab, one experienced with laboratory animals.

The model is here.

Hi Kurt,

do you mean through space or space-time? Do you mean the distribution of EM radiation will be affected altering the size and shape of the images produced from the information, or the size and shape of material objects will change? Why do you say charge and forces and magnetic moments will change?

Einstein's theory of Gravity has no place for Gravitational Waves

One year after the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) instrument's discovered Gravitational Waves, the LIGO scientists still have not provided the answer for this question: "What are the Gravitational waves MADE OF?" or "When someone talks of waves, the instant response should always be, "Waves of what?", as Charles Scurlock put it.

So, as of today, the basic nature of LIGO Gravitational Waves is still a mystery.

Actually, this widely and cheerfully accepted discovery creates much more mysteries and myths that need to be addressed. This GW, for example, is acting - or moving, precisely - against the Laws of Physics.

Throwing a big rock into water, we create waves that would certainly move toward the shore. But if we dig a hole at the bottom of the lake that immediately sucks water in - something similar to the black hole - the waves created, if any, would move in the opposite direction, toward the hole, not the shore.

The illustration provided by LIGO artist shows it well.

But the LIGO's two black holes - while merging and combining their sucking power - suddenly generate waves that move away from the holes and toward the shore, or in this case the LIGO instrument that is 1.3 billion light years away from where they were born.

Another mystery is the unbelievable capacity of the LIGO instrument.

http://www.einsteinerrs.com/Attachment #1: Einsteins_theory_of_Gravity_has_no_place_for_Gravitational_Waves_N.doc

Matter does seem to show up everywhere, usually as mass. The properties of objects are very important and mass is a particular property as is amplitude. Although amplitude has no meaning in GR classical physics, amplitude is a very important quantum property.

Action is a simple belief that objects change and the GR of classical physics is built around the action principle. Although action is normally the derivative of matter or energy over time or space, action as an axiom along with matter are correspondingly from where time and space emerge. This is of course upside logic according to belief in spacetime axioms, but the equations pf matter and action work perfectly well predicting the future without space and time.

The discrete aether choice of matter and action as axioms simply provides a starting place for anchoring consciousness that is different than the anchors of space and time. Axioms are something in which we must simply believe in order to make sense out of sensations of the world. Instead of believing in space and time, it makes more sense to believe first of all in matter and action and let space and time emerge from matter and action.

Although discrete aether seems natural to me and unifies gravity and charge, no one else seems to really want to reconcile gravity and charge no matter how much sense it makes. That is why I am at the fringe in discourse with the fringe who all seem to have their own notions and are not really that interested in anyone else's notions. But I like the banter and it helps me sharpen my axioms and better structure discrete aether.

We live in a multiverse represented by all combinations of c, h, G. Fine tuning was inevitable. It is a good bet that our universe is overlapped with other universes, some of which may be superluminal, others with even stranger properties.

Hi Jason,

Hope you are well,Happy to see you again on FQXi? it is cool that you write also.You are creative.I have thought also about these multiverses.The works of Mr Tegmark about the mathematical universe and multiverses are interesting.I asked me what where a multiverse if we link with the uniquenss.A center so is necessary.If our universe is part of a multiverse.And if I link with my theory of spherisation, let's assume so a multispheres.The big question is about thisuniqueness,in logic we return at this number 1 and this uniquenss, because the multispheres is part of a sphere with sphères.Now I find the idea relevant for the play with constants,laws and intrinsic équations of these sphères different.That said we return always with this uniquenss, entropical.The serie is so between 1 and 1.In this line of reasoning indeed we can play with different properties.Personaly I consider one universal sphere in my model, but the mathematical play of multispheres of Mr Tegmark could be relevant for the imagination and creativity even subjectivity.

ps Jason The superluminal is possible with particles not baryonic in logic ,this dark matter.But not with our fermions bosons at my humble opinion.Regards

Hi Steve,

Great to hear from you. You have been one of the long standing pillars of this physics community.

I imagine our spacetime to be like a spherical planet/star inside of it's own cosmos, but that every space-time is growing larger at its own speed of light until they all begin to overlap. Our space time is likely to have overlapped with other space-times that won't necessarily be detectable. They are like ghostly universes all around us.

Hello Jason the creative :)

Thanks,I was not on fqxi because my net is hacked and that I have a lot of probelms in belgium dueto bad persons but I have faith I am christian.That helps.I love this Platform.They permit us to write our thoughts and models,it is innovant, transparent and we learn so much here.

Best Regards

Thank-you for your interest. It often seems like people argue endlessly about this and that but the basic idea of unification gets lost in the noise of quantum uncertainty.

Charge bonds matter by means of the exchange of photons, which is action or change. Gravity bonds matter by the exchange of the same photon along with its emitted photon at the CMB creation and everywhere in between. This biphoton exchange is the monopole and quadrupole of gravity while single photon exchange is the dipole of charge.

Thus discrete aether results in the universe of matter and action from which space and time or spacetime emerge. Change or quantum action by math is a differential and it is from that differential that space and time emerge. The quantum Hamilton Jacobi equation, which is the basis for both gravity and charge, has dimensionless ratios of space and time.

Time scales from the orbit period of the electron in hydrogen and other atoms while space scales from the charge radius of the electron. The mathy version is worked out here, but it is very mathy...Universal_Quantum_Action_with_Discrete_Aether_and_Time_Delay

The civilian version is here...quantum-aether

James and Steve,

Seeing as how each of us has at some point agreed to disagree with the other, and have something like a mutual disagreement association, let me introduce a basic idea.

'Quantum' is so overused that it deserves a Lenny Bruce expletive. So let us look at what 'unification' actually means. Gravitational theory whether Newtonian or Relativistic, cannot explain how the micro subatomic size masses can hold together in a nuclear cross-section volume against the magnitude of electrostatic force that must exist at that level of separation and the inverse square law still hold. The final act of the Rosetta mission cannot compare to how tenuous the gravitational attraction must be if those subatomic masses are discrete, particulate matter which is an entirely closed gravitational domain. (now, I don't want to get too far into the subject of topology as a unification of mathematics, so I'll try to keep this intuitive) To argue the Std Model of an 'exchange particle' in the theoretical form of a 'photon' is meaningless until that photon is given real physical definition beyond a simplistic value measurement. Because the question remains; 'what IS charge?!' and how can it be that it exhibits only one direction of action, either inward or outward, if treated as a quasi-surface of a spherical volume?

Firstly there must be a general, rather than operational, definition of both inertia and charge. jrc

Hello to both of you,

Thanks for sharing Mr Agnew,It is a beautiful work.I liked the 1d spherical wave and the sphere :) beautiful play of maths.That said I have difficulties to analyse this aether in correlation with our standard model and special relativity.This gravitation seems linked with dark matter and is not baryonic.The aether in this logic is gravitational.The motions andphasis in logic could be extrapolated with this gravitation considering particles of gravit ,this dark matter and BH and quantum BHs could be superimposed at our standard model.This zero absolute seems really interesting.The équations of motions could be imrpoved if wr insert mlosV=cst.and ml².The 3 motions of sphères,linear, orbital and spinal more the volumes and the nature can answer.The problem is this bridge of thermodynamics and special relativity.It is there that the spherical volumes become relevant at my humble opinion.The aether seems really gravitational considering these smallest spherons produces by the central BH.The biggest.All could be harmonised with the spherisation on an increasing entropical line time.The theorem of Noether and the geometrical algebras if they are well utilised about domains and axioms could be relevant.Time can be dépendent or independent and the classments of 3 motions could be relevant in 3D.I am asking me how are really these 3 motions of sphères.Have they a maximum? My equation is it correct? I don't know, perhaps even that simply the sense or rotation answers also for this thermodynamocal equilibrium between baryonic matter and dark matter ,this gravitation.I don't know, I am asking me what is this matter.I don't know if the roadis this zero absolute and its fractalisation near this zero.It is complex.In al case the motions are essential.Noether, Lagrange, Euler,Legendre....shall agree perhaps :)

Regards

at the same moment John, hello also.But like I write less speedly ,so this explains that:) Regards

ps john, they turn so they are .....

I liked you general work.But it seemsto have a problem considering the dark matter.It is not Baryonic....Aether seems really gravitational and not luminiferous.The biphotons quadrupoles is an electromagnetic force correlated with our thermo, standard model and special relativity.Gravitation does not seem to be an emergent electromagnetic force.But of course it is just my opinion.If a chief orchestra exists, it seems to be this gravitation.Why they turn these sphères, it is not due to our actual electrom forces.The aether seems relally correlated with the central sphere BH of our universal sphere producing these particles of gravitational aether.The photons are not really the primordial quantum of E.These photons seems governend by a gravitational equilibrium.That is why we see that this gravitation encircles this standard model at the two scales,quant and cosm.We cannot unify the quantum gravitation with our general relativity in this line of reasoning where our standard baryonic model is taken into account.We need a kind of balance, equilibrium for this thermodynamical forces.Gravitation cannot be photonic in this reasoning.It isjust my opinion Mr Agnew,I liked your general work,I just explain my point of vue.Aether is a concept linking the words of Einstein ,God does not play at dices, the stability of this gravitation shows us that this aether is gravitational.Light and heat are not the only one road it seems to me.

Best Regards

Georgina - ask all the questions you want it is ok but some of the answers are a little hard to talk about on a computer. I like to talk about time and space not space time. I am against space time for a lot of reasons. It is probably true if you do any thing to change time there will be changes to space and if you do any thing to change space there will be changes to time. For years I have talked about this - if gravity waves travel at the speed of light photons and neutrinos moving in certain directions will see some gravity waves with infinite energy - a lot of not normal things would happen like light and neutrinos would not be able to travel on straight paths and they would change energy - light and neutrinos have a not normal Doppler effect with gravity waves - gravity waves move at an almost infinite speed - people will not ever see gravity waves. Michaelson and Morley tried to find the ether using an interferometer. LIGO uses an interferometer. People said gravity waves change the speed of light and LIGO will not work because of this - I am not claiming credit for this. I guess I am claiming credit for a lot of things like Doppler effect associated with gravity waves will influence time, space, distance, shape of time and shape of space that photons will see - photons going on different paths through an interferometer will see different amounts of Doppler effect. It might be more simple to think of a universe with just 2 photons moving on a paths that an interferometer uses. A gravity wave goes around them. Because the photons are moving in different directions they will see different amounts of Doppler effect. If gravity waves move at the speed of light the photons will see a normal Doppler effect and they will see normal changes with things like time, space, distance and direction - but this would stop an interferometer from working - if there was an interference pattern it would be different from what LIGO is looking for. A lot of people have worked on LIGO for a long time. There is not any person who knows what they have done including them - 1 person can not know what thousands of people have done. Gravity waves going around LIGO will change all things around LIGO like the ground and equipment around LIGO. I could talk for days about how time and space act like the spring constants of time and space and how time and space changes shape. I could talk for days about how space changes and how this influence space around that space. People who have worked for LIGO tried to make things simple. I think they are dishonest to say they saw gravity waves. I think most physics people are against the people who worked on LIGO. Look on the internet. Gravity waves change the vacuum like time and space. When the vacuum, time and space change a lot of things will change like mass, energy, forces, electric charge and energy of photons.

John R. Cox,

"So let us look at what 'unification' actually means."

Dear Steve Agnew,

I am interested in following through with learning about your work. I concluded some time ago that your work is an advance for theoretical physics. My own work differs entirely. I am not seeking to explain my work in this thread. However, I am responding to John R. Cox's message. I will return my attention immediately back to your ideas.

John,

I have looked at it and written about it including here. Unification means identifying the single cause for all effects. The path to follow is to define all properties of physics except for space and time, or since space and time have never been directly represented in physics equations, to define all physics properties in terms of the physics substitutes for space and time. Those two substitutes are object length and object activity. All other properties must be defined only in terms of these two naturally indefinable properties, object length and object activity. Object length has units of meters, and, object activity has units of seconds. Since properties are represented in physics equations by their units, the units of all other properties must be defined in combinations of meters and seconds only. The immediate benefit is that mass becomes a defined property for the first time. The definition of mass identifies the single cause for all effects as the variation of the speed of light. The benefits go on and on including the identity of electric charge.

"Because the question remains; 'what IS charge?!' and how can it be that it exhibits only one direction of action ... "

Electric charge is a universally constant measure of an increment of time. It is the time it takes for light, measured locally, to travel the radius (4.8x10-11 meters) of a simplified, much like the Bohr atom, hydrogen atom. Its units, when defined in terms of meters and seconds only, are seconds. The polarity is a property of mass, i.e., a property of the variation of the speed of light.

Steve, Ok that is all. I am not looking for anyone's response to it. I remain interested in your work if your interest has not been turned off. I need to finish reading the link you provided.

"How many times have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" - Arthur Conan Doyle

In the world of Sherlock Holmes, a successful search for information results in more information becoming available, information which is then logically applied to the possibilities in scope. In light of the newly available information, some things previously seen to be possible are now seen to be impossible .

In terms of a mathematical language called situation theory, applied to the possibility indexed by i:

[math]theSituation \models [/math]

means

[math]theSituation \models [/math]

Adding a little more math by associating the possibility i with a number, the second equation becomes:

[math]theSituation \models [/math]

More here.