Alternative Models of Reality

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.

Dear Steve Agnew,

"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."

I am familiar with the case put forward that "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." I have not read how it reconciles gravity and charge. I assume gravity is taken as a given once space and time, I believe you mean space-time, emerge. Could you please explain where charge makes its appearance. I am assuming you mean electric charge. The word charge is used in physics more loosely than that.

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.

[math]theSituation\models information:available[/math]

[math]theSituation\models possibility_i:impossible[/math]

[math]theSituation\models \Psi_i=0[/math]

ATTN ALL WRITERS!!! PLEASE, TO INCREASE READABILITY AND READERSHIP--

If you have a comment to make on this thread, please follow the usual practice in blogs of posting your comment on this thread. (See the "reply to this thread" option below.)

If instead you choose to start another thread, then you will most likely reduce readability and potential readership. Why? Because as linguists tell us, context determines meaning.

If you choose to locate your comment within this thread, then the reader will have more context to work with. And, readability will increase. Readership should increase!

Otherwise, if you choose to start another thread with your comment on this one, the reader will have to do some work in order to acquire the context.

In order to increase readership, writers should probably do as much work as possible in order to set the context for the reader.

Please, if you have a comment on this thread, use the "reply to this thread" option within the thread.

IMHO : ))

Wavefn collapse via informationalism. These 3 eqn. model the collapse. Here's how:

(The full references are here.)

First, Shrodinger saw that observations are discrete. Likewise the informationalism of Jon Barwise assumes that "information comes in pieces." Therefore the problem of the continuum (cf. John Baez, Struggles with the continuum.) is not in play. Here I assume that a discrete observation produces a piece of information.

For example, when in the two slit experiment an electron hits the plate, a piece of information is produced.

[math]theSituation \models information:available[/math]

Next I apply is the basic tenet of Barwise's informationalism:

"The Inverse Relationship Principle: Whenever there is an increase in available information there is a corresponding decrease in possibilities, and vice versa."

Given all the possible locations of the electron on the plate, the electron is observed in only one location. And this makes a piece of information available.

The inverse relationship principle then tells me that because of this increase in information, "there is a corresponding decrease in possibilities."

In other words, as soon as the information becomes available that the electron hit the plate at location, say, "j", no other possible location, say, "i not equal to j" is now possible.

[math]theSituation \models possibility_i:impossible[/math]

Using natural language, "the wave function has collapsed." Or more formally--

[math]theSituation \models \Psi_i=0[/math]

Thanks for all the useful questions. It really helps me to refine my discrete aether universe when people ask questions about unification and charge. The notion that the universe emerges from just the two axioms of matter and action is really appealing.

John R. Cox replied on Oct. 1, 2016 @ 15:12 GMT as "...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?

Charge represents a particular phase of the action of discrete aether and light is just a pair of aether particles in resonance at some frequency. This is akin to the photon as the occupation of a vacuum oscillator in QED, but with discrete aether, it is more useful to think of light as fixed and the rest of the universe moves past each photon.

Notions of space like surface and volume emerge from the radius of electron charge. An electron is an aether condensate with minus phase while the proton is an aether condensate of plus phase. Of course, there is more structure to the proton as three quarks, but quarks are all aether condensates as well stabilized by gluon exchange.

Quantum is at the root of all action as the Schro. equation, which makes the differential of an action proportional and orthogonal to the matter of that action. This means that both matter and action have amplitude as well as phase and these quantum notions do not have any classical analogs. Classical motion like gravity is simply an entanglement between complementary phased actions that makes it seem like action and matter do not have phase.

Matter that has a plus phase attracts matter that has a minus phase and it is the exchange of an aether pairs as photons by which charge attraction or repulsion occurs. In essence, motion is the increase in mass by exchange of aether. So with discrete aether, the nature a photon is as an aether atom. Likewise gravity is the exchange of a photon pair whose symmetry is therefore always attractive. In effect, a photon pair reduces gravity to the exchanges of single aether particles instead of aether pairs.

In essence, the decoherence of aether represents the shrinking of the universe and all observable matter is bathed in that flux in a constant but discrete exchange. It is the decoherence rate of aether and all matter at 0.26 ppb/yr that determines all force and is what holds the universe together.

The CMB creation represents the freezing out of just 1e-7 of aether into observable matter when force reached a threshold and aether has been driving observable matter into black holes ever since then.

Since aether decay is where all force comes from, the matter decay of a star due to radiation loss leads to an extra force and therefore energy in the virial energy of a galaxy. Star decay essential transfers angular momentum from inner to outer stars in a rotating galaxy without the need for a dark matter halo.

Galaxy rotation is then simply a consequence of quantum gravity exchange and there is a similar explanation for dark energy. At the scale of cosmic threads, the motions of galaxy clusters couple by quantum exchange much like the motions of charge couple with magnetism. There is a force associated with the neutral flux of matter on the cosmic scale that is now called dark energy.

Very good. Starting with space and time as universal primitives, charge certainly does follow just as you suppose. However, if you start with charge and spin as the primitive notions of reality, it is rather matter and action that are universal primitives and space emerges as the radius of electron charge and time as the period of electron spin.

James A Putnam replied on Oct. 2, 2016 @ 03:16 GMT as "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."

The nice thing about discrete matter and action as universal primitives is that the mass of an aether particle limits action at the Planck scale with the spin of a black hole's event horizon limits action at that scale. Black hole singularities are simply quantum aether objects with spin just as electrons are quantum charge objects with spin.

Just as electrons are not singularities in matter and action, black holes are not singularities either. However, that does mean that electrons are not therefore fundamental and comprise a large number of aether particles of one phase. In a sense, black holes are more fundamental than electrons since black hole spin is of complementary aether spin just like photons of light and so black holes carry very little charge.

Steve Agnew,

Hi, A correction is in order: "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." I should not have said "...measured locally, ...". The speed of light is constant when measured locally. The length of the radius is a constant when measured locally. The time it takes for the light to travel the radius measured locally or remotely is the same universal constant we know as electric charge. I didn't explain how electric charge could be a measure of time. However, I have written about it here at FQXi.org. My first essay entry introduced the idea. In other essay entries I show that the key move is to define mass. That act connects physics equations that follow to the meanings communicated to us by empirical evidence. That is not the case for theoretical physics.

Here is something I have not written about here. Action is definable. Its units of meters, seconds, and newtons are not telling us that action can be considered as either time x energy or length x momentum. Its units are telling us that action is energy x momentum. This conclusion has not been presented here but the basis for it has been presented. In one of my contest essays I wrote about "Calculating the Universal Gravitational constant." The method used to make that calculation is also used to define action. The Least Action Principle represents the condition where both energy and momentum are jointly conserved. I don't know yet that you are familiar with my work, but, I do know that you and your work are a valuable resource.

I need to get back to discussing your ideas. I have been delayed because my wife and I have had the popcorn ceilings removed from our house. The aftermath has involved us in cleaning and painting. This has been occurring while we continue to babysit two of our grandchildren :) daily. I have been thinking but not writing for the last three weeks. I do read your messages. Thank you for continuing to participate here.

James Putnam

So this is the place for my "own novel physics theory or model." Alternative Model of Reality thread or Cosmology? Which is most proper? Both fit, that is certain.

Well, strictly speaking this proposed model is not my own, as most of it has been presented in detail by others and just a small portion which brings it all together is truly novel. But this change in perspective makes a big difference if one would like to fully understand any one or more of several big mysteries in physics.

Very, very simple in most respects. But so difficult for most to grasp. This "Alternative model" is a little like an optical illusion where you see one thing but the second image is difficult to find and lock in your mind's eye for more that an instant. Most of us know many things and if what we know conflicts in some way with something new then the new view can be difficult to see; we may be stuck with seeing only the older vision.

Should, what you the reader knows to be true, conflict with what I know then you may wish to save time and energy by reading and working with ideas that are compatible with your present views of "Reality" and "Cosmology." As an example, if your friend has a deep conviction that the past and future are out there somewhere and someday someone will figure out how to zip to and fro in history, please don't refer him here as I do not need to see his wonderful proof that time travel is just around the corner; you see, I know that time travel is out of the question. On the other hand if you are determined to travel faster than light, that is OK with me as I do not know that it will always be impossible for anything to exceed the speed of light. And I will not challenge your desire to find a way to do so.

Waves or particles? Do you favor one of the two, waves or particles? You know the old wave-particle duality question. Well if you have a serious bias then you should get lost or at least take a break and catch a nap or have a snack because you will have trouble when I explain why we can not have one without the other. You see it is a bit like looking at a painting of sunlight streaming down through trees that seem to surround you with more and more trees deeper in a dark forest -- until you see the eyes and a jungle of animals; and then the trees disappear. If you think that you may be able to see both the animals and the trees then come along.

But be warned if the big bang is sacred to you and your tribe. Then you may zone out when this possibility occurs ("a big bang isn't really necessary after all"). Now, there are a lot of trip wires that keep us locked in our present view of the world and the universe beyond. Even as we try to see beyond our present limits. One very small point can stop you cold and all the more so if you have devoted a lifetime to one approach.

The "problem advice" that I have heard most often? "Well, if it was that easy someone would have thought of it before. And a lot of smart people have tried and they didn't think it was so simple--and besides -- that would mean that--" (a pet notion) "--is out the window."

Still with me? Then let's go for it. Just volume filled with charge. No time to start with, it falls out later. Space filled with charge. Nothing but charge. And only one kind of charge, please. The volume of the universe filled with charge means pressure and that means energy. The bits of charge cannot be still, that arrangement would result in a greater pressure and require greater energy and increased order to attain this stillness. These bits of charge move and are synchronized with the universe of moving charge surrounding them. This universal structure of charge and it's motion are the origin of "space-time" and everything in the universe and the regulator of time and all interactions.

These bits of charge are each a fraction of the charge of an electron. Let us say 1/3 the charge of an electron. These bits are basically locked in place, they can not just wander around, as they are surrounded and repelled by like acting bits of charge. But they can and must oscillate in three dimensional space while hemmed in by surrounding neighbors. This motion presents an effective shape that packs more tightly.

That is it. That is all you need. Everything else is made up of these bits of charge. One or more bits can be forced out of place if enough energy is applied, So we can say 3 bits forced out of place will result in production of an electron and a positron (the 3 now vacant holes in the structure.) Note the energy needed to displace 3 bits of charge compared to that needed to remove only one bit. So the nature of quarks and electrons results from how 1, 2 or 3 displaced bits move through the structure of space made of charge locked in place by a universal pressure. And the spaces left vacant in sets of 1, 2 or 3 move in near perfect symmetry; reflected by the structure of space.

The question of unequal matter and antimatter is no more!

I would like to talk about some of my old theories. Associated with my theories there were a lot of dishonest things done by a lot dishonest people. There is a lot of corruption associated with physics. I guess most people are bad. Around 1990 I talked about some of my theories on the internet using sci physics. 1 of my theories was how does gravity get out of a black hole and the answer was 1 of my theories gravitons are tachyons. Around 1990 I said to George that I thought gravity, electric fields and magnetic fields are tachyons. George said some thing like if gravitons are tachyons gravitons have negative momentum and that can explain attraction created by gravity. It is probably true George was the first person to explain attraction created by forces. George was working on a BS degree for physics at Old Dominion University. I guess he got a degree around 1993. He was part of U.S. air force. When I put my theories on the internet a person on the internet said some thing like if gravity waves move at the speed of light how do gravity waves get out of a black hole. If gravity waves do not get out of a black hole there can be a lot of trouble like how does time and space have the right shape that is associated with the black hole. A lot of dishonest people did a lot of dishonest things like not give credit to people who came up with the theories. There is a lot more to the story. There are a lot more theories. There are a lot more dishonest things. I will try to talk about this at a different time.

Dear Steve Agnew,

Your paper Matter Time, Aethertime continuously raises questions for me throughout it:

First, I am interested in your reasoning for substituting the word matter sometimes in place of mass and sometimes referring to objects commonly called matter. Is this accurate? Has the property of mass been elevated to the status of the source of the rest of the properties of matter? What is mass?

Second, "Since time and matter determine relative velocity, energy is equivalent to matter and aethertime is naturally Lorentz invariant the Cartesian continuous space, motion and time." Your apparent adoption of ":"... energy is equivalent to matter ..." without deriving it from "aethertime" theory appears to be your basis for concluding that "... aethertime is naturally Lorentz invariant ..." Is the theory of Relativity a given in your work?

That's enough to see if it should continue.