Vladimir,
Nice essay again, very well written for a second (or third?) language. We've agreed on much in the past and I do so again. Not with every detail, but then agreement is not a scoring criteria and all hypotheses should be proffered.
I think and hope you'll like min again, completing a long haul to remove the weirdness from QM, though of course doctrinal physics may take forever to update!
Very well done.
Best of luck in the contest.
Dear Peter,
Here we are again all together.
Thank you for the good evaluation of my work.
I like your description to. I enjoyed reading your contribution.
Аgree with Declan Andrew Traill «often correct explanations in Physics turn out to be ridiculously simple».
Vladimir Fedorov
Vladimir
Thank you. I hope we can work together to advance understanding. It's a massive task. See my posts on Chandra Roychouri's essay. We need more coffins, quickly.
I have a question on gravitational waves for you.
Apart from obvious angular considerations; What is the difference between the variations in G potential from the moon at any one position on Earth?
And are not our seas excellent meters of such G fluctuations? (The tidal flows around the UK are largely moon dependent).
Thanks
Peter
Dear Peter,
Thank you for the interesting question for all.
«Apart from obvious angular considerations; What is the difference between the variations in G potential from the moon at any one position on Earth?
And are not our seas excellent meters of such G fluctuations? (The tidal flows around the UK are largely moon dependent)».
If we consider the influence of only the moon, it seems that it attracts water in the oceans.
But the two tides are illogical in this scheme of action forces.
But if we consider the simultaneous gravitational action of the sun and the moon, then everything becomes logical ( https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hzn3q0vZVToxOMVFkwGsRlOxnNeb9OiY/ ).
When the angle between the directions to the Sun and the Moon is 90 degrees, there is a minimum of tides throughout the Earth.
If the Sun and the Moon attract water in the oceans, then it would seem that their vectors of strength should be summed and there must be tides, but they are not.
Consequently, the tides are not a consequence of the force of attraction, but are a consequence of the formation of increased gravity (heavy water) in places shifted 90 degrees from directions to the sun or the moon.
The increased gravity of water is caused by the orbital toroidal gravitational waves of the Moon and the Sun (analogues of Wheeler's geones, https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2806, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VMlesBfYVVa-Fp6bIr1I-uzU-Vnq3FFY/ ) in which the Moon and the Earth are in potential well of stability and which provide a minimum of the action of the forces of attraction and inertia, in accordance with the extreme principle of least action in soliton gravitational waves.
Those. in places of low tide, water is heavier and it is created the effect of 2 low tides in places shifted on 90 and 270 degrees away from the direction to the Moon or the Sun, hence will be two logical the existing tides, in 0 and 180 degrees from the direction to them.
Low tides on Earth are similar to low tides on the Sun from the action of coronal loops (toroidal gravitational waves) in dark spots.
The registered gravitational waves in the LIGO project these are stationary toroidal gravitational waves of the Earth's gravisphere (magnetosphere) (https://www.nasa.gov/images/content/668517main_vab-orig_full.jpg) and the orbital toroidal gravitational wave of the Earth (http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/yabbfiles/Attachments/Dipolnaya_sostavlayushaya_infrarad.jpg) that form the weather and cause tides and ebbs on the Earth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Dear Vladimir,
Very deep critical analysis and deep ideas aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in fundamental science. Today, the broadest competition of ideas is needed, especially in cosmology . I would just add an ontological justification (basification) for your conception. In physics, it is necessary to introduce the Ontological standard of substantiation of fundamental theories. Physicists and poets should have a single picture of the Universum as an holistic generating process, filled with the meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E. Husserl).
Yours faithfully,
Vladimir Rogozhin
Vladimir, ...(copied to mine)
Thanks. Interesting. But as a level 1 racing yachtsman I have a logic and direct correspondence between ~13hr tidal periods, spring & neap tides, & sun and moon and can even predict adjustments for wind. I understand your description, which doesn't seem to conflict, i.e. more net gravity with no bodies overhead so less UP vector leaving more DOWN, giving a 180 degree major axis ellipse, but I'd like to understand why you find 'vector summing' doesn't work the same way after allowing for lag, flow momentum and angular influences, which can be major factors. However that wasn't what my question was about.
I'm interested in why & how the motions of larger bodies further away are assumed to be a different case to smaller closer bodies. In my own field a body of mass is a body of mass. All should have the same influence on the magnetosphere, however it's 'described'. Surely there aren't two different 'types' of gravity?
Sure it may be 'detectable' but I suspect they just haven't thought far enough out of the boxes and away from theory so have confirmation bias. i.e. there's no explicit proof of the 'curved space-time' hypothesis in the LIGO finding. Is that fair?
Very best
Peter
Vladimir,
The fundamental in the universe are elements in two basic phase states: toroidal gravitational waves and photons? True, Any object with mass that accelerates - including spinning and orbiting objects produces gravitational waves. They are small except for neutron stars and black holes that LIGO detects. "All processes in the universe are based on energy circulation." I can understand that toroidal motion produces fusion. All our ideas contribute to one another as do yours. I also agree that "Fundamental science should be based on the fundamental principles of research, without the use of abstract and ideal concepts, and we can't disagree about the power of toroidal gravitational waves. I speak of this as well in my essay. Hope you get a chance to look at mine and compare.
Jim
Dear James,
Here we are again all together.
With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of the highest praise.
I am glad for our mutual understanding «most likely will continue to redefine the meaning of fundamental, knowing that scientific knowledge and what we deem the fundamental evolve, requiring constant editing, revision and refinement».
I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Vladimir,
Thank you for taking the time to read my essay.
Bet of luck in the contest.
Jim Hoover
Dear Vladimir, ...(copied to your)
I completely agree with you.
«In physics, it is necessary to introduce the Ontological standard of substantiation of fundamental theories».
Ontology studies the fundamental principles of the device of being.
The basis of the universe is the physical vacuum. Conceptual physicists believe that space is empty and has ideal properties to carry the real photon energy billions of years without energy loss. This is a key mistake - all scientists know that there cannot be ideal properties in science, but they do not notice it, or it is global hypnosis, as in Germany at the turn of the 1940s. It is this leads to the justification of the causelessness of processes, science has turned into a fantasy and to what you write.
«The modern crisis of the philosophical foundations of Fundamental Science is manifested as a comprehensive conceptual crisis, crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation, crisis of methodology, loss of certainty».
When I write about the environment of a physical vacuum, from an ontological point of view, I emphasize its real energy and material basis of the world, instead of an abstract foundation, in the form of emptiness, as well as virtual and quasiparticles.
For example, phonons are generally considered quasiparticles, which form photons that carry real energy. I believe that such supernatural, phantom and abstract concepts should not be in science. All particles are real. If a photon is fixed, this means that in the physical vacuum environment there was a pair of real particles.
On the one hand, matter consists of energy, on the other hand, it is energy that forms the mass. Mass derived from energy, it can be formed, under certain conditions, and may not be formed.
For example, an electron-positron pair is actually a phonon (it is not a quasiparticle) that has energy and mass. "Annihilation" of the electron-positron pair leads to the formation of a pair of massless photons. Each photon carries half the energy of the electron-positron pair. In fact, one photon is the pure kinetic energy of an electron-positron pair. The potential energy of the electron-positron pair is a pair of vast gravispheres from the medium of the physical vacuum, which includes a set of de Broglie waves. Gravispheres form a mass, and their energy is parametrically transformed into a second photon during the "annihilation" process.
Thus, the electron-positron pair has a mass, while the photon has no mass and its temperature is close to zero. At the same time, in the process of "annihilation" only the structure of the elements of matter has changed. For example, for an electron - the toroidal structure has turned into a cylindrical spiral. The electron, as consisted of a nematic sequence of 137 quarks, continues to consist of 137 quarks in the photon. In this case, the cross section of the interaction of a photon with the medium of a physical vacuum decreased by a factor of 137, in comparison with the electron-positron pair. Therefore, a photon is a pair of elements (a pair of baryons) of a deeper neutrino and quark level of the fractal structure of matter. Therefore, an electron in the Cooper pair can move in the equilibrium superconducting state only at a speed 43.6 times slower than the speed of light, and the photons move at the speed of light. A boson from a pair of quarks is a graviton (gluon).
An electron-positron pair can be formed only from a photon with an energy of 1023 keV.
The inverse transformation of photons with an energy of 511 keV into a pair of particles with an energy of 256 keV leads to the absorption of energy from the medium of the physical vacuum for constructing their gravispheres and mass formation. Therefore, laser cooling will allow cooling of the body, practically to zero temperature.
In fact, "annihilation" of particles is the process of their division on the second subharmonic of a parametric transformation with the release of energy, which can be used to synthesize heavier particles with energy absorption.
Thus, the process of division and synthesis of the elements of the physical vacuum environment is the main process of energy circulation in the universe, which leads to parametric resonance and solitons. Phase transformation of the elements of the physical vacuum environment is the cause of self-organization of matter according to the principles of the heat pump.
Thus, the most fundamental parameter in the universe is the energy dissipation coefficient (Hubble parameter) in the medium of the physical vacuum, which determines all the parametric processes in the universe. The stars in the universe are shining, due to the dissipation of energy in the physical environment. For example, the Hubble parameter easily calculates the solar radiation power.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Peter, ...(copied to you)
You asked:
«I'm interested in why & how the motions of larger bodies further away are assumed to be a different case to smaller closer bodies».
«Surely there aren't two different 'types' of gravity?».
Answer: «there are no two types of gravity».
There is the only remote mechanism in the Universe for forming the force of interaction between the elements of matter, which is realized as a result of the interaction of the de Broglie toroidal gravitational waves at the common frequencies of the parametric resonance (entanglement effect).
This quantum mechanism of gravity is shown in a photo of phenomena observed in outer space (essay 2017) https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2806.
On the photo https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1MvF-AefpMmNWJ2MGJkRmJvR00/ two interacting large bodies are shown which, using a multitude of toroidal gravitational waves, move small elements of Saturn's rings (their moving is an indicator of the action of force between bodies) https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/resources/4755/?category=images. It should be noted that there are no toroidal gravitational waves directly connecting the bodys. Toroidal gravitational waves interact with each other only at Lagrange points.
Similarly, with the help of toroidal gravitational waves, the Earth and the Moon interact, and the ocean tides are indicators of their interaction
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hzn3q0vZVToxOMVFkwGsRlOxnNeb9OiY/.
Orbital toroidal gravitational waves are formed due to parametric resonance in the medium of the physical vacuum (these are soliton waves), which minimize the force of interaction between bodies in a very rigid superfluid medium of the physical vacuum.
Ie, any force leads to the formation of toroidal gravitational waves aimed at minimizing the force, including minimizing the inertia force. Therefore the force of attraction of the Moon to the Earth is minimized, and the law of gravitation of Newton is unfair for both stars in galaxies and for orbital bodies.
Those. The moon is in orbit in the potential well of gravitational fundamental interaction and is not attracted to the Earth. All fundamental interactions have a potential stability pit as a strong interaction.
For example, no one uses the law of gravitation of Newton to calculate the ephemeris of planets and satellites. It is impossible to explain complex trajectories of the orbital motion of bodies without quantum reformation of toroidal gravitational waves. On a photo of rings of Saturn https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/system/resources/detail_files/5512_IMG004512.jpg
depicts the principle of the formation of a complex trajectory of the orbital motion of the small bodies of the rings of Saturn under the action of toroidal gravitational waves of two gravitationally interacting satellites of Saturn. And here is showed, complicated moving of the Pioneers https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1MvF-AefpMmVXJfWjF1VF9JaVU/ .
However, the mechanism of minimizing the force with the help of toroidal gravitational waves is not ideal. No ideality is caused by the absorption coefficient in the medium of the physical vacuum (the Hubble parameter).
In order that the Moon does not fall from the orbit, due to the imperfection of the mechanism of minimizing the force of its attraction to the Earth, on the Moon constantly acts the force that pushes the Moon in orbital toroidal gravitational wave with an equivalent speed of 1 km/s (the first cosmic velocity of the Moon). Therefore, on the surface of the Moon, a gravitational potential is formed equal to the square of the equivalent speed of 1 km/s.
A constant force is also acting on the Earth, it pushes forward it on orbit around the Sun by a stream of physical vacuum in a toroidal gravitational wave, with an equivalent velocity of 8 km/s (this was discovered by Michelson and Morley). Accordingly, a gravitational potential equal to the square of the equivalent velocity of 8 km/s (the first cosmic velocity of the Earth) is formed on the Earth's surface.
For example, it was found that the Sun moves relative to the propagation medium of microwave radiation at a speed of 369 km/s. To minimize the resistance force in a rigid environment of physical vacuum, the Sun forms a huge gravisphere, several light-years in size. The force of the deceleration of the sun in the medium of the physical vacuum is determined by the Hubble parameter, as is the anomalous inhibition of the Pioneers and the red shift of the photons. The entire energy of the braking of the solar system is concentrated in the Sun according to the principle of the action of the heat pump. Through the force of deceleration of the Sun, its radiation power is easily calculated.
Thus, one of the most fundamental parameters in the universe is the energy dissipation coefficient (Hubble parameter) in the medium of the physical vacuum, which determines all the parametric processes in the universe. The stars in the Universe are shining, due to the dissipation of photon energy in the medium of the physical vacuum.
You also asked:
«i.e. there's no explicit proof of the 'curved space-time' hypothesis in the LIGO finding. Is that fair?»
Instead of curvature of space-time, there is a derivative of spatial coordinates in time. Equivalent of "'curved space-time" is the variable speed of propagation of gravitational interaction.
For example, on the surface of the Earth, the velocity of propagation of the gravitational interaction is 8 km/s less than at the periphery of the Earth's gravisphere. Therefore, the elements (gravitons) of toroidal gravitational waves (similarly to the coronal loops on the Sun) are accelerated in bodies, when exiting the Earth (or are decelerated in bodies, at the entrance to the Earth). Thus, the reactive force of attraction of bodies is formed.
In the Earth's magnetosphere often occur conversion powerful toroidal gravitational waves. In this case, there are intense https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B1MvF-AefpMmQnJaUXdOTEo4NW8 bursts of electromagnetic radiation over a wide frequency range and recorded the characteristic signals of gravitational waves LIGO project, that unreasonably taken as the signals from the "binary pulsars".
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Dear Vladimir Nikolaevich!
Your approach to necessity of revision of basic concepts and methodology used in modern physics, indeed are remarkable. I can say that I am fully share that "Fundamental science should be based on the fundamental principles of research, without use of abstract and ideal concepts". This is just great!
This demand oblige us to use in our constructions what we really have under our hands, without referring to this or that hypothetical or abstractly-arbitrary essences. Great Newton says "Hypotheses non fingo (Latin:"I contrive no hypotheses.")
But majority of advanced scientists can not do without different kinds of hypnotic things for now, which comes not from experiments or reality, but these coming from their brains and freely working fantasy!
Almost the same demand tried to putting Einstein, however it was defined by the corresponding negative stamp of the "operationalism"!
And the disappointed maestro claimed them the "people with amputated brains!" I am saying this history to show you how is difficult to bring people on the right way, especially when they do not wish listening on this.
You idea of loop gravity (the idea of thoroidal fields) seems to me workable that can brought to concrete results by simplest ways. If you allow me I will say this idea must be generalized applied to the concept of field in whole. I can talk on this matter so long but here is not the right place and right time for detailed examination of everything. Thus, I will only say that your criticism is very right and your efforts to solve fundamental problems also directed on the right way. So, I can wish you only a success!
Best Regards
Dear George,
Thanks for the kind words.
I also can talk on this matter so long but here is not the right place and right time for detailed examination of everything.
Dear Vladimir Nicolaevich,
Thank you for your nice words and appreciation of my submission.
I also have read and appreciated highly your essay.
You are listening well to the "music" of our universe.
I am a proponent of bot LQG and the emerging gravity as treated by Verlinden.
Especially the first is an explanation that can give my own Reality Loops model mathematical background.
The foundational laws of our reality are for now and in the future not attainable I think, but in this contest, you can see that there may be 7 billion approaches.
best regards and good luck to you.
(and thank you)
Wilhelmus
Hello Vladimir,
I like your essay (and thanks for looking at mine). I find that the map is not the territory (Korzybski) and the concepts of physics are not the territory of physics. However, the concepts should not be written off...we need them and they keep on changing ...its the way we move from truth to truth. And as you point out the territory is what we are after.
I am going to write a longer response, in a day, but right now I know this is an excellent essay and will vote so.
Thanks,
Don Limuti
Vlad,
I'm not sure what to comment regarding your essay. You present many interesting ideas with supporting calculations, but it is hard for me to see the big picture that you are trying to create. I think this is partly the result of your essay attempting to cover too much material. For example, between eq 12 and eq 13, you present the fine structure constant as being the ratio between two successive values in a series. This alone would have been sufficient for the entire essay. The fine structure constant is one of the biggest puzzles in Physics.
In any event, you have given me much to think about.
Best Regards and Good Luck,
Gary Simpson
Thank you for your comments on my essay. I have now re-read your paper.
First, your work on toroidal gravitation is too advanced and unfamiliar for me to follow without spending a lot ot time, though I do like your use of fractal structures. I have picked out a few ideas in your work which stuck a chord with me and which may or may not be useful or relevant.
You mention 'levels' of matter of which the electron matter is one available now. In my (lego-like) preon model the electron is at the lowest level being made from the smallest number of preons. My graviton (only in model#7) is at a higher level of complexity having more preons in it than the electron, so a pair of gravitons could become (as you have it) two pairs of photons in my model#7.
Entanglement, for me, needs to be mundane and not mystical. With a preon model I can make a graviton (almost but not quite exactly) out of two photons. And one could say that the two photons are entangled within the graviton. But it has to be a mundane and deterministic phenomenon for me. In some ways I see entanglement, and its mystical associations, as a Standard Model mechanism for coping with effects of preon structures without admitting the existence of preons. Similarly, all the various colour/anticolor entangled properties of gluons can be constructed mundanely using preons. In my model, gluons have more preons than the electron which allows the reaggregation of preon groups into a variety of colour/anticolour groups.
I have tried to model the Standard Model particles, using preons with SM eigenvalues and did not go beyond the SM's three generations. I see no need to limit the number of generations to three but I have no target data to try to build such particles. Many of the very high generations could by now have decayed into lower generations. This generates more space in the universe because of the exclusion principle and the very large number of lower generation particles that one can make from one higher generation particle.
A second point is your mention of obtaining work from vacuum energy. I have not thought about this much before now but it is indirectly in my model. In my model the accelerated electron does not simply radiate a photon. The electron interacts with a higgs field or a higgs particle (an additional higgs with low mass) and changes the spin and weak isospin [and chiral handedness] of the electron. Likewise a higgs particle or field is emitted when a photon is absorbed by an electron. So, in my model, even the simplest interaction depends on the use of vacuum energy. Sometimes giving and sometimes receiving.
In some sense the cold end of the universe represents a final phase when all the available vacuum energy has been used up. Creating an industrial scale extraction from the vacuum would speed up the end of the universe, so by Sod's Law it may be correct!
Best wishes
Austin Fearnley
Dear Vladimir,
Thank you for your interest in my essay.
Regarding the view in your essay."The gravitational constant reflects Kepler's third law in the solar system and is not fundamental constant for other planetary systems.
In my essay, the opposite view is obtained by my calculations.
„Each planet and star have its final lifetime, but Kepler's laws describing relations between them are eternal. The same applies to Newton's, Maxwell's and Planck's laws ... and the phenomena to which they relate." Still, I appreciate your efforts and the opposite views with a good score.
Regards,
Branko
Dear Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov,
I enjoyed very much your fascinating essay. This year, as last year, we are in agreement about the fundamental nature of gravito-magnetism. You state that:
"The nature of the fundamental elements in the universe can be in two basic phase states: in the form of toroidal gravitational waves and in the form of photons."
It's not clear to me that our understanding of toroidal gravity is the same. In 'The Nature of Quantum Gravity', I see induced gravito-magnetic circulation as the deBroglie wave induced by the electron's momentum density. Association of photons and neutrinos is not compatible with my understanding. I believe the gravito-electro-dynamics represented by eqns(1) in my essay iteratively yield appropriate solutions. One must go from the vortex to the torus, dynamically, to accomplish what we both wish to do.
You seem to say that the speed of gravitational interaction is 770 times greater than photon propagation; this would conflict with recent data from colliding neutron stars, which indicate gravity and light propagate at the same speed. We do agree that "distortion of space-time is more of an abstract concepts and physical process." And, as last year, when you say "there are no fundamental particles ... with a greater mass than the electron", I believe this should be "greater mass density".
So we agree on the fundamental importance of gravito-magnetism however the details must, in my opinion, be worked out from the dynamic equations. The non-linearity of gravity makes this quite a difficult task, probably accounting for the general lack of solutions in this area. It seems your calculations are heavily based on harmonics, and it is not clear to me that that is sufficient. I encourage you to continue developing your model.
My best wishes for continued development of your very interesting theory. I shall continue developing mine, and perhaps we will converge to a best theory.
Edwin Eugene Klingman
Vladimir,
Thanks for the positive comment on my essay. I have just read your paper, although admit I skipped over much of the detail, but got the general thesis. It is a very interesting paper, and I agree that matter is comprised of vortices held together (in part) by gravity. I think you would be interested in my paper where I model electrons and positrons as 3D Electromagnetic standing waves: http://vixra.org/pdf/1507.0054v6.pdf
My wave function solutions could work for any mass plugged in - leading to infinite possible particles, except that my suspicion is that only certain masses lead to just the right amount of wave curvature (due to gravitational bending) to allow stable particles to form. Thus only certain particles can exist. So this bending effect of gravity causes certain energy densities to be able to form stable wave function structures. Also I have long suspected that the Universe may have a fractal nature - the repeated application of simple laws building up bigger and bigger structures, but with a similar appearance at different size scales.
Best Regards,
Declan Traill
