The Present State of Physics, Mathematics, and Science

Fundamental nature has revealed these numerical clues: the speed of light is 299792458, the proton/electron mass ratio is 1836.15289, and the intervals between the atomic numbers of the noble gases is 2/8/18/18/32. What is the meaning of these numbers? Why not some other quantities?

Tom, that said on the other thread, the solitons semm important, the real secret is still the philsophiucal origin of the universe and why we have these solitons and the most importan why theyr propagate and these propagations are the secret and for this we have also the superfluidity becoming a key.They are everywhere these solitons in nmechanic, like in optic , like in hydrodynamic..... and they can be linear or non linear. For me the real interest now is to analyse the QFT and inconsidering the 3 systems merging that I explained, There are so deeper parameters implying these solitons and the works of sine gordon and schrodinger can be utilised but we need in logic to superimpose deeper equations of cause and mainly the space vacuum possessing the main codes .All this to tell that the cause of our standard model for example if not from the GR but from the spacevacuum of this DE and so the solitons and propagations and oscillations also in a sense ....

Thanks for post!

Electron Doping? by David Vognar

I think it helps to visualize physics so that it doesn't amount to equations that don't describe the "fitness" of their operations to physical reality as precisely as they could.

For instance, when we think of an electron, which seems to play the most vital part of Quantum Computing (because even the most advanced QC's try to achieve alternating states of superconductivity or single-state per macro state conditions), I think we can think of it as similar to doping sticks.

Considering a Bohmian 8 +1 + 1 + 1 + n +1... universal physical reality accessible at this point in history to human consciousness (with 4 implicate and 4 explicate dimensions of time/space/energy/matter and 1 rotating through point standing for the "0" dimension or vacuum space: Can we think of this one micro state per macro state condition as "doping" or adding through electron valences: https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.5027198.

This doping can be Levy Flighted to create a system whereby one can expressly interchange and "control" the doping and thus the motion of 8! states through the above paper, I suspect, or similar approaches of adjusting doping at the "0" vacuum site, which allows continuous jumps from say -4 to 3 in our world, or as we tune through doping downward, 2 to -1. The motion of such doping can be used to harness large amounts of energy and also fine tune energy levels. A resonance calculation that keeps the doping pace and procedure stable would have many applications for our physical world. Levy Flighting such a crystal doping regime means being able to rotate the crystal in a pattern consistent with one's intended effects. A suitable way to do so would be to suspend the crystal in zero gravity and influence it through fields of electromagnetic and containment fields.

Examining Superposition and The Measurement Problem, via comparison of Schrödinger's Cat with The Basketball Game Thought experiments

Summited to viXra not yet processed

Again a problem linking .I'll give you the viXra uRL when it's available. 7 pages

The Basketball Game compared to Schrödinger's cat

Basket ball going through hoop is like the cat encountering poison; The existential relationship outcome. They are obviously materially dissimilar scenarios but logically similar. The poison ends the cats life, the basket ball going through the hoop ends the game [Specified earlier]. Opening the box and noting the condition of the animal is like writing on the score card. The score- like, state outcome has come into existence upon box opening, preceded by the material condition of the animal. The basketball does not posses the score prior to being thrown'

State of the game outside of the court is unknown until score is acquired. What is the state of the game going to be found to be? Either 1 or 0 Likelihood fluctuating as ball goes back and forth. A mix of future outcome score to be found and imagined future that will not be found. This is abstract and not the material existing players (Nor players and court ensemble, or material ball and hoops.)

When a basket is scored it is detected and a signal is sent to the score board causing it to change its display from 0s indicating no baskets and game is still in play, to 1 indicating a basket has been scored and game is over. (The score is an abstract entity that can be represented and recorded in various ways, obviously different from the current activity of the existing, material team members.)

The score board sends the result to the separate press room. A journalist in the press room and collects the update on the game. At once the journalist knows if the game is over if a score of 1 is seen. If just 0s seen the game is still in play. it's not known how much play time has elapsed unless a stop clock in the press room is activated along with the air horn starting the game.

The 0 showing game still in play, is akin to a live cat outcome being acquired, 1 game over, a dead cat noticed and remembered or recorded. The outcome of seeing the score in the press room is knowing 1 or 0 with implications of that. If 0 the game is stopped at once. An air horn could be activated again with press of a button, in the press room, to signify the end of the game.

Stopping the game is akin to opening the box and rescuing the live cat. Getting the game score outcome is akin to forming a new observation product of cat on opening the box, such as a visual image, but could involve cinematography, video, movement detection. The game outcome acquired (game then stopped 'at once', by pressing the stop button, if not already over) is not the material players and/ or ball and hoop. It is a separate abstract entity. The mentally held or memorized or recorded vitality state of the cat is a separate abstract entity from the material animal.

The Basketball Game: rules, apparatus, starting the game, scoring a basket

The game involves two teams in a 'sudden death' play off. The game ends when either team scores one basket. When that will happen is not known but it will happen given sufficient time. When the game ends players are required to wait and rest, passively on the sidelines.

A basketball court is locked so no one can come in or leave. Inside the court there is a game starting device. It has a small radioactive source. When the source decays randomly it emits a particle which activates a detector. The detector sends a signal to a device activating an air horn, starting the game. [linking a quantum event to macroscopic one, instead of instigating process that will lead to a cats death it's decay leads to starting of the game and so inevitable progression towards score of 1, if the game is allowed to run its course] The game is stopped when the score is acquired from the separate press room, if not already over. Whether the game ends with a basket being scored or is stopped, players are required to wait and rest, passively on the sidelines

Scoring a basket is like release of poison killing cat. (While the state of play is unknown instead of supposed live-dead quasi real cat there would if modeled and interpreted the same way, game over and ongoing play simultaneously. There may be objection that the two teams are not a single entity like the cat. Each player could be considered.)

Different people can become aware of the recorded outcome score at different times without effecting the play that has already taken place. In the same way that watching a sports replay does not effect the earlier game or post game activity. Each person's viewpoint of the state of play (assuming they think they are getting live feed) depends on when they receive the information. There is nothing paradoxical this is just relative perspectives. This is like the time difference between Wigner and friend receiving information on the vitality state of the cat.[writing about what is Wigner's friend cut here for brevity]

The game outcome acquired, (game then stopped 'at once'), is not the material players and/ or players and court/ ball/ hoops ensemble or ball and hoop. It is a separate abstract entity.

Measurement problem, Wikipedia: "In quantum mechanics, the measurement problem is the problem of how, or whether, wave function collapse occurs."

There is no existing state prior to measurement. There is no relation with the measurement apparatus that can give a singular 'measured this way' outcome. This had been widely interpreted as meaning it is not something actual, rather than lacks a relative to a specific observer viewpoint or measurement process. The existing unseen, unmeasured object can still exist (in absolute relation to everything else existing locally). Object permanence is relevant. We do know from object permanence that things can exist without being seen or measured. Quantum physics does not allow for this, and has particles becoming real at measurement with random outcome.

Evidence of existing unseen and unmeasured; Peekaboo, Object permeance, work of Jean Piaget, Appearing and transformation illusions ,using concealed objects, such as fireee ito doves using dove pan, rabbit from 'empty' hat, Is the Moon there when nobody looks analyzed by Georgina Woodward.

To Conclude: The solution to the measurement problem of quantum physics can be given.

Found by considering what a wave function is in relation to existence. A wave function is not physically real being a pre-measurement superposition of; what will be the outcome after the measuring process has happened and imagined outcomes that will not come to be. It does not collapse causing the definite state object to come into being. There is nothing physically real to collapse. It is just replaced with a new abstract entity, which is a score like outcome. The outcome 'score' can be recorded in different ways, be held in mind (thought) or memorized.

The object after measurement is a different entity from the abstract score like outcome. When the replacement is done the wave function is no longer relevant. What might be is replaced by what is known to be. What is before the knowledge is acquired and part of mental awareness or stored for future access is another matter.

There will be temporal delay between the physical 'measurement' interaction happening and registering of a detection. Thinking of Schrödinger's cat, the cat and poison interaction can have happened some time before opening the box but until the box is opened what might be found (to be found and imagined but will not be found) is still relevant. Keeping in mind the wave function is not the animal.

This also makes Wigner's friend type problems not paradoxical. The knowledge of friend, who is told the outcome by the observer, and direct observer of the cat can be different without logical contradiction. Its about whether or not the abstract outcome score has been acquired (individual replacement of wavefunction i.e. what might be found) not the condition of the system under consideration in the meantime. That different observers replace the wave function at different times, when they have access to the information, is no more strange than relativity. Individuals forming their own observation products when they have received the information and not before.

Supporting evidence relevant to completeness of Relativity theory and to quantum mechanics.

The following question and it's examination is relevant to the concept of existing things and of object permanence.

Is the Moon there when nobody looks?

Is the Moon there when nobody looks? A question of Einstein's.

There are two questions that can be asked about the question, which is ambiguous.

1. What is meant by, 'the Moon?'

It could be referring to the observer independent materially existing Moon. Or the observer generated relative observation products called the Moon too. There are also other perceptions related to the mental concept of the Moon. That may be 'in mind' without observing the Moon.

There is also potential sensory data emitted by the Moon but not yet received by an observer, so neither existing moon nor yet observation product.

2. What is meant by 'there'?

It could mean within the configuration of existing things independent of observation? But it doesn't mean that because the questioner was Einstein and he didn't differentiate observer independent existing things from observer relative semblances of existing things.

He wants to know if the existing Moon is in Spacetime when not observed.

It is not there, in space time. The seen Moon is seen as an Image semblance of the existing Moon which is a spacetime image. It is not formed if potential sensory data (electromagnetic signals) are not received and processed into the observation product called the Moon.

The existing material Moon is an observer independent actualization. We know from the idea of object permanence that it is likely the Moon still exists when not seen. Existing in an absolute configuration of existing things which is not in observation product spacetime, but elsewhere.

Response to questions on viXra concerning Moon analysis-

What is an observer? is a valid, worthwhile question I also address elsewhere. An observer must be capable of receiving potential sensory data, electromagnetic radiation where vision is being considered, and must subsequently produce an observation product or products. The observation product shows the observer viewpoint or relative perspective. The rivet in the bug rivet paradox is not an observer as it is incapable of producing an observation product .

Where is the question? It is abstract and can be in different forms and locations; In active thought as electrical activity of brain structure, or processing within computer circuits, within the existing material form. As memory stored as material structure of neurons and synapses also existing. It could be stored in other formats such as on magnetic tape, also material existing. Its written form could be seen in which case it is on the existing paper, in the existing brain activity and a virtual spacetime observation product. It is taken as a given that existing and observation products do not occupy the same type of space.

What is a question? It is usually a request for an informative response from another person. Though it can also be directed to an animal, machine or sometimes even an inanimate object. Questions can also be rhetorical. Not intended to gain information but used as a figure of speech to berate, belittle or hector another. As I believe, [ }, your questions were intended. A written question is usually denoted by a question mark at the end of the sentence. In spoken English a question is usually signified by inflection of the voice at the end of a sentence.

Reply to comment on viXra concerning Moon analysis-

... From Oxford languages: Metaphysics, " the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, identity, time, and space".

These are foundational questions, perhaps better suited to readers of the FQXi forum and blogs.

The starting question is Einstein's. He thought it worth considering.

Examination of this question provides further evidence of object permeance. Which is to say objects still exist when not seen or measured.

This is relevant to Relativity which treats observation products as existing objects; there is no distinction. Which is a categorization error. It is relevant to quantum physics which currently is interpreting having no pre-measurement state as a quasi real condition. A mix of future outcome and imagined but won't be-s stands instead.

As I say at the beginning of the paper re. existing things and object permeance: Concepts with relevance to identifying the incompleteness of Relativity theory and Quantum mechanics, explaining why there is paradox and strangeness associated with both theories.

Another reply to comment on viXra

Schrödinger's cat and the basketball game described use different apparatus but are logically similar. If I said a Black hole is to celestial phenomena as Grapefruit is to fruit, they are logically similar statements. Both give the 'object' and a larger set to which that whole 'object' belongs

Schrödinger's cat thought experiment is Schrödinger's not mine. I am just providing a logically similar scenario. Which makes it easier to grasp that the outcome is a new abstract entity.

BTW I would not have by myself chosen to compare a black hole and a grapefruit. I was responding to the claim: "This is like trying to explain the physics of a black hole by comparing it to a grapefruit." Wolfgang Sterm. That is false. I am, in the paper, called 'The Basketball Game Thought Experiment', giving numerous logical comparisons provided by the alternative thought experiment with similar logical structure to the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. I demonstrate by example what I mean by logical similarity using the black hole and grapefruit. They are obviously physically very different things.

Reply to comment on viXra concerning Moon analysis-

I do not say I'm presenting a scientific analysis. I'm looking at the logic and semantics of the question.

I do not assert the Moon is only an image in the space-time thus electromagnetic radiation. You are putting your own confusion 'into my mouth.' You are muddling categories. What, 'the Moon " refers to isn't specified by the question which is a problem for answering the question correctly . That is what Einstein didn't do, though he was close in posing the question.

Abraham Pais said "We often discussed his notions on objective reality. I recall that during one walk Einstein suddenly stopped, turned to me and asked whether I really believed that the moon exists only when I look at it." Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 863-914 (1979), p. 907 .Like the Schrodinger's cat paradox calling attention to the lack of pre measurement objective state,he uses the Moon for the purpose. This is about objective local realism too.

'the' Moon' can mean; the observer independent existing material object, the seen observation product , experienced as existing externally but generated by internal brain activity which produces virtual spacetime, the concept and the visualization of the moon by brain activity we call imagination. Though not usually referred to we can also mention the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the material body but not yet received by an observer. That is what I refer to as potential sensory data ,signals (or potential sensory information .)

The observation product called 'the Moon' only, isn't generated by the observer when not looking or eyes are closed or blindfolded etc. There is still the existing observer independent moon, the potential sensory data in the environment, the concept of Moon held in imagination stored in memory and other records.

I am providing evidence of object permanence. The illusions and child psychology also relate to object permanence. That is about existing unmeasured and unobserved i.e. Observer independent existence.I do not say I'm presenting a scientific analysis. I'm looking at the logic and semantics of the question.

I do not assert the Moon is only an image in the space-time thus electromagnetic radiation. You are putting your own confusion 'into my mouth.' You are muddling categories. What, 'the Moon " refers to isn't specified by the question which is a problem for answering the question correctly . That is what Einstein didn't do, though he was close in posing the question.

Abraham Pais said "We often discussed his notions on objective reality. I recall that during one walk Einstein suddenly stopped, turned to me and asked whether I really believed that the moon exists only when I look at it." Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 863-914 (1979), p. 907 .Like the Schrodinger's cat paradox calling attention to the lack of pre measurement objective state,he uses the Moon for the purpose. This is about objective local realism too.

'the' Moon' can mean; the observer independent existing material object, the seen observation product , experienced as existing externally but generated by internal brain activity which produces virtual spacetime, the concept and the visualization of the moon by brain activity we call imagination. Though not usually referred to we can also mention the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the material body but not yet received by an observer. That is what I refer to as potential sensory data ,signals (or potential sensory information .)

The observation product called 'the Moon' only, isn't generated by the observer when not looking or eyes are closed or blindfolded etc. There is still the existing observer independent moon, the potential sensory data in the environment, the concept of Moon held in imagination stored in memory and other records.

I am providing evidence of object permanence. The illusions and child psychology also relate to object permanence. That is about existing unmeasured and unobserved i.e. Observer independent existence.

Reply to comment on viXra concerning Moon analysis-

The analysis of the logic and semantics of the question, as it is written/ has relevance to Relativity theory and quantum mechanics because it helps with understanding of the mental concept of object permanence.

The biology of vision works by the eyes receiving electromagnetic radiation , which stimulates the photoreceptors. In response nerve impulses are sent (or are modified) to the brain. Processing of the nerve impulses in the brain generates an observation product or products, The product generated is experienced as external. In space time . it is not (the image) outside of the body of the observer. If no image is formed the image can not be a part of the observation product , so is not seen anywhere.

I did not realize there would be such incomprehension of the subject. I'm sorry i have presumed too much. I've been told i tend to overcomplicate my explanations, and can simplify them. The explanations in the comments is hopefully compensating for the brevity of the paper

Detailed inquiry nto the meaning of the question 'Is the Moon there when nobody looks?' and related matters, of relevance to foundational physics

Abstract

The usefulness of the analysis is presented. Some history of the question related to Einstein is given along with the supposed motivation for asking it. Questions are asked about the meaning of the starting question. What is meant by 'the Moon?, and what is meant by: there? The lack of precision of the question is identified. The biology of vision is briefly discussed. What is an observer? is considered. For completeness 'What is a question?' And, 'Where is a question?' are also discussed. Further evidence of unseen and unmeasured existence is given. This paper concerns Metaphysics.

'll try to link