The Nature of Time

Steve Dufourny

Hi jason, yes the vanity is a big global problem and all we are vanitious , we are all persuaded but a time for all, I have explained this , now let s speak about this physics. In my model also I have equations, I know like you my foundamentals in physics , and the correlated equation, the problem is not there, we speak about the general philosophy of this universe and the real origin of this universe, what I tell is simple, we cannot affirm that these photons are the only one piece of puzzle like if a kind of God osccilated with geoentrical algebras the points or strings of an infinite heat to create the geometries, topologies, matters and fields, so you cannot affirm that these photons are the primordial essence, and so you cannot affirm that these gravitons are correct in changing their momentum, posotions or others due to different frequences, oscillations, it is this that I try to explain you, if the photons are not the main essence and that the fields are not the main origin, so all is false simply and nobody has proven these gravitons nor the fields like origin nor the points or strings like main begining at this planck scale, you can utilise all the known equations , that will not change this fact, we cannot affirm, we just have assumptions.

Steve Dufourny

I am curious, what is for you this Dark matter ?

Steve Agnew

There is a two-dimensional time in the universe, one time dimension comes from the collapse of the universe wavefunction, which is made up of gravitons as biphoton and the second time dimension comes from the collapse of the photon wavefunction of the atom. Attached is a sketch of this idea.

It is true that a lot of very smart people have not figured this out yet, but the idea came from Paul Dirac's big Numbers Hypothesis. Dirac abandoned his idea because the galaxy measurements back then seemed to show that the fine-structure constant did not vary in deep space. Now, of course, there are plenty of more accurate measurements that do show variations in the fine-structure constant in deep space. So Dirac was right after all...

Dark matter is a straightforward result of the coupling of moving star decay or radiation. I call it gravitization because it couples moving stars with a vector force just like magnetization couples moving charges with a vector force...there is no need for the dark matter fiction at all. Stars radiate complementary photon dipoles and so stars radiate biphoton gravitons as well. Graviton emission is what couples star motions in galaxy rotation and not dark matter.

Matter-action discrete aether is therefore consistent with many unexplained observations like galaxy rotation, galaxy cluster rotation, fine-structure constant variation in deep space, pulsar decay, IPK decay, 11 year sunspot cycle, coupling of stellar variations in star clusters, and so on.

Steve Dufourny

you affirm things not proved like facts, the gravitons correlated with the biphoton are an assumption, so why you affirm , you could utilise the word maybe or I think that perhaps ....and after you explain but in affirming assumptions, it is not a rational deterministic comportment, I make the same for my theory , I don t affirm and I doubt and I try to prove, where have you proved your assumptions ?

Steve Dufourny

so in resume , don t affirm things not proved, make like all, try to prove by experiments or rigourous mathematical proofs and there we shall agree with you, you have not proved nor your gravitons , nor your ideas about this dark matter , like verlinde modifying this newtonian mechanics, like your ideas about this time, like saidf Feynman, I am smart enough to admit I am dumb, make the same, doubt, don t affirm assumptions and prove them,

Steve Dufourny

ps I work like all about the proof and formalisation of this quantum gravitation that I have reached, and I have considered this DM cold encoded in nuclei and a gravitation like main chief orchestra and I have a fith force even also, I have considered the Dirac large number, I have calculated and oddly it approachs the number of cosmological spheres, that is why I have considered the same number for the 3 finite series of 3D spheres coded, one space and two fuels, and I have utilised the lie groups, alg and derivatives, an intrinsic ricci flow in the main codes for the deformations, geometries and I have correlated with the clifford alg and the topological and euclidian space , more the hiopf fibrations on surfaces to rank the quasi particles andI have quantified this quantum gravitation , because simply the distances must be changed because the main gravitational codes are farer and that it is not an electromagntic force simply, the 3 main finite series of 3D spheres , with this dirac large number when they merge creates this reality, I have many assumptions that I don t affirm me, but be sure this reasoning explains the quantum gravitation at 10 exp - 67 Newton of force , we need a balance +, matter antimatter, negentropy entropy, cold heat, electromagnetism gravitation, particles antiparticles.... and we have in my model 3 aethers mainly , the luminiferous one, the gravitational one and the space without motion, so the glues are the two fuels, not only these photons, not need of biphotons and strings and gravitons,

Steve Agnew

Here is the pic...had to compress it a little more...Attachment #1: 2Dtime.jpg

Steve Dufourny

an antivers?? from what and why ? and also , since when the shpae of the universe is like this ??? we don t know, even the BB is an assunption even if we have interesting datas with the CMB and the inflation. So let s go deeper, what is this antiverse and why ? and why this shape ? the only anti gravity that I see is this Dark matter , and why the fact to consider only photons ???? it is a common interpretation but you could go farer , think beyond the box, I am curious , what is the main cause of this universe for you, be frank, do you consider a kind of creator or not and why , develop, and what are the foundamental mathematical and physical objects at this planck scale and why , after maybe we could see better,

Steve Dufourny

and for the time, it is not a real dimension, it is just a duration correlated with the motions and rotations, the quaternions can help to encircle this time like a duration, still the problem come from an odd interpretation of the GR and the time, this time is just an irreversible parameter considering the entropy and the evolution, we cannot check it, we can just decrease our internal clocks paradoxally with the equations of einstein, but for this we must go at c and it is still for the observations and if we make this in technology we d have problems,

Steve Agnew

Just saying this is false is not that useful...you should pick one measurement and give an alternative explanation...that is the way science works. Paul Dirac's Large Number Hypothesis is the origin of matter action...do you doubt Dirac?

I agree that time emerges from a simpler reality and does not exist otherwise.

The universe wavefunction collapse is the universe, but the wavefuction growth is the antiverse. Making the universe precursor a wavefunction leads to the outcome that there is both an antiverse as well as the universe. It is kind of a fun thing that gets rid of the big bang singularity...

Steve Dufourny

we know all in logic here how works the sciences, what I tell is simple, we can never affirm assumptions , we must like all prove our ideas and models, it is just this that I explain, you affirm the gravitons and it is an assumption , you consider the photons like the main primordial essence and we are not sure , we must doubt, personally I beleive that we have deep unknowns to consider and superimpose, we have just analysed a little bit since 100 years the electromagnetism and these photons and the GR, we know nothing .The antiverse is an assumption also and even the BB we cannot affirm, even with the CMD, we have probably also a deeper logic, so all your reasoning is not a fact but just a general assumption mixing several assumption, it is just this and like you told it is how works the sciences, we must prove. The singunarity is beyond our understanding at this moment. We are free to have all our models and assumptions but if they are not proved , they are just assumptions, it is only simple than this, and all rational thinker recognises this.

Steve Agnew

I agree that photons are the glue that holds the universe together with exchange. Photon exchange is what binds atom charges together. What we think of as "free" photons are not actually free of their atom precursors because photon wavefunctions have have tails that never go to zero. Remember that gravity is 1e-39th of charge and so it is those "free" photon wavefunction tails that bind atoms to the universe as gravity.

Steve Dufourny

it is not only a glue, it is fuel creating the bosonic fields of our standard model and our ordinary matter, they create the electromagnetism and heat, they permit also to see and observe because without photons, there is no light and so we don t see, but forget the vanity and the fact to be persuaded that they are the only one piece of puzzle, your ideas about the gravitons are just like many an attempt to unify the GR and the quantum gravitation and like I told, it is not renormalisable, because simply we have a deeper logic for the space and the gravitation than these photons, but apprently the thinkers have difficulties to think beyond the box, we don t need lessons about the known equations, I know my foundamerntals, we need to explain the unknowns and the photons only and this GR are not sufficient, I am irritated sometimes in seeing the thinkers repeating the works of others but don t create new partitions imaginatative in thinking beyond the box, maybe they lack of general studies and cannot insert a deeper philosophy , it is odd , since when the photons are proved like the foundamental essence ?? you speak to god lol and you beleive in strings and consider an infinite heat oscillating in 1D these photons ??? it is not sufficient to reach our deep unknowns, it lacks many things, the space and the cold dark matter for me, and the vanity of thinkers shall not change this reality,

Jason Wolfe

I don't have a clear picture of what dark matter is at this time, so I'm ignoring it. I know what spacetime is made of, and how to store a gravitational potential energy within it. I don't need to worry about dark matter.

Jason Wolfe

Expanding gravitons are intended to be the carriers of the physics constants and the "things" that make the laws of physics work. In other words, without a flow of gravitons coming from the Planck scale, the laws of physics don't exist.

Steve Agnew

The biphoton of gravity is a fact, not an assumption. Each hydrogen atom is a charge bond due to the Rydberg exchange photon. That hydrogen atom formed at the CMB when it emitted a Rydberg photon that was a phase complement of the Rydberg exchange photon. These are facts, not assumptions. Those two photons have anticorrelated phase, which is also a fact, and form a biphoton.

The strength of gravity today then gives the universe size today by that biphoton. That is a matter-action assumption that is consistent with all other observations, but is a different kind of universe...it is fun to explain something that no one else can explain...

Jason Wolfe

Expanding gravitons are consistent with both the derivation of special relativity, virtual photons and the spacetime interval.

In contrast, the captured graviton is consistent with wave functions and quantum entanglements.

Jason Wolfe

In my expanding graviton model, expansion at the speed of light means that time ( frequency) and length (wavelength) are built into the quantum states. Any particle that exist there is subject to the time being kept by that graviton.

Jason Wolfe

All that "many world's interpretation" of quantum mechanics is also wrong. It's like thinking that your house has 5 rooms, and that every room requires a whole new house. MWI is total baloney. But quantum mechanics does suggest that space itself is made of quantum wave functions. That's also equivalent to saying that space itself is made of wave functions (although the details of how are a little bit illusive).

So basically, the last major breakthrough in physics was general relativity. But hat was a 100 years ago. What have you done lately? Nothin'! You've been staring at black holes which has not given you much to brag about. I saw the picture of a black hole. It looks like a coffee stain.

I have a prediction. In the second term of president Trump, the aliens, the ExtraTerrestrials, will confirm their existence. You will have to learn to live with telepathic beings who are a lot further along scientifically, emotionally, mentally then you are. Won't that be fun! :)

Steve Agnew

Once again, you are the one who has nothing...your model does not explain anything. Matter action explains many heretofore unexplained observations:

Matter-action discrete aether is consistent with many unexplained observations like galaxy rotation without dark matter, galaxy cluster rotation without dark matter, gravity lensing without dark matter, fine-structure constant variation in deep space, pulsar decay, IPK decay, 11 year sunspot cycle, coupling of stellar variations in star clusters, and so on.

Your model accepts spacetime singularities, matter action eliminates spacetime singularities like black holes. Current science is just now understanding the neutron equation of state and what happens deep inside of neutron stars. Right now it is a mystery why every neutron star does not collapse into its own black hole.

Matter action has a path for quantum neutron equation of state...work in progress...science is fun...new science is really fun...

Steve Dufourny

unfortunally , all what you tell is an assumption not proved and all your ideas are not innovative, you reapet things known mixed with affirmations not proved, sorry but it is a fact, you have not proved that the DM does not exist, you don t consider foundamental objects and your philosophy general about the origin of this universe and this antiverse is just in your head unfortunally, like all you have just assumpotions and you have not proved them, so maybe you could doubt instead to affirm, it is not like this this that the sciences act, doubt and calculate your assumptions, after maybe we could accept them, at this moment you just discuss and nothing ir really concrete and proved. Too much affirmations not proved simply, me I don t affirm my assumptions, I work on them to prove them, you could make the same Steve Humbly in recognising this like all rational thinkers trying to explain our unknowns.

Steve Dufourny

I know what is a biphoton, I speak about the fact that you consider only photons like primordial essence, and also that you have made the same than verlinde in modifying this newtonian mechanics and so you forget this DM, it is not proved, your antiverse like balance, the same it is not proved, and you don t develop the correlated philosophy, thirdly, you consider gravitons, they are not proved and are hypothetical and 4 what do you consider like foundamental objects, develop, and explain , are they points or strings and why , and what are your geometrical algebras, but there also it is not proved, the nmatter action is not the problem and the bipohotons also, the proofs are the problem about this planck scale, the main codes and the philosophical origin, so you can repeat and tell all what you want, that will not change the fact that all are just assumptions not proved.

Steve Dufourny

your balance is not bad about a kind of antimatter for this universe ,so an antiverse but it is not proved and you cannot affirm simply and I repeat, the same for your ideas about this DM, and the same for your gravitons, but apparently you affrim these thingfs like facts, where are the formalisations and mathematical proofs ?

Steve Dufourny

the same for your aether , you consider a luminiferous aether like main primordial essence, it is not proved , and you speak about the matter action discrete like if we had what ??? what is the cause of these matters actions, fields ??? and why ? strings and oscillations and why ? have you proved them ?no you have not

Steve Dufourny

what I try to explain is that this antimatter is necessary because we need a balance for our ordinary matter , but the fact to affrim its origin and its mechanics is odd, we don t know this balance, all what we have actually are assumptions about this balance , and you can utilise the schrodinger and klein gordon equations or einstein fields equations , that will not change the problem that we don t know this real origin of this universal balance, I consider a cold dark matter but me I don t affirm, you you affir, feynman had its ideas but he didn t affrim, the same for dirac , they thought differently but they didn t affirm, they have not proved these unknowns simply and they recognised this. This universal balance is the main important problem for me and if we find the solution, we solve many unknowns, but we cannot affirm actually simply, so why you affirm ???

Steve Dufourny

that implies also that we don t know about this time , dirac and feynman had different points of vue about this anti matter, so how can we affirm things that we cannoty prove actually, it seems odd, that is why we must doubt and begin a post aboiut these things by maybe I beleive that...or I have an idea but I am not sure I have not proved still, but no, you you come with assumptions and you affirm them ????

Steve Dufourny

A sure thing is that we need this balance and we have had proofs with several experiments like the Lawrence livemoreNational Laboratory, if my memory is correct they have discovered these positrons with the decays matter anti matter, but we don t know nor its origin philosophical and physical. I have a model that I don t affir, Dirac had his ideas, Feynman also , like Hawking and the BHs, and others also but all we recognise that we don t know really this hard problem. We have just assumptions I repeat. For me and I don t affirm, it is correlated with this cold Dark matter because it is also encoded in nuclei for me, and the day that we shall check this anti matter it will be revolutionary , that can be even utilised for the propulsions and the energetical systems, but we are not there actually.

Steve Dufourny

In fact , all is a question of positive energy and negative energy but never it is said that we need an antiverse for this negative energy, and never it is said that we must only consider E=mc^2 , what we must do in logic is to complete this equation and the dark cold metter seems one of the most logic interpretation and furthermore can explain the evolution and furthermore can predict the future of this universe , the baryogenesis can be better understood simply with this negative energy like this cold dark matter turning in opposite sense even in my model and in the cold, that permit to balance really , I don t affirm of course, but I see like that. It is there that my equation intuitive becomes relevant for the baryogenesis and the neutrality of the dark matter,not need of an antiverse and all is inside the universe simply,See that this Dark matter explains the problem of this antimatter lacking furthermore and this evolution , it is very important like idea. All this reasoning permits to go deeper even than this BB and inflation, due to a kind even of primoridal gravitational essence and correlated energy, fields and matters, well see now the annihilation and the CP violation .... you shall understand better my cosmological model of spherisation

Jason Wolfe

The luminiferous aether, taking it out of the realm of alchemy and relocating into theoretical physics, is the effect of expanding gravitons that fill all of space with momentum and position quantum states... places for particles to inhabit and permissible velocities.

Steve Dufourny

we see a little bit the same about the expanding gravitons like main primordial essence, continue to search answers with this reasoning, it seems good, I consider just a different primoridal essence with this space and this dark cold matter but that converges a little bit with you , the balance for the baryons seems the answer

Jason Wolfe

Hi Steve,

My idea about the wave function being a captured graviton allows me to declare that the quantum operators, particularly the momentum operator, are properties of the graviton. The expectation value of momentum is,

[math]p_x = - i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial x}[/math]

Furthermore, the equation for a force is,

[math]\vec F = \frac{d\vec p}{dt}[/math]

For a wave function of the form,

[math]\Psi(x,t,\omega(x)) = Ae^{i(k_x x - \omega (x)t)}[/math]

We are left with the suggestion that a frequency that changes with position, like a blueshift or redshift, could be an indication that a force exists.

« Previous Page Next Page »