Quark Stars and a New State of Matter?

Alan,

The exchanges also rekindled my curiosity about what lies at earth centre and it is a new area of interest. It appears unlikely that matter particles held together by electromagnetic bonds can exist there. Only the strongest possible bonds between particles are likely to be stable. As to your questions

(i) Do I still favor a medium-based worldview for the motion of light waves? Yes, I do. I also wrote a paper on what we have been discussing. (ii) Do I favor a medium-based worldview for the gravity force? Yes, as well because I don't think space is inert and only relational. I am of a 'substantivalist' leaning, like Newton. Then, as to "I don't think NASA are intentionally keeping a non-relativistic agenda secret", in response to the anti-Soviet agenda as Wallace claims in the link you posted, I was able to find a draft of my earlier post (I suggest installing a search engine to find previous posts on this site). This is part of what I wrote:

If you are the Emperor of Einsteiniana and

(a) A group of your patriotic scientists have discovered the 'theory of everything' or nearly done so

(b) You are afraid of terrorists and other evil empires,

what will you do?

In my contemplation, for a wise Emperor the following would be an appropriate course of action:

1. Hide that theory and keep it top secret.

2. From my Defense department I will directly provide encouragement in the form of grants, funds, etc to misdirected scientists going the wrong way and do so also through other third parties to avoid suspicion.

3. Silence scientists insistent on going the right way by denying them funding, restricting their access to publication of their findings, blacklist them and if all else fails, kill them.

4. Provide a forum for discussion of foundational physics to establish how much knowledge is actually out there and award prizes to those that further mystify and becloud the topic.

5. Label as crackpots and noisemakers, activists campaigning for the truth to be made a public thing. They should be forgiven for in their innocence they know not that they jeopardize the safety and security of Einsteiniana.

6. Fund conferences in exotic islands to discuss things far away from the theory of everything.

7. Fund experiments but filter out the truth and keep this with my closely knit group of scientists having custody of the theory, while doctoring the findings entering the public domain.

8. When I get to my wits end as the truth continues its characteristic behavior of persistently struggling to emerge from secrecy with the advent of the internet aiding and abetting its struggle, I will seek opinion about how humanity's future should be steered.

9. Apologize and pay compensation for the wrongs done to 'dissenting' scientists at the appropriate time in future.

...Any wise Emperor would do all these things for the sake, safety and future of humanity. With the human, economic, information and computing resources available to the Empire it is very unlikely that the theory of everything is not already known or almost known by a select few. No gainsaying that evil people are amongst us and we cannot underestimate what they can be capable of if they have details of a theory of everything. Mutually assured destruction is no longer an option with the advent of suicide bombers.

If you are the Emperor of Einsteiniana, the custodian of humanity's safety and security, would you not do likewise?

Akinbo

*That Wallace book is a gem entering my e-library right way. Thanks!

Peter,

yes, I remember the helix connection from the essays. Eventually enough null results from general relativity tests will get the mainstream looking elsewhere imv. Yes, a theory of everything is more than a solution for Mercury's precession but at least the correct solution is a good start.

I know that the behavior and modelling of light is not trivial. Light slows down and is refracted in glass for example a.k.a Newton's prism. But Akinbo still feels the need for a medium for light as well as gravity. Is this your view with light as well?

Alan

Akinbo,

Your point no.8 made me smile. The consequences of a new paradigm in physics is overwhelming to contemplate. I don't think that it would be able to be kept secret. In the past fundamental science progress has been exchanged around the world. All nations have elite scientists who all are indoctrinated to Einstein's general relativity. How a new paradigm will manifest itself is bewildering. The young will cease upon the new science with ease but the established 'intelligencia' will be much more reluctant and mistrusting. What will happen? We'll hopefully find out if we live long enough. It's going to happen in our lifetimes don't you think?

Yes, Wallace's work is a gem (!)

Alan

Akinbo,

We were talking about how strange quark matter might be the seeds of celestial body formation. Take a look at this:

SMA Unveils How Small Cosmic Seeds Grow Into Big Stars

[quote]The team studied two specific spots within the Snake nebula, designated P1 and P6. Within those two regions they detected a total of 23 cosmic "seeds" - faintly glowing spots that will eventually birth one or a few stars. The seeds generally weigh between 5 and 25 times the mass of the Sun, and each spans only a few thousand astronomical units (the average Earth-Sun distance). The sensitive, high-resolution SMA images not only unveil the small seeds, but also differentiate them in age.

Previous theories proposed that high-mass stars form within very massive, isolated "cores" weighing at least 100 times the mass of the Sun. These new results show that that is not the case. The data also demonstrate that massive stars aren't born alone but in groups.

"High-mass stars form in villages," said co-author Qizhou Zhang of the CfA. "It's a family affair."

The team also was surprised to find that these two nebular patches had fragmented into individual star seeds so early in the star formation process.

They detected bipolar outflows and other signs of active, ongoing star formation. Eventually, the Snake nebula will dissolve and shine as a chain of several star clusters.[end quote]

If "black hole" is re-written as Strange Quark Matter then the lack of star formation would be due to the seeds of formation having coalesced into the center:

Bullying black holes force galaxies to stay red and dead

[quote]"Once again, Herschel has detected something that was never seen before: significant amounts of cold gas in nearby red-and-dead galaxies," notes Göran Pilbratt, Herschel Project Scientist at ESA, "nevertheless, these galaxies do not form stars, and the culprit seems to be the black hole.[end quote]

Will certainly be updating my knowledge of Quark matter.

I thought some more:

It makes sense that giant elliptical galaxies are old spiral galaxies who's central Strange Quark Matter has stopped spinning enough that the SQM loses it's gravitational anisotropy. Because the quarks of SQM are unbounded I have hypothesized that centrifugal force can create the gravitational anisotropy. This is why they then attain their elliptical shape from a former star producing giant spiral.

Wikipedia entries support this hypothesis imv. Lenticular galaxies are the intermediaries between spirals and ellipticals.

[quote]The morphology and kinematics of lenticular galaxies each, to a degree, suggest a mode of galaxy formation. Their disk-like, possibly dusty, appearance suggests they come from faded spiral galaxies, whose arm features disappeared. Alternatively, as lenticular galaxies are likely to be more luminous than spiral galaxies, which suggests that they are not merely the faded remnants of spiral galaxies. Rather, lenticular galaxies might result from galaxy merger, which increase the total stellar mass and give the newly merged galaxy its disk-like, arm-less appearance.[end quote]

The possibility of a more luminous lenticular galaxy compared to a spiral galaxy can be explained by the reduced spin of the central SQM. The galactic plane becomes lost yet the stars themselves still attain star forming material. The stars themselves still have spinning SQM cores. A galaxy merger scenario is therefore not required.

Does dark matter have its own version of Higgs field? A dark-Higgs field? Did the big bang create multiple versions of a Higgs field?

If dark matter had its own Higgs field (a dark Higgs field), then that would distinguish it from our known Higgs field. Our known standard model of fundamental particles would owe their existence to some unknown property or quality of our Higgs field. Yet a dark Higgs field for dark matter would have its own unique qualities that give rise to its own dark standard model of dark matter particles. And both of these Higgs fields would have some relationship with our common space-time continuum.

Hi Alan,

That Archimedes screw is popular with many people for some reason. Probably because it's conceptually easy to visualize and understand.

As far as the definition of the Higgs field, I like the idea that it suggests some strange kind of aether. I guess there are two kinds of people who are interested in physics: those who like very well defined physics/predictable physics; and those who like aetherial physics. For some strange reason, nature split the difference. Black hole physics and event horizons tell us that everything is information theory. But it's like quantum mechanics takes that "information" and blurs it by adding a layer of mystery.

Jason,

Yes, I believe there is a natural predisposition of human beings in general to favor aetherial physics. It's a more comforting/pleasing worldview which I used to share too. Even for someone who comes to accept the slightly less warm helix-particle/string-only worldview, it doesn't take away the natural wonders of nature or perceived reality.

Btw Black Hole event horizons are a thing of the past according to the latest announcement of Hawking.

Stephen Hawking's Blunder on Black Holes Shows Danger of Listening to Scientists, Says Bachmann

Peter,

I awoke with a revelation. A simple law that will lead to a theory of everything.

The larger a quark strange matter core, the quicker it loses it's spin and so the quicker is loses it's anisotropy

This applies to planets, stars and galaxies. Mercury is very small, which implies that it has a very fast spinning SQM core and therefore is very anisotropic. It's this high SQM core anisotropy combined with it's high orbital speed which leads to it's anomalous precession.

Large stars will have large SQM cores which therefore lose their spin more rapidly. They therefore lose their rotational plane gravitational anisotropy relatively quickly which leads to a loss of radiation pressure and the star collapses in on itself.

As explained previously concerning the demise of a spiral galaxy to a lenticular and then to an elliptical. The possibility of a more luminous lenticular galaxy compared to a spiral galaxy can be explained by the reduced spin of the central SQM. The galactic plane becomes lost yet the stars themselves still attain star forming material. The stars themselves still have spinning SQM cores. A galaxy merger scenario is therefore not required.

A simple law that can explain the dynamics of the macro-world. The quantum world explanation isn't far away.

Alan

Alan,

You didn't say exactly what you would do as Emperor of Einsteiniana. However, back to the topic here, "... when the temperature reaches the QCD energy scale (T of order 1012 kelvins) or the density rises to the point where the average inter-quark separation is less than 1 fm (quark chemical potential μ around 400 MeV), the hadrons are melted into their constituent quarks, and the strong interaction becomes the dominant feature of the physics. Such phases are called quark matter or QCD matter".

Then, "A neutron star is much cooler than 1012K, but it is compressed by its own weight to such high densities that it is reasonable to surmise that quark matter may exist in the core. Compact stars composed mostly or entirely of quark matter are called quark stars or strange stars, yet at this time no star with properties expected of these objects has been observed". Both from Wikipedia.

My questions: What is the general density requirement for quark matter formation? What is the pressure or density at earth's core? Can the gravitational attraction of the overlying earth mass squeeze the core to the extent that it meets the density requirements and the average inter-quark separation of less than 1 fm mentioned above?

Then related in another way, has the radius of the earth been changing or constant, i.e. has it increased or is it decreasing? This may have interesting consequences for pre-historic animals since a reduced gravitational field intensity (GM/r) in the past may make the task of motion easy no matter the gigantic size of such animals.

Akinbo

Alan,

It sounds like Stephen Hawking and the physics community are confused about event horizons. I don't know what to say. I mean, I have my own pet theory about event horizons, but I'm an electronics technician, not a physicist. I look at oscilloscopes all day, so everything to me looks like waves.

The more I hear about how physicists are stumped by the ultimate "grand design", the more I think that life after death/ghosts/spooky stuff might actually be possible. I know how grim the physical world is, therefore, it would be inconceivable that something as joyful as an afterlife could even be possible. It is my belief that the ultimate grand design is most likely impossible to make sense of.

Jason,

"so everything to me looks like waves" very funny..

I believe in more 'spooky' stuff than the average scientist. There's much more to reality than meets the eye, I'm sure.

Alan

Akinbo,

I'm not going to try and work out the numbers. It makes sense to me to think of spinning SQM being created at the beginning with baryonic matter which then becomes the seeds of formation of celestial bodies.

As to the gigantic sized animals of the past, this relates to the SQM core tidal model of the 100ky ice age cycle. The equatorial tides increase on the 100ky cycle. These create greater precipitation at the polar regions which leads to glacial build-up and loss of albedo. The counter to this is that extra tide raising forces also brings nutrients to the surface. This then changes the chemistry of the atmosphere. Bacterial particles from surface algae released into the air be seeds for rainfall. Despite the colder global temperatures, warmer coastal seas would exist at high latitudes. More rainfall would occur globally. Deserts would become grasslands. This is my off-the-cuff explanation for ice age megafauna.

Alan

Alan,

"There's much more to reality than meets the eye, I'm sure."

I agree. GR QM afterlife/ghosts/spirits = cannot be unified.

Jason,

how do you feel about the suggestion that strange quark matter exists at the center of the Earth?

Alan