Dear Russell,

Thank you very much for your latest post, it's exactly the kind of thing I was expecting and wanting to hear. I like the phrase "smallest mechanical device" which gives the idea some rigitity. It does have a comical aspect to it, especially since it's so easy to understand to the layman, and would perhaps put a bit of 'egg on the face' of the professional mainstream scientific community. It's certainly been overlooked imo.

As to the definition of what makes them move I put down to the force of creation. I have a mental image of a hypersphere which has a lot of 'thriving energy' on the outside but a complete void or bubble of nothingness on the inside. One can imagine that this hypersphere or bubble spontaneously appeared and grew due to the non-perfect dynamics of the outer thriving energy. Energy from the ouside then penetrated the inside in a fountain of spin. This spurting spin energy then appears to 'us' as having structure, but perhaps is an illusion simply due it's spin energy, or it's spin momentum. The 'it' may not be anything that we understand as a substance, but may just evaporate or vanish with radiation for example. Once it's spin energy has dwindled via radiation, then perhaps the phenomenon simply ceases to exist and a void is left in it's place?

You're almost there in understanding the complete meaning of the phrase "Anyone who uses the term "mass" is unwittingly subscribing to a spacetime continuum worldview imo". It's a very important point I'm making, yes. It's to do with the philosophy of worshipping a mathematical formula as sacrosanct. In Star Trek we are constantly reminded that "You cannot change the laws of physics", but this is a misconception from the 1900's. Newton's lack of a mechanism to explain the force of gravity left his equation as an approximation of reality. The equation itself denotes that all substances attract one another equally in all directions. This has just been assumed though, and appears to work well on the scale of planets but doesn't work well at the scale of particle physics. Think about it a bit more. A helical particle has orientation. This defies his equation. I have to go quickly, cheers for now. Alan

  • [deleted]

  • Post #19

Rather surprisingly, this new hypothesis of our climate would even allow for the sun to be hotter during an ice age! It would account for the megafauna which is evidenced by their numerous fossils which would be due to an abundance of megaflora, w.r.t more sunlight. There's even evidence that tropical monkeys were also of mega proportions when compared with their modern counterparts:

There's a cave in Brazil where remains of a much larger than normal species of monkey were found. How did they grow so big? Were the trees twice as big, with twice size fruit? That's the only possible scenario isn't it?? Webpage title: Discoveries Under Brazil.

"The skull of Caipora bambuiorum, one of the two complete primate skeletons recovered from Toca da Boa Vista. It closely resembles the living spider monkey, but is more than twice the size, suggesting that South American monkeys participated fully in the mega-faunal phenomenon of the last Ice Age.

Frontal view of the crania of Protopithecus (left) and Caipora (right), both from Toca da Boa Vista. They resemble living South American monkeys that inhabit the top levels of the tropical forest canopy, but they were significantly larger than any living species. Further exploration of Toca da Boa Vista hopefully will yield more primate species that also were quite large compared to modern monkeys."

Dear Alan,

Interesting! Now that you have asked us to look at your essay and re-introduced concept as a commentary and a possible reality, it seems like it would be up to you to show how it translates to equations with units that ultimately describe things measured in physics. It seems like a great way to get people to think and we want that specific logical detail to back it up.

Your screw and mass comment have helped me to look at my own ideas so I am happy you gave me a poke!

Kind regards, Russell Jurgensen

Dear Russell,

I'm glad you have gained something from my ideas. They are perhaps more than you yet appreciate w.r.t finding a mishap in the evolution of manistream scientific dogma.

I have studied simulation modelling at masters degree level and now have a mentality which reflects the expetise of my Brunel Unversity professor. I don't feel the need to translate my pictorial dynamics into equations with SI units at all. What I want to do is find someone good enough to express the ideas from the very start of creation. A simulation model of reality from start to finish is my ultimate goal. The details come later imo.

Best wishes, Alan

    Dear Alan,

    I'll keep pondering your comments and I look forward to hearing about your developments.

    How would you classify your thoughts in the spectrum between philosophy and physics? I understand pure physics as something that can be tested and measured, but it does seem physics could be appropriately influenced by philosophy. History shows plenty of inappropriate influence and maybe that is why physics resists external philosophy. Some people (I can't remember the reference) think this puts a straight-jacket on physics. I see you trying to break out of that straight-jacket. So I'm curious how you attempt to resolve a philosophically leaning idea to translate it to predictable tests in physics. Perhaps that is not the goal. Or does one have to say at some point that no testing can be done beyond here?

    By the way, thanks for commenting again on my essay with a link to the LHC observations.

    Kind Regards, Russell

    PS. (Oops) By "beyond here" I'm asking about a selected point in the theory (not all of physics).

    Dear Russell, I've just sent this following development I made just last night to Peter Jackson via email:

    I'm still thinking in very abstract terms of helical geometry and I'm quite lost in the technical language of others' papers at present. We have both hit on this fundamental pattern, but I'm also exploring a fractal helical dimension which is proving fruitful. An imaginary helix of a helix gives the second lowest possible mechanical force carrying particle, the gluon. This open ended spinning helix of spinning helices will evaporate, releasing the smaller force carrying particles, the gravitons. A helix of gluons is equivalent to a neutron and vice versa. This proposed spiral structural fractal index (SSFi) gives a new visualisation of quantum mechanics. The proton radiates the electron effect giving electron bonds between hydrogen nuclei. I'll have to scan my notes after lunch and post them in a forum so that I can hyperlink them from my FXQi essay thread. It'lll be easy to explain that way, rather than write from memory.

    SSFi (1 to 4)

    1. graviton

    2. gluon

    3. magnetic field

    4. electric field

    Russell, I really appreciate your comments and admiration for the screw idea. I know you are thinking along the same lines. Best of luck with further developments. Bye for now, Alan.

    Alan

    I can see what you're saying, but can't see how it could be in any way falsifiable or resolves any problems. But I can see it could provide scaled 3 dimensional oscillation, which does have to be addressed at some time. How would the polarisation and charge processes work?

    The spiral form in the DFM comes from the blazar (See photographic evidence of Centurus A etc.) and the quandrupolar CMB asymmetry analysis. It's logic is the resolution of the twin opposing jet problem from an essentially symmetrical toroid black hole. A tokamak toroid is effectively a closed ended rotating helix with the fields rotating round the body. (Tokamaks are the nuclear engineering basis of fusion reactor research).

    There is talk of micro black holes, which may certainly place the helix in the quantum domain! You certainly deserve a good score for imagination alone.

    Does any of that help your model?

    Best wishes

    Peter

      Hi Peter,

      I can tell that you have a deep and detailed understanding of many technical fields which I'm not familiar with unfortunately. My thinking is still very much in the abstract form. I'm not so keen on the micro black hole idea just yet, but maybe it's a feature which will need addressing at a later date. There's another angle concerning the latest LHC results of 'flocking particle emmissions' which I'm having a dialogue with someone about and how the helical model can help explain it. I'll give the link below. It may be worth reading the comments as the site holder seems very interested and is looking into it all in further detail.

      subrealism

      "In its first six months of operation, the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva has yet to find the Higgs boson, solve the mystery of dark matter or discover hidden dimensions of spacetime. It has, however, uncovered a tantalizing puzzle, one that scientists will take up again when the collider restarts in February following a holiday break. Last summer physicists noticed that some of the particles created by their proton collisions appeared to be synchronizing their flight paths, like flocks of birds. The findings were so bizarre that "we've spent all the time since [then] convincing ourselves that what we were see ing was real," says Guido Tonelli, a spokesperson for CMS, one of two general-purpose experiments at the LHC.

      The effect is subtle. When proton collisions result in the release of more than 110 new particles, the scientists found, the emerging particles seem to fly in the same direction. The high-energy collisions of protons in the LHC may be uncovering "a new deep internal structure of the initial protons," says Frank Wilczek of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, winner of a Nobel Prize for his explanation of the action of gluons. Or the particles may have more interconnections than scientists had realized. "At these higher energies [of the LHC], one is taking a snapshot of the proton with higher spatial and time resolution than ever before," Wilczek says.

      When seen with such high resolution, protons, according to a theory developed by Wilczek and his colleagues, consist of a dense medium of gluons--massless particles that act inside the protons and neutrons, controlling the behavior of quarks, the constituents of all protons and neutrons. "It is not implausible," Wilczek says, "that the gluons in that medium interact and are correlated with one another, and these interactions are passed on to the new particles."

      If confirmed by other LHC physicists, the phenomenon would be a fascinating new finding about one of the most common particles in our universe and one scientists thought they understood well."

      Thanks for the comment about the imagination, much appreciated! Alan

      I have just thought of a mental image to describe the proton i.e. hydrogen nuclei. The three quarks, which are in ring donut helical configurations are linked in a chain. The centre quark is neutral, with opposite travelling ring helices within it's donut. The outer two quarks are the same config as each other, with the same directional spinning helices. This gives an overall torque on the three linked quarks, which accelerates the entity into an overall spin. It's a analogous to a catherine wheel spinning, with the centre quark acting as a pivot and the two outer quarks providing the synchronised thrust. Catherine wheel

      Some scans of my drawings can be seen here, see post #3; Spiral Structural Fractal Index (SSFi) in QM Describes Quantum Particle Interactions imo

        It's the fast spinning ion which creates the hydrogen bond by giving the emitted gravitons a larger helical form!

        Hello Alan,

        I am not totally approving of your essay, though I enjoyed it. However; I need to express my gratitude. Or perhaps, I need to inform you - at least - that I am flattered you have used resources I created, as I'm primary author of the Wikipedia article on Fractal Cosmology. Some of the same material also went into a journal publication in Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, as it turns out.

        I've thought about the LHC flocking effect myself, though I think it relates to entanglement and decoherence. I think this effect is likely explainable by a fractal spacetime fabric, as well, however. I'm afraid the Archimedes' screw example is a bit of a stretch as that device works 'because' of gravity, so it takes effort to imagine it as the cause. On the other hand, the same is true for the commonly-used example of the deformed sheet.

        But thanks for making the effort to participate.

        Regards,

        Jonathan

          FYI -

          We have been talking about Muller's work on Climate change over on the Azimuth forum. I just downloaded the orbital inclination paper you provided. Thanks for that. And thanks also for writing a paper that made me think without making my head hurt.

          Regards,

          Jonathan

            I'm really excited that you've picked up on their paper. It's just the mechanism which is lacking imo. Please think about how an inclination tide could drastically effect the strength and direction of the ocean currents which are critical in the determination of the onnset of glaciation. It's a good fit if one assumes that the 360 mile wide innermost core of the Earth is both made of a non-standard matter and is rugby ball shaped, as if standing on it's end waiting to be kicked. See here [link:www.spacedaily.com/news/earth-02z.html]Earth's New Center May Be The Seed Of Our Planet's Formation[/url]. I'll take a look at the Azimuth forum when I get the chance. My parents are visiting at the moment so I feel quite busy. Thanks again, Alan

            Hello Jonathan,

            It's a small world then! I was overjoyed when I found the Fractal Cosmology entry on Wikipedia, I didn't think it would be in there. The moderators of online science forums dismiss this topic out-of-hand, but that's probably just a reflection of their scientific knowledge more than anything.

            The mechanical screw is a better fit than a spacetime fabric! QM is all about mechanical particles which interact just like an Archimedes screw does. What better way to combine gravity with the quantum world?! Nevermind, we have a difference of opinion on that one then.

            Thank you for your kind comments about my essay and the new ideas. Kind regards, Alan.

            • [deleted]

            • Post #35

            Hi Alan,

            Your "spirals of spirals" ad infinitum sounds similar to Sreenath's logarithmic spiral (Golden spiral?) and similar to my expectations of fractals and scales.

            I need to read your essay more thoroughly and comment on the Archimedes screw idea.

            Have Fun & Good Luck!

            Dr. Cosmic Ray

              • [deleted]

              • Post #36

              Hi Alan,

              Reality is both fractal and discrete. For instance, I think that reality is a(near?) infinite Cantor set with several self-similar scales, but we observe integer numbers of dimensions (3 space 1 time), not fractal numbers of dimensions. Perhaps fractals and scales combine using properties similar to Lucas Numbers (please see my essay) to form perfect integers.

              Regarding Archimedes' Screw, this could be related to String Theory, where gravitational field lines, and the length of the screw, follow strings. The rotation of the screw represents time, and the extremely fine thread of the screw (fine because it must represent the normally weak gravitational force) is a result of scales. If all screws have the same thread pitch and rotation, then all applied forces would be solely attractive or solely repulsive. In the case of gravity, we know that this is strictly attractive.

              Have Fun!

              Dr. Cosmic Ray

              • [deleted]

              • Post #37

              I wonder how screw thread pitch and rotation is related to CPT symmetry?