The Noise of Gravitons

John,

Good insights.

By a state change in the line, I mean the same thing as meant by measuring the motion of a pendulum bob forced from its equilibrium state.

The question of whether the bob was ever initially in its equilibrium state is the deep question posed to Lemaitre.

Nevertheless-- because I propose that time is a local nonlinear phenomenon (as opposed to those quantum theorists who characterize time as a nonlocal linear phenomenon)--every quantum measurement is time-dependent. As a consequence, as Einstein said, all physics is local.

If Steve Agnew is still around, I would like to engage. From an earlier post of Steve's:

"Graviton noise seems to be that perturbation and yet Science does not yet realize that this is actually the basis of physical reality. Once again, no one that I know believes this except for me...but I believe that one person can change the universe...and am... "

I'm with you.

Hi Tom, It is total nonsense because it cannot be massless and cannot comes from this GR and from these gravitational waves, you make all the same error . I know that it is difficult to accept , the only one way to success with the GR is to consider a massive gravity and it is not possible because if yes the speeds of gravitational waves change and so there are problems. These graitons must have a totally different logic and must have a mass .

And you can even cponsider the quantum state of the gravitational fieldam and a tensor product of the Hilbert states of the individual graviton mode, that will not change the problem.

The massless state of foundamental strings too have the same problem of renormalisation, if the thinkers cannot see this evidence and that we must consider a deeper logic than this GR , so frankly they are just encodctrinated by the photons and the GR simply, and the perturbations, the fluctuations, the degrees of freedom in this GR are not the problem, the problem is philosophical and the fact to add a deeper logic to this GR.

Regards

and one person cannot chage the universe, let s be humble please too . One person maybe can change the earth but apparently the vanity is a problem because I have created a concrete project to solve the major problems on earth with the forum Global collaboration, but all they are vanitious or sometimes jealous or other, that makes me laugh the humans frankly , all they beleive they are special, we are not special , we are all equal.

So to be frank you are oing to engage what lol, you have quantified it this QG, no , he has quantified it l, no , Wilczek has quantified it, no, is it really necessary to discuss about a general false reasoning about these gravitons massless ., lol you are going to make what, to change the energy tensor product with the geometrical algebras like this E8 and a non commutativity with different groups and orders, let s be serious, it is not renormalisable like this simply. The feynman diagrams cannot solve,m the GR cannot solve becaiuse the infinute resulsts cannot disappear and also the gravitons interact with nthemselves infinitelly.If the thinkers don t understand this, there is a serious problem there. And the planck scale it is the same still , it is just an assumption and all they try to unify G c and h with foundamental strings in 1D at this planck scale, is it a joke in fact , a hidden camera maybe and after hop hocus pocus a low vibrational state of energy and the ADS CFT correspondance, and after hop hocus pocus, different vibrational states in this GR explain the DM, I see an ocean of nnon sense still due to this relativistic prison, they are not able now to consider a deeper logic than just these photons, these strings and this GR,and it is sad because the 3D spheres and the DM and DE are there to solve.

and too I am going to tell you an assumption, for me our biggest error is to have considered only these photons like primary essence and this GR. And in fact the EFE and the SR and the mass energ equivalence have create this prison , because if the photons are not massless and that the gravitons are not massless and that we superimpose this DE and DM with the main codes for this DE, we can explain many unknowns in respecting the logic.Sometimes I tell me thaqt this GR and the EFE and the SR have simply been invented and improved by very smart persons to creatre this prison , like this during this time, the others that we don t see them continue to rank correctly the unknowns in secret in respecting newton, if you understand this, you understand the internal conpetitions about the physics and the conflicts of interest. I don t affirm but I tell me that it is not possible all this in fact , it is a joke. The best actual thinkers work in secret somewhere and don t publish , the otehrs makie a circus of vanity in trying to explain things not possible to explain with our actual lines of reasoning and this GR and SR. Threy give prizes lol but it is a joke

So in resume, if and I tell if my reasoning is correct, our biggest error is to have considered these photons massless and if the photons and the DM are simply fuelds of mass and of energy encoded in the real particles massless the DE , there all can be solved , and when they merge together the 3 systems due to fact that this DE possesses the main codes, the bayonic matter appers and so we must change the mass energy equivalnce for the baryonic matter in considering my intuitive equation.

so that implies even that this DE is pure energy and pure information and probably massless , but I am not sure of course, I try just to see how the universe acts to create this baryonic matter. If you consider the photons like the primary essence and the only one truth, many things are not renormalisable or explainable , I don t understand why the thinkers in majority consider only these photons and this GR and the fields like origin of the reality instead of particles in a superfluidity with the 3 systems free cosmologically speakinga nd the fourth when they merge the baryonic matter , many things are easier to explain in this line of reasoning.

You can see easily that if these particles,bosons in our standard model have a non zero mass , a very very very small mass , that solves the quantum gravitation, but also the constant cosmological problem, so yes I insist the biggest error if to have considered this GR like the only one piece of puzzle, the error of the SR and mass energy equivalence and also to consider thes ephotons massless and now these gravitons, and also to consider the fields like primary essence, It is not coimplicated to consider these photons have a very small mass and more energy and the opposite for thecold dark matter, all this reasoning does not contridict the thermodynalics, it even don t contredict the observations of a kind of GR wich must be simply adapted in superimposing the deeper parameters and a superfluidity for the 3 spacetimes.

Tom,

that brings up an interesting thought. Given the locality of pendular action, we can envision that pendulum swinging at various chosen distances from a center of gravity, yet still responding to the 'penny a day, doubled each day' harmonic series of a ballistic curve. Mechanically however, that curve operates along a circle arc determined by the fixed length of the rod or string. The bob cannot follow a ballistic curve, but its rate of change of fall does. So would we find the natural exponential function along a line from the pivot point of the pendulum, and the midpoint on the circle arc where the bob suffers reversal from fall to climb? jrc

Steve, please. I asked to have a dialogue with Steve Agnew.

Steve D.

If you hold that Time is not existential, and only an emergent phenomenon propagated by the relative motion among groups of physical objects, then why do you continue to speak of Spacetime? Spacetime by definition is physically real, including the Time parameter. That is perhaps the most fundamental disagreement between Quants and Relatives. No Time: No Spacetime. jrc

Tom,

"The question of whether the bob was ever initially in its equilibrium state is the deep question posed by Lamaitre."

Well, ... that also goes to the question of choice of geometry in GR, there being no center of a sphere from which to protract a radial boundary. In practical terms, that provides the dynamism inherent to GR, or more properly provides for the quantitative definition of dynamism in the real world of observable phenomenon. That Dog does hunt! :-) jrc

Yes I have answered you, there is a problem, If you cannot debate about what I say, it is in fact a problem one of vanity, or second you don t understand what I say .Like this it is said,

Like if the dialogue that you search is going to be relevant lol yes of course Tom, of course

John, Our error is to consider this time like a parameter that we can check, it is not the case and for the spacetime, it is just a tool that we observe with the relativity, it permits to rank the universe and the evolution because we see our past in going in space, I believe that many don t really understand the meaning of the spacetime of the GR, it is just a tool and the time is an invenction and due to the SR we just observe the past , that does not mean that we can check this time. And the EFE or others like the tensors or actionsor....are not the problem, that doe not change the meaning of this time wich is purelly irreversible on the entropical arrow of time universally speaking.

Tom, when you are on this kind of platform,you must understand that we have different points of vue and the real respecdt is to debate the different ideas in arguing. You don t do this , you put congratulations there and you don t explain deeper why . If you have persons debating other ideas , you could try to find roads for debating in tellingaguments against or for and why. Steve A have some ood ideas but there are common ideas like his antiverse , what I tell and repeat is that many consider only these pho9tons and GR like primary essence and they turn in rou nd in this philosophical prison, so now if you can tell me why the persons are persuaded that we have just this like primary essence , so give the proof , but you cannot give this proof and if ^persons are persuaded to better understand the philosophy of origin like if they have a syndrom of elected , it is not my problem, my problem is to find unknowns and our actual reasonings cannot do it

Forget it. I'll try to talk to Agnew privately.

Right on, John. Just the point I made in my paper, "Dynamic spacetime imposes Matter Wave Continuity."