## Sunday, November 12, 2006

### The Wisdom in a Grain of Sand

The Wisdom in a Grain of Sand....:)

What is in a grain of sand????...:)

The key to understanding the Whole Universe..>:)

That is what I believe... Check it yourself..>:)

Many of us have seen the experiment that demonstrates vibrational normal modes on a drum...:) For people who is not musically inclined, a drum is an acoustic cavity covered with a leather or elastic membrane...

The stretched material (leather) will vibrate and have normal modes defined by the boundary conditions. In this case, the boundary conditions is to have zero amplitude on the circular wooden frame that holds the leather sheet.

Normal modes are standing waves with an increasing
number of nodes.

As you can see, the mode (1,1) has a node right in the middle. That is where the grains of sand will go.

Up to now this has been just High School Science...:) How come such a trivial problem can explain the whole Universe???

The answer is always in a change in paradigm or how do you look at what everyone have looked before and see something nobody has ever seen...:)

The solution is to think about our minute grain of sand as my four-dimensional dilator..>:) and the vibrations on the drum as the dilaton fields on the 3D Shock-Wave Hyperspherical Universe.
Let's take it slowly... One don't want to have a mental cramp...:)

If one considers how the standard experiment is done, one will probe only the second harmonic, that is, one will excite the drum membrane using a sound wave with the second harmonic frequency while pouring sand over the membrane.

As the frequency of the sound wave comes close to the second resonance frequency mode (1,1), the sand motion changes from chaotic into a coherent displacement and all the grains of sand move into the nodes. I mentioned the second harmonic because the first has no nodes...

That is how everyone plus the kitchen cat sees the experiment... That will not bring you any wisdom...

To see what I see, you have to see the grain of sand as my four-dimensional dilator. Since the grain of sand doesn't vibrate, one should consider it a zero amplitude dilator with undefined phase. Under these conditions the grain of sand (zero amplitude dilator) will move into the node where the vibration (dilaton field) has zero amplitude.

Up to now, there is no new wisdom... Now consider that the drum is excited by a sound wave with frequency equal to the sum of the the first and the second resonance frequencies. This frequency is the sum of the w1 and w2, first and second resonance frequencies of the drum.

Now add to the grain of sand an unique vibrating amplitude, the difference beating (w2-w1) and a random phase. The difference beating frequency is choosen because I wanted to make the correspondence between the dilator and a coherence between two normal modes as in my model. The beating or difference frequency is the tunelling frequency between two eigenstates of the 4D tunelling rotating double well potential.

The usage of the sum frequency to nonlinearly excite the two modes of the drum was used just to simplify the experiment (not to introduce sub-harmonics).

Now that we have the two normal modes beating with a fixed phase shift between them, one can start pouring the vibrating sand on the drum...

The first thing you will notice is that the grains of sand will not all want to move into the nodes... All of them vibrate and they don't want to be in a region where nothing is happening...:)

They will relocate themselves into the regions where their vibration is in phase with the supporting vibrating drum and the local membrane vibrating frequency is equal to the difference beating.

This simple thought experiment - I don't have vibrating sand nor a drum - explains my Lagrangian Principle. Dilators will move into regions where they are in phase with the dilaton field. Using this simple argument I reproduced all forces of nature.

The quantum part of it comes about if you make the sand very thin along one coordinate and make them to rotate, thus impacting the vibrating membrane differently depending upon their rotational phase. When the grain of sand is flat on its back, it impacts the most the drum membrane...(not a perfect analogy...but...:) When it is on its side (90 degrees rotated), it is too skinny to interact appreciably with the drum membrane. I guess I would have to make the membrane porous, such that the skinny grain of sand would not interact at all with the membrane....:)

This kind of on and off interaction is the basis for the Pseudo Time-Quantization.

Applied to our drum it would mean that all the grains of sand would interact only at specific phases of their rotation and would all move towards the maximum amplitude or zero phase, thus creating a Cosmological Sand Coherence....:)

Rotational and dilator frequencies have to be related due to the fact that we only see one side of these rotating dilator at each de Broglie step.. An electron is always an electron - has always the electron mass - and a proton is always a proton -has always the proton mass..

This is the basis for Pseudo Time-Quantization...:)

This is a lot of Wisdom to be in such a small grain of sand...:)

It is also im my paper - the same one that Los Alamos is censuring..>:)

It is a National Shame...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS_ I finally learned how to allow you to forward the blog to someone you might consider to benefit from it... The envelop icon below allows for you to email my blog to everyone...

Please do so and also visit the Philica link on the top of the page... It is important that everyone who can understand it, learn about this theory....

I still don't have a review at Philica... I understand why... The paper is difficult to read... complex concepts, some math... and people don't want to stick their neck out ... like the Los Alamos ArXives moderator... It is safer just to say nothing than to express an opinion...:)

I exhort you to do it differently... Take a position!!!... bring this blog to all your friends and colleagues... This might be difficult, but I am blogging it into simple bits... hoping everyone can understand...

The more people visits my Philica Paper the more likely it will be seem by the scientific community and some resolution will take place...:)

Cheers.

## Friday, November 10, 2006

### No News in The Front...

Nothing New in The Front...:)

I have to say that I am disapponted with Los Alamos ArXives... I was hoping to receive some hint on why did they considered my paper
INAPPROPRIATE...:)

I tried to guess why... but guessing might lead to errors..>:)

I think "INAPPROPRIATE" is a strong word for a brave new idea... It takes courage to state a new idea... it takes tremendous effort to publish it... The stablishment is just not friendly to creativity from others...:) and I was a scientist in the past... and still am one at heart...

As a scientist, I learned that Science made their quantum leaps when challenged... I presented a full frontal challenge to current Science and instead of being embraced, my theory was shunned - wait a second... it didn't have a chance to defend itself... It was censured......:) It is a shame... a dark day in Science...

I can understand that the most backwards sectors in society might consider it INAPPROPRIATE... dangerous ideas... but Science... The Moderator, who I suppose is a scientist, should had recognized the self-consistency of the theory and how it provides an alternative explanation to our reality... The innovative character of the theory jumps into the reader's mind, off from the Abstract... The allusion to an Universe described only in terms of geometrical constructs, where we all travel at the Speed of Light..:) has to be intellectually appealing... and not scary...:)

One should not be scaried about new ideas...:) If they make sense, they are what creates the introspective reevaluation of WHAT THE BLEEP WE KNOW...

Once I had my insight, I revised all Science and still have a lot to say... but I need to say that to someone that talks back... Science ...:) Not to a shy Censor...:)

I sent the email below to Professor Gizparg and to the moderator... but it seems that my address has been added to Los Alamos Arxives spam filter...:) I tell you, you have to admire the scientic mind...:)

Considering that I was the main author in my paper and that my submission requested that all the correspondence to be directed to me, it is a surprise that I am caught in a spam filter...:)

Cheers,

MP
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Professor Ginspard,

I recently submitted a paper to the Los Alamos ArXives after going through the trouble of finding an endorser and explaining my theory in detail.

That is the level of moderation or barrier that is advertised on the Los Alamos arXives site. To my surprise, the paper was still rejected and that after a lapse of at most 5 hours.

I consider it callous to substitute the lengthy discussions with my endorser and his careful reading of the paper with a few minutes review. I am supposing the moderator didn’t read only my paper during the elapsed five hours.

I kindly requested the moderator any example of the only and vague criticism contained in the rejection but never received any acknowledgement of the reception of my email or any reply.

I would expect more from a scientist.

Could you please review the moderation procedure and direct someone to provide me a meaningful reason why my paper was censured.

The reason why I made such an effort to publish at Los Alamos is because I value criticism and feedback. I receive neither from the moderator.

I just want for my idea what every idea should have. In a scientific debate you present your idea, receive/accept criticism, and respond with facts or logical arguments.

Accepting the moderator’s answer as a final critique would be to abdicate from what science has of most valuable – rational criticism. I am not about to do that. This is a scientific paper. Not a religious argument. Nobody should be protecting or hiding behind dogmas – I am not.

The paper is attached for your convenience.

Thanks,

Marco Pereira
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission:
Paper: hep-ph/0610362
Title: The Hypergeometrical Universe
Authors: Marco A. Pereira
correspondence to Dr.Pereira at ny2292000@yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Rejection:
Your submission has been removed upon a notice from our moderators, who determined it inappropriate for the hep-ph archive. Do NOT under any circumstances resubmit to the original arXiv before first explaining the reason to moderation@arxiv.org AND receiving a positive response. Please direct all questions and concerns regarding moderation to the moderation@arXiv.org address.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Review
Dear XXX,
The moderators feel that the submission content has serious issues that need to be reworked before the paper will be at a publishable level. The paper contradicts or ignores many well-accepted physical theories without acknowledging these omissions or explicitly challenging the foundational literature. arXiv is not a repository for otherwise unpublishable material, and the moderators do not feel this submission is appropriate for any subject within arXiv. You should seek feedback from a conventional journal.
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------

The paper is about a geometrical theory - that is, it models matter as a metric modulation. It proposes a new model for matter in which a single dilator would account for most matter in the Universe.

A coherence between two 4-D space deformation stationary states (dilator) is used to create a continuous modulation of the spacetime (5D)metric (dilaton).

It also proposes a new topology for the Universe - a four-Dimensional Shock Wave topology.

Under these conditions, it is a given that this paper would differ significantly from current views.

As any theory, it should be judged within its own logical framework and on how it might disagree with "experimental" data available.

It is important to emphasize the word "experimental" because there are many constructs which cause paradoxes left and right in Science. These paradoxes have been taken as true as a matter of faith.

If a theory proposes a solution to some of these paradoxes, the solution should be evaluated within its logical framework.

Could you please provide a couple of examples supporting this statement: " The paper contradicts or ignores many well-accepted physical theories without acknowledging these omissions or explicitly challenging the foundational literature. "

I will do my best to provide you a convincing answer from within the paper. If not, I will be happy to change it to reflect your critique.

Thanks,

Marco Pereira

## Thursday, November 09, 2006

### Number Two

Number Two

There are two important open problems in this theory.

Here is Number Two....:)

I created a Quantum Lagrangian Equation that provides the "Forces of Nature". That coupled with standard Classical Mechanics produces both Classical and Quantum Mechanics paradigms.

The problem is that this paradigm mixing is not clean... that is, one should expand the Quantum Lagrangian Principle to reproduced all the dynamics on 3D. The QLP is missing the Classical Mechanics dynamics. The dynamics should be written in terms of the 4D Volume projected on the 3D Shock Wave Universe on the de Broglie steps. Well, this is a view considering the QLP using only 5 dimensions. Even though the space is five dimensional, there are time projections. The time projection adds one more dimension to the problem. In my first simple theory, I did not want to makes things even more difficult to understand by dealing with more complex details.

One has to bring about a physical argument for inertia. I've already associated it to a 3D footprint of the 4D displacement volume. The larger the footprint of the region of the Fabric of Space that has to be tilted the stronger the required force. Thus one just have to express this statement mathematically within the framework of the QLP. Lagrangian Multipliers are a hint...:)

Remember that the total 4D volume always remains the same on both sides of the dilator, that is, the electron should be 2000 taller on the radial direction...:) Who would guess?

I will think on it on and off for some time... but I have hig hopes that someone else will solve it before me...:)

You have a month to solve the problem, starting counting now 11/09/2006 8:00 am...:)

Cheers,

MP

### Number One

Number One

There are two important open problems in this theory.

Here is Number One....:)

A 5D Schrodinger equation - not directly related to our 4D Schrodinger equation needs to be created for the 4D volumes of the rotating tunneling dilator system.

I will think on it on and off for some time... but I have hope that someone else will solve it before me...:)

You have a month to solve the problem, starting now 11/09/2006 8:00 am.

Finding this equation will also mean the solution of the dilator dynamics problem.

Cheers,

MP

### Plans for the Weekend

Plans for the Weekend

The Monkeys will remain here until I receive a reply from Los Alamos ArXives or when I get tired of waiting..:) Whichever comes first...:)

It has been almost one week and Los Alamos or the moderators of the Los Alamos ArXives did not send me a reply... I will keep you abreast of developments.

A friend of mine insisted on the single electron double slit experiment and kept proposing me thought experiments on electronic diffraction. This is something impossible to do in your mind... One is testing or reading reality... :)

On the GUT paper, I proposed an alternative explanation for the Double Slit Experiment based upon my "Force" derivations .

As any alternative explanation of something, it has many challenges and of course, since nobody ask me any questions (not even the Moderator) I don't have all the answers at once... I have to think about it...:)

I went in the net and found a great paper by Dr. Tonomura on the double slit experiment and Aharonov and Bohm effect. The paper is at this site

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/102/42/14952?ck=nck

Of the cuff, I gave two simple answers that would explain this phenomena.. The first one woud have to do with windowing of of electrons... The basic argument that detection is different from emission. That is what I used in the past. It is based on collaborative interaction, that is, many electrons will interact with their collective dilaton field and that field will after passing through both slits or both sides of a biprism, create the interference dilaton field. This interferometric field will drive the single electron (which passed through a single slit) onto the detector array. Although the collaborative aspect of this field seemed to be a basic requirement, it might not be necessary and might be extremely accidental, considering the very short wavelengths involved.

An electron generates a wave as it propagages in four dimensions.

The Mach-1 dilator on the site below provides a great insight:

http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/doppler/doppler.html

This is how the dilatons are emitted from the dilators as they travel along the radial direction.

The Mach-0 or stationary source how a dilator stationary with respect to the Fabric of Space looks like. The non-zero velocity source in the same page is not a perfect depiction of how the dilator looks in 3D due to the lack of Doppler shifting...

You should remember my teachings...:)... Sometimes there are things that even the theory creator did not perceive or do not know...:)

Questioning or critique is the only way to improve one's theory.

This question and this paper will force me to review my thoughts about the single electron dynamics. I certainly don't expect anything to change, since the paradigm explains dynamics and has Quantum Mechanics built in.

Just to make sure everyone understands, I don't have any qualms with Quantum Mechanics. In fact, I used in my theory left and right. The 4D deformational levels are to be calculated by a yet to be discovered Schrodinger equation. The dilator rotational tunneling dynamics is a quantum problem, although the whole Universe probes each other's rotational (spin) phase at each cycle.

I reproduced Biot-Savart law, thus reproducing Electromagnetism. This means that AB effect can be understood within the Hypergeometrical Universe Model. It is just a matter of thinking a little and writing another blog or another paper...:)

I created the published document such that people can work on these problems and help solve the rest.... I certainly cannot and have no interest in doing everything...

If anyone from Dr. Tonomura's group is listening, could you please send me info about the size of the hole in front of the wire. That would give me an idea if there is windowing. Also relevant is if the plates are charge, that is, if the plates are part of the acceleration process and how far apart they are..

These are technical details which wouldn't be relevant if we knew the answer to this problem. My point is that a new paradigm brings about new questions in addtion to a new possible conclusion...:)

Cheers,

MP

## Tuesday, November 07, 2006

### Good News.....:)

The Monkeys will remain here until I receive a reply from Los Alamos ArXives or when I get tired of waiting..:) Whichever comes first...:)

They symbolize censorship..>:) Collusion... Conspiracy and other evils of life..:)

Now the good news, I went through the tremendous trouble of placing the paper in the open journal Philica...

The paper reference is shown below:
Pereira, M. (2006). The Hypergeometrical Universe. PHILICA.COM Article number 45.

Please, feel free to go there and review it.

## Thursday, November 02, 2006

### Updated Version of the Grand Unification Paper Out

An Updated Version of the Grand Unification Paper is Out

updated version of the Grand Unification Paper.

This is the basic paper to understand how one unify the forces of Nature....:)

Of course, this link is also available from the right side panel on this blog.

It should have a better flow... I redid the introduction and found three typos on the equations...

The paper still need better references to the current methodologies. Suggestions are welcome.

By the way, this is the Forbidden Paper... The one they don't want you to read...:)

I've been trying to get an open review, that is, a peer review in which people say what they want and let me know where did I go wrong and right.

I am currently pursuing such a venue with little success. Rules of the game are changed mid-way and the playing field is not plane. I shall let you know better what is happening by next week.

Cheers,

MP

## Friday, October 27, 2006

### Mass Challenged Electron

The Mass Challenged Electon...:)

A friend of mine asked me to give a better explanation on the WHYs behind the Fat Electron...

This is a revolutionary idea... In a single slight of hand, the Whole Universe became awfully homogeneous...:) and Simple....:)

The first thing to remember is that waves are created by wavegenerating events (in that case they will dissipate) or are continuously created by wavegenerators....:)

I try just to read Nature and Nature tells me that Gravitation and Electromagnetism do not vanish with time... thus matter has to be modeled as wavegenerators.

Many crackpot theories in the internet miss that point, which I consider an important one... Without it one cannot create the concept of spatial deformation coherence... that is what is missing in all the crackpot theories that tried to compare themselves with mine...:)

I am not saying that my theory is better or correct... It is just a theory... What I am saying is that mine is better thought through and based on sheer common sense ...:)

Now that we know that there should be wavegenerators in the Universe and not just echoes of the Big Bang, one can consider what is a good model for a wavegenerator...

Simple analogy - I say simple but I know that what I say is not simple for most people- with electronic coherences is used to create the wavegenerators.

Most people slept through the class on the expected value of X in a coherence between two states of a double well potential... It doesn't seem important, just a footnote in a Quantum Mechanics class...:) I am an Electronic Engineer and always tried to make a physical model of whatever I learned. In this case, the expect value of a coherence between two states of a double potential well is an oscillating dipole, not unlike the ones I calculated in my Microwaves and Antennae Classes...:)

This oscillating dipole analogy is a fully Quantum Mechanics result. It is not a Semi-Classical model... People who might come up with that perception simply didn't learn Quantum Mechanics properly.

Now that we know that we are talking QM, the next step is to understand why to choose an Electron and a Proton as the counterparties of this Quantum Mechanical Dance...:)

Well it is simple, although it took me six months to decide it. The first thing to notice is that the Fundamental Dilator is actually two particles or better can represent two particles. If one of them is unstable the whole coherence will be unstable.

We know that Gravitation and Electromagnetism is not a transient interaction, thus one have to choose stable particles for the dilator... The Proton and Electron are stable particles which are present on all documented Gravitational and Electromagnetism data.

Now, inspection of their masses and their dynamics modeling through the four-dimensional tumbling indicated the need for Pseudo-Time Quantization and recognition that the dynamics described is taking place in a 5D Spacetime....:)

At that point, everything felt in place and the theory made sense.

Upon inspection of current human knowledge, it was easy to pinpoint the current flaws. With the understanding the de Brolie waves are 3D projections of the 4D dilaton field, one can easily solve the Double Slit Experiment Paradox...

Double Slit Experiment

My dilator model is quite localized and doesn't make too much sense if one consider the standard Quantum Mechanics model for free electrons.

In QM free electrons are modeled as planar waves, thus presenting infinite uncertainty along the direction perpendicular (Y) to the motion as well as along the direction of propagation (X). The Y direction is not constrained by the Heisenberg Principle (or Fourier Principle).

These principles related deltaX and deltaPx, thus the planar wave picture with total positional uncertainty along Y has no quantum mechanics support to begin with...

In other terms, the deltaY and deltaPy are not defined in the planar wave picture. They should be defined by the Quantum Mechanical Dynamics propagation from a localized state (at the moment of thermal emission in the cathod).

One could have and should have electrons with little position uncertainty along the Y direction and thus they should only pass through one slit at a time...:) That is obvious...:)

Obvious but it is not supported by the experimental results, thus all the theoreticians overlooked this small detail..:) Shame.. :) I missed it also... so I cannot say anything...:)

Once I knew about the dilaton surfing, dilaton 3D projection (de Broglie matter wave) surfing principle, it became clear that the Electrons were surfing the dilaton 3D projections before and after the slit. Next I thought about what happened that everyone missed that point and realized that most people (theoreticians) don't pay attention to experimental setups. Since I know that it is difficult to measure really small currents and that when people say that one electron interfere with itself, they really mean that they are detecting one electron at a time and the their deposition follows an interferometric pattern.

Well, that is a good explanation, but that is not the only explanation possible. I found another...:)

The explanation is that a coherence monochromatic flow of electrons in four-dimensions will produce a coherence monochromatic de Broglie dilaton field. The Quantum Lagrangian Principle states that the dilators will surf the 4D dilaton field, which also means that their projections will look like they are surfing the 3D de Broglie waves....

This theory states that the waves have a real meaning independent upon any single particle surfing the dilaton field as opposed to current QM which believes that the de Broglie wave is the dual personality of the particle....:) Personality issues...:)

So the solution of the problem is that the de Broglie field is real and it is created by a flow that is millions of times the flow resulting from a single dilator. It is the de Broglie wave that is planar and that passed through both slits at the same time...

When one electron manages to pass through one of the slits, it will surf the de Broglie interference pattern on the other side...and deposit itself according...

I am just reading Nature... nothing else...

Cheers,

MP

### Pitch Forks and The Scientific Inquisition..:)

Pitch Forks and The Scientific Inquisition

Pretty soon I will defend Science...:) My theory should be able to defend itself, but I will have to defend it from nonsensical questions or comments...

Before I do it in terms of specific comments and questions, I should preemptively strike and demand an level playing field...:)

I will write down a few things that my theory answers which were never asked to others...:)

• My theory is a fully geometrical Grand Unification Theory. General Relativity tried to be a geometrical theory as Aristoteles envisioned, but felt short from it. First it has non-geometrical constructs left and right (Energy, Mass, Momentum, Charge, etc)... The second failure is due to the fact that if the concept of geodesical trajectories is so good, why it didn't apply to Electrostatics (other than through the covariant electrodynamics). The field around a Proton is 10^36 times stronger that the Gravitational field around an equivalent mass. My estimate of 10^36 is the correct one, simple comparison between G and 1/(4.pi.epslon) would yield something around 10^41 or so... That means that one Proton is equivalent to 10^36/6.026E26 Kg... or 10^10 Kg or 10 Million Tons... In the Science at Einstein's time it would be proportional to 10^5 time larger than that or 10^12 tons.... This means that a charged one Farad Capacitor would be more than enough to create a Black Hole.. This means that the most beautiful contribution of GR (the geometrical interpretation of curved spacetimes) didn't receive the most basic scrutiny...:)
• Quantum Mechanics failed horrendously in two of their most famous paradox: the Double Slit Experiment and the Action-At-Distance Paradox... Both, I solved within this blog and papers...
• There is a criticism that was undully directed towards my theory, which is that a good theory should focus on explaining experimental data...:) That is laughable....:) Well, string theory cannot replicate any of the basic equations I replicated, that is, cannot explain basic Electrostatics, Magnetism or Gravitation... Many theories pay attention to Black Hole Entropy questions when the last time I checked there has been no entropic measurements on a Black Hole... Again, the devil is in the details... It is difficult to place a Black Hole into a calorimeter and measure the flow of energy and mass... and information...:)
• Not to mention, Black Holes have not been characterized enough even to show that they exist. The same can be said of Quarks... Today, I saw a new paper on the Los Alamos arquives where someone tries to explain Proton stability by adding another dimension to the problem... What happened with the simple explanation that the Proton is the lowest state of a system... Wouldn't that simple explanation be sufficient ... That is what I said here...:)
• I almost forgot, this theory explains why the speed of light is the limit... It is the only velocity. Nobody asked why when Restrict Relativity came out...:) In doing so, it also explains Unverse explansion (without resorting to Dark Energy).. inflation theory (infinite Universe expansion velocity)
• What is the meaning of Space being created...:) This is a basic question... I explain everything without having to create space all the time...:)

Here are a few questions that my theory explains but no other does... I am sure nobody asked those questions before because they did not have an answer to them either...:)

On the other hand, after all this preemption, I have to say that one can only improve one's theory with criticism... I will always welcome well thought criticism (even mean criticism... as long as the criticism is warranted) and I will try my best to answer any unexpect surprises that my theory might bring about... I hope my scientific colleagues will do the same...:)

I do believe if those questions were posed to the brilliant people behind these theories, they might have answered them ...:)

I hope when people come with Pitch Forks to perform the Scientific Inquisition on the Hypergeometrical Universe, they also bring some answers to these questions or some deeper understanding of the nature of Human Knowledge...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS -

• Sun's mass is roughly 1.99E30 kg - I shouldn't be so lazy...- Previously this blog had a mistake in how many Protons would make it up to a Black Hole...:) I finally checked the Sun's mass... I remember that two Sun mass is enough to create Black Hole, thus a one Faraday Charge in a Capacitor should bend space more that your basic Black Hole... (minor error... )... Please feel free to tell me when I make mistakes...:)

### Single Electron Double Slit Experiment

Single Electron Double Slit Experiment:
Experimentalist Point of View..:)

I told a theoretician friend of mine my explanation on why I did not believe any longer on the standard conclusion assigned to the Double Slit Experiment.

He was slightly convinced until he managed to utter the Single Electron Experiment Argument....:)

As you know, theorists have too many hands... they break things in the lab... they are oftentimes kept out from anything experimental...:)

The Single Electron Double Slit Experiment argument goes like this. If one lowers the cathodic current to such a level that a single electron is detected at any given time, that electron will have to be interfering with itself...

If you don't pay attention to the argument and don't know anything about laboratory setups, you might be puzzled.

The missing point is the design of the experiment. One has to have small slits to allow for the de Broglie wave to interfere into anything that can be detected in a not too far detector. This means that most of the electrons will be hitting the plate itself and missing the slit.

If one remembers that one pico Ampere cathodic current is around 10 million electrons and that is in the lowest end current one can measure (this is not the detector array current), then it is clear that there is a significant 3D de Broglie projection of the 4D dilaton field. Since this dilaton projection is supperimposed on a random bath of thermal dilatons, it will be the main driving field for the monochromatic electrons.

The electrons have an inertial motion which seeks to relax their local 4D torsional states but they are subject to the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, thus they surf the dilaton fields.

They do that before the slit and they will do that after the slit... The dilaton field projection has a de Broglie wavelength and will interfere after passing through the slits.

The electrons or the single electron will surf it into the detector array and produce the interferometric pattern - Even if they arrive one at a time...:)

Cheers,

MP

## Tuesday, October 24, 2006

### The Meaning of Planck's Constant

The Meaning of Planck's Constant

Among all Cosmological Constants, Planck's constant has a preeminent position. It is the basis of anything that is Quantized. From Black Body Radiation to the Quantization of Light to the Quantization of Action and thus Quantum Mechanics.

In my theory, it has a new meaning.

My theory is a purely geometrical theory without any parameters. Planck's constant is used to relate the fundamental wavelength (de Broglie Hyperspherical Universe Expansion Wavelength) to the mass of a Fat Electron. That might seem like I am using a parameter...:)

In fact, Science has been using this parameter to relate the Fat Electron 3D Volume Projection to its mass using equivalent momentum analysis (h=m.v.lambda). The parametrization happened when one tries to match the resulting de Broglie wavelength to the 3D de Broglie projections of the associated 4D dilatons that electrons surfed in their 4D trajectory.

The reasoning goes like this: Monochromatic electrons traveling along a 3D trajectory Electrons surf a 4D Dilaton. The 5D dilaton is recognized as the 3D de Broglie matter wave associated incorrectly to a single Electron as opposed to being an ensemble property. To match that 3D projected wavelength to the wavelenght associated with the Skinny Electron mass one needs the Planck's constant.

The same reasoning can be done when one tries to model Black Body Radiation and has to deal with a dilaton bath 3D projection.

In conclusion: The 4D dilaton has a wavelength that does not depend upon Mass. Its 3D projection is the 3D de Broglie Matter waves. The momentum equation used to match 3D de Broglie wavelenght to the particle mass has a Planck's Constant as a proportionality constant. This means that Planck constant was originally a relationship between 4D volumes and 3D Masses.

Cheers,

MP

## Thursday, October 19, 2006

### Double Slit Experiment Corrected..:)

Double Slit Experiment Corrected:
Quantum Mechanics Revisited

Ach Einstein, vom Himmel sieh darein!

Anyone out there...:)

I've invoked Einstein back from the Beyond to see the demise of one of the Pillars of Quantum Mechanics and nobody complained...:) That is not fun...:)

In any event, that was on purpose. I would like to bring attention to a very import result of this theory. The proposed Lagrangian Principle requires that Electrons travel in phase with dilatons waves. Since the projection on the 4D dilatons on the 3D Hypersurface are just the standard de Broglie waves, electrons travel, better surf 3D Space riding high on de Broglie waves.!!! That might come not as a surprise for people who does not pay attention. It is different to be a wave and a particle at the same time and to be a particle riding a wave.... The result is the same, matter deposition on interferometric patterns. The essence is totally different... I hope everyone can understand that small but important point... Well, if not, just ask me a question...:)

This means that an Electron does not interfere with itself as proposed by Quantum Mechanics. The velocity pre-selection, necessary for this interferometric experiment, creates a flow of coherent electrons. You have to know how to read an experimental description. When someone says that this is a single electron experiment, he is meaning that only one electron is detected at any given time. This is quite different from only one electron is emitted and traveling this monochromatic path at any given time. What happens is that the cathodic current is not know with more than a pico Amperes of precision and that is 10 Million electrons. Out of those 10 Million electrons maybe one will manage to pass the slit while surfing a dilaton...:)

Dilators always ride dilaton fields. This happens while the Universe travels at the speed of light outwards. A transverse (3D Space) velocity means that the propagation k-vector is tilted by an angle arctan(v/c). In the Grand Unification Theory paper, I demonstrate how a 4D wave can be decomposed in the product of two perpendicular waves. For the motion, the Lagrangian Principle states that the particle will be in phase with the surrounding dilaton field, thus a field that is decomposable into a standard de Broglie wave (3D dilaton projection) and another Radial wave perpendicular to the 3D space which is not observable.

This means that an electronic flow with a narrow speed distribution creates a dilaton field of de Broglie waves that is narrow band and can be used for interferometric pourposed.

This also means that de Broglie waves have the physical meaning of 3D dilaton projections and are independent of the particle that rides them, although that particle will contribute to the dilaton intensity.

Electrons do ride dilaton waves not only prior to the slit but also after the slit. The de Broglie waves will pass through the two slits and will interfere close to the detection plate.

The surfing on the interference pattern means that the electronic deposition will follow the same final interference pattern to the very end.

Below is my initial less provocative entry. Even though I am happy to create some discussion, I am even happier with the final picture the theory provides. It eliminates the horrendously uncomfortable feeling of having to believe that one thing (no matter how small) could be in two places at the same time.. Or many places at the same time (for a multiple slit experiment)...:)

It sounds like Religion and it is.

MP

__________________________________________

This blog is about my argument against the Amazing Concept That Electrons Passes Through Two Slides at The Same Time...:)

I am sure you are familiar with Einstein dislike of the probabilitstic interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and hoped to discover the Hidden Variable that could explain such bizarre behavior as the Particle-Wave Interpretation and the Double Slit Experimental Results...:)

He would be happy to read this Blog...:)

To create a Grand Unification Theory, I created a new Lagrangian Principle that states that dilators move in phase with surrounding dilatons...:) This means that dilators (Electrons) travel as a wave following the wave interference pattern.

3D de Broglie Waves are just dynamic projections of the 4D wave pattern and so it is the 3D interference pattern.

Thus the from the Lagrangian Principle it should be clear that one electron passes only through one slit at any given time...:)

Don't believe everything people tells you.

How come there are interference patterns on the photographic plates or photodetector?

Since I mentioned that dilators replicate the dilaton surroundings, they behave as dilatons and have a inherent phase. The 3D space shows the de Broglie projection of the 4D phase pattern.

This phase information allows for dilators (electrons) to behave as wave individually and to create an interferometric deposition pattern on the detector.

Since all the dilators are interacting with the same dilaton field and carry phase information, there is NO NEED FOR THE ELECTRON TO PASS THROUGH BOTH SLITS AT THE SAME TIME...:)

The electons pass through one slit at a time... Many electrons will have their dilaton fields interfering and will follow an interference pattern trajectory prior to detection, but after passing through a single slit...:)

Thus the Universe is simpler than Quantum Mechanics has made you believe...:)

Cheers,

MP

## Saturday, October 14, 2006

### First Milestone.....:)

First Milestone...:)

We should congratulate each other or better I should thank you for reading my postings.

Sometime during the evening of October, 13 2006 - Friday, The 13th - we reached the ONE THOUSAND READERS MILESTONE.

Today, I will polish the Grand Unification Paper to include a proper explanation about the Fat Electron and Time Quantization. I will try to come back later and discuss other resonances in Nature and the possibility of Overlapping Universes...:) or if the old fashioned values of Infinite Cartesian Space, Absolute Time are back or never left...:)

In the past, prior to the advent of Astronomy, discussions on the dimensions of Universe have been based on Metaphysical and Religious arguments. I will present my take on theZero and Infinite Problem...

Thanks,

MP

## Thursday, October 12, 2006

### Time Quantization and The Fat Electron

Quantum Time and the Fat Electron

This is a very deep Blog with profound implications. This is also a Blog about Science and I do Science for fun...:) thus expect an entertaining and educational voyage through the Fourth Dimension....:)

Here I present a pseudo-Time Quantization Ansatz, which means that although time might not be quantized, the final effect for 3D interactions is not unlike Time Quantization...:)

At the end of this Blog you will understand what is 4D-Mass, 3D-Mass and why Time can be Quantized and Continuous at the same time..>:) and of course, the most important:

Why did I use a one atomic mass unit electron in my calculations!!!!

Time Quantization Ansatz:

Let's consider that you have a Girlfriend on a Swing - I had to get the Kid out of the Swing for this Gedanken Experiment. It will become clear soon why...:) (in my case, it would be a girlfriend, in your case it might be something else)...:)

She asks for some untimely spanking and you have to comply. Well, that is where Time Quantization comes into play. What is the best way to comply?... Of course, it is when she is standing still, or at the pi multiples of the swing harmonic oscillation...:)

Of course, if there were some Malabarism taking place as the Swing goes to and fro such that she becomes really skinny (flatten like a 2-D Girlfriend)...:) then there might be some more calculations to consider. Let's say that this Flattening occurs with half the frequency of the swing - spin half-, then she will become 3D and spankable only once every four pi multiples...:)

How such paradigm would help us understand Pseudo-Time Quantization?

Let's recapitulate a few things from the past and a few from the future:

• Remember that the model for matter is based upon considering particles as coherences between two stationary states of a 4-D Rotating Deformation Potential Double Well. This means that the master frequency or wavelength is defined not by the mass of the particles but by the "energy gap" between the two states.

• Let’s define the Electron-Proton Dilator as X-Particle.

• Let’s define the Standard Universe narrowly composed as all the elements, electrons, protons and neutrons. Every particle in this subset of the Universe is X-Particle monomers/ polymers.

• Keeping in mind that a rotating particle or Girlfriend would be spankable or interactable at every 2pi phase shift.

• One would also conclude that if the same Malabarism were occurring for a Proton/Electron, there would be some phases where that Proton/Electron might become really skinny…

An exception would be a real zero spin particle. It will be interactable every pi phase shift. There are no zero spin hadrons among the components of the Standard Universe, so we will not discuss this kind of particles at this phase.

In the Standard Universe, spin zero matter is created out of linear combinations of spin half dilator - the one and only Electron-Proton Dilator or X Particle.

Electron says about the Fat Proton: He ain't Fat, He is my Brother...:)

First let review some data from the Future…:)

One needs to understand Neutron decay to have some representation of the Electron and Proton 4-D Deformational States.

Standard Model of the Neutron Decay Process:

Neutron -> Proton + Electron + Anti-Neutrino

My interpretation of the Neutron decay process is given below:

(2/3,-1/3,-1/3) -> (2/3,2/3,-1/3) + (0,-2/3,-1/3) + (0,-1/3,1/3) respectively.

This assignment was done considering the lowest volumes or lowest numbers ONE can use for representing the nuclear reaction (Neutron Decay).

This is clearly unorthodox, since the electron is not supposed to have a Quark composition. This is a first glimpse Hypergeometrical Universe Standard Model, which of course, is a very simple model.

Depending upon the response (if any) to this Blog, I will explain the Universe further...:) You people are known for being shy...:)

4D-Mass and 3D-Mass

By this time, after reading the Girlfriend on a Swing Paradigm and all the information I gave you, you should be able to predict the 4-DMass, and 3-DMass for a few particles. Let's start with the easy ones: Proton and Electron.

What is the 3D-Mass and 4-DMass of the Electron shown below?

The red dot indicates that the coherence is on the Proton side (2/3, 2/3,-1/3)

The green rectangle indicates that the coherence is on the Electron side (0,-2/3,-1/3)

Notice that I don't mention the residual length of the four coordinate for simplicity, but it is certainly smaller than the others, thus the skinny profile..:)

The first thing to notice is that in this theory 4-D volume is proportional to mass. There are two kinds of masses. One is an observable mass - the 3D mass. The 3-D mass is not much different that the average Girlfriend spankability. The spankability is proportional to 3D volume and 3D volume is minimal at 90 degrees rotation.

The 3D-Mass of the Electron is what we call as the Mass of the Electron. We do that because we have a 3D view of the actual 4-D Dynamics. Not unlike the Girlfriend on the Swing, the electron is skinny at pi angles (since the X-Particle is tumbling at spin half frequency, at pi phase, the rotation is pi/2 or 90 degrees). At 90 degrees, even the Proton looks skinny!!!! The 3-DMass or Known Mass of the Electron is actually is actually the (Mass of the Electron Standing-Up + Electron Standing-UpsideDown)/2 plus a Proton Laying-Down. There are some refinements that can be made at this point, but it would be non-didactic to go into details.

Now the One Million Dollars Question: What is the 4-DMass of the Electron?
The 4-DMass is equal to the known Mass of the Electron plus the known Mass of the Proton or about one atomic mass unit. The reason is for that is the from the 4-Dimensional point of view the volume occupied on each state is the same no matter if the X Particle is up or sidewise. That is the reason why I used a one atomic mass unit electron on my calculations and why the Electron is as Fat as the Proton.

They have the same 4DMass and are really more than Brothers, they are Siamese Twins..:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sake of completeness, I will present briefly the other relevant particles:

As you can see, if you add a Spin -0.5 Proton to a Spin +0.5 Electron you get a Spin 0 Neutron, which subsequently decays and emits a Neutrino. Other Nuclear Chemistry reactions are similar. The point to be made is about the Neutrino and its nature. It is clear from the two Neutrons States that the Neutrino interacts with the X-Particles while they are laying down..:) It is also clear that the Neutrino carries the energy associated with the two states shown at phase pi. Not unlike an electromagnetic wave, the Neutrino will make the Neutron make an X Particle Dimmer transition. Since the energy gap between those two states is smaller, the Neutrino will not interact with the X Particles during the Cosmological Coherence.

Just to clarify some really complex thinking that I did. To reach the conclusion that the 4DMass of a X-Particle (Electron or Proton) is one atomic mass unit, I had to consider what would be the 3D perceived Mass (4DVolume) at the 3D Time Quantized Phases. I considered that lying down or not the Proton or Electron in 4D would be as massive as the Standing Up 3D perceived Proton or Electron.

Of course, even though the 4DMass of the Electron is one atomic mass unit, the Lagrangian Principle should be applied at the end of the cycle or at 4pi multiples, thus the 2 lambda.

I also created a Blog for the Gyromagnetic Ratio of the Electron and how it is represented in my theory. It will be presented next.

Now you can go back to the Meaning of Material Existence and understand better what I wrote there.

For the people who didn't realize it, I proposed a solution to the Action at Distance Paradox in the Blog "God's Amazing Magic Parlor Trick", which is an irony to a high degree, since this paradox has been used to provide support for crappy "Science" mixing together Consciousness and Reality...:) It was the most obscure intrusion of the observation process on reality. The paradox was a direct attack to Rationality and was in line with the Inflation Theory in my peeve Brain Damaging Offenses...:) In fact my solution is in collision with Inflation Theory for the simple reason that I had to get ride of Electromagnetic Vacuum States., which are neecesary for any Adiabatic Radiation Cooling to take place within the scope of the whole Universe. Inflation Theory from I can guess, uses these states and their scaling with the "size" of the Universe to explain cooling... Forgive me if I am guessing incorrectly. I've just cannot read something the proposes breaking all the rules of Physics even for a second...:) Call me a purist...:)

The solution to the paradox was easily achieved by the Gedanken experiment where I placed two eyeballs on the excited state molecule. Each eyeball would look in the direction of the polarizers and see both detectors. I simply proposed that Black Body Radiation from the detectors were responsible for the dephasing of the Coherence at the emitter, thus creating photons with well defined polarization at the emission instant. This eliminates the need for infinite communication speed, traveling back in time, etc...

I have no doubt it is correct. Let me know your thoughts...:)

Cheers,

MP

Feliz Aniversario, Joca...:)

## Monday, October 09, 2006

### As Good as It Gets...:)

As Good as It Gets...:)

This friend of mine told me that my Blog on
Time Quantization and the Fat Electron was the funniest scientific papers he'd ever read...:) and told me that now the expectations are higher... and I am bound to disappoint everyone...

I do believe it will always be the most important paper in this series. First, the Fat Electron is explained for the first time. When I wrote the original paper, I wrote it for the largest Eggheads in the planet and thought that they would immediately understand...:) I confess it was poorly explained ... It was done without time quantization...... but it wasn't as ground shaking as proposing the pseudo quantization of Time...:)

The Fat Electron was also ground breaking...:) The idea that most of the Universe is composed of a single particle is quite remarkable ...:) This insight goes side by side with the Cosmological Coherence insight...:)

Prior to that I explained that electronic vacuum states do not exist. That perspective is supported by the consideration that the Universe is a poor imitation of a resonant cavity...:) It is not a metallic box.. That line of thought was presented on the Photon Disentanglement. In Photon Disentanglement , I solved the Action-at-Distance Paradox by realizing that a implicit hypothesis was not correct. The implicit hypothesis was that the photon emission is randomly polarized or of undefined polarization. This hypothesis is derived from not so careful understanding of how electromagnetic emission occurs.

On
De Docta Ignorantia, I ranted against anything that mixes together Consciousness and Physics. Ranted even more after I realized the paradox of Action at Distance did not exist at all and that meant that there was no sign of any experimental effect of an Observer on a Macroscopic Phenomena. There is no support for the extension of the Copenhagen Interpretation into the Macroscopic Universe. My theory doesn't support it either.

In the
Infinitas Complicatas, I say that M-Theory, String Theory is a very complicated Mistress and tell the theoreticians to take a look at my Mistress (The Hypergeometrical Universe Theory)...:) ( I am being specific.. :)

I wrote a facetious but profound review of Hund's Law and its relationship with Superconductivity in the
Hund's Law and Supercondutivity. I provided a graphic albeit qualitative explanation of why there are Fermions and why there is Superconductivity and Stationary States.

This was the first time a detachment of Inertia and Gravitation/Electromagnetism was presented, as far as I know...:) In my theory there is only one interaction and that interaction acts through the 4D space but acts upon the footprint on the 3D space. This means that for something to feel a 5D spacetime wave (dilaton), one has to have its foot on the 3D Universe.

Electron detaches faster than Protons from the 3D space due to their 4D inertial characteristics. This is an explanation for Superconductivity and most likely also for the lack of structure on electron scattering (quark composition).

On
The Meaning of Material Existence, I describe the physical constraints placed on particle coherence wavelengths and spinning frequencies. For particles to interact, they have to (pairwise) have coherences that are identical or relatively close. I also explained the phase matching condition associated with bringing into existence a particle. A particle is born in phase matching with the Whole Universe, cannot be done otherwise.

In
Gravitation 101 - The Whole Grail of Physics, I presented the simple equations associated with Quantum Gravity. I also presented my strong interest in discussing these ideas with intelligent people... Two or more Brains are always better than just one...

In my paper,
Grand Unification Theory, I introduced the concept of Cosmological Coherence and in Fields of Dreams I review the underlying hidden hypothesis in Field Theory. In a geometrical representation of the Universe only spacetime waves and wavegenerators can exist, thus it is implicit in the concept of a field that all waves are in phase otherwise one cannot just add their amplitudes coherently.

I also recreate the whole Physics by creating the only geometrical theory that reproduces what happens in Nature (Gravitation, Electromagnetism) without the use of any existing concept (Force, Charge, Mass). Only spacetime waves and their interference.

I proposed that the Whole Universe surfed a 4D Shock Wave, it is finite and yet impossible to traverse... Relativity was corrected several times. The highest absolute speed is pi*c....:)

I brought back an Infinite Cartesian Universe and an Absolute Cosmological Time without losing the relativity of time and motion. I explained a little of the meaning of time... Someday, I will explain a little more...:)

I proposed a simple Quantum Lagrangian Principle that allowed for the Cosmological Coherence needed to explain the Universe.

I reformulated the whole Cosmology in my Hypergometrical Cosmology Paper and Blog.

I explained
Why Things Move, the most profound question I've ever tackled. The answer is the Why for Newton's First Law. 5D Spacetime relaxation is the reason for inertial motion.

I explained the Cosmic Microwave Background and am now leaving a warning... :) Don't travel at the Speed of Light in any direction or you will be burned by the Gamma Ray Front Row View of the Big Bang (by reversing the Doppler Shift).

I drilled down the concept of the
Universe as a 4D Shock Wave and explained the Hypergeometrical Universe Cosmology both in the blog and in my second paper.

I presented a simple theory of
Cosmogenesis on my third paper and calculated the size of the initial fluctuation that gave rise to the Universe on Size doesn't Matter...:)

I responded to my Peer Review in
Peer Review and asked for a Giordano Bruno in Giordano Bruno.

Ranted several times against mindless censorship of my ideas, one of them at
E Pur Si Muove.

Enlightened you by telling why the speed of light is the maximum speed -
it is the only speed.

Was hopeful in
Hope Springs Eternal.

Promised the Undiscovered Continent in
Giordano Bruno. That is how I see the future...

I also create the plans to fully implement the whole theory and reached out (in my funky way) to possible collaborators in
HyperGeometrical Universe Couse Description.

I considered continuing teaching things bit by bit... but this is not how it is suppose to be.
People should be able to see the value of an idea and make their choices.

In my first blog, I mentioned the
Plato's Allegorie of the Cave and expressed that I would try to free you from the shackles that bind us and help you to see the light.

From Wikipedia - The "Plato's Allegory of the Cave"

I started this Blog with the description of the situation as I see it. The best description is given by the Allegory of the Cave direct from Wikipedia, and reproduced below:

Imagine prisoners who have been chained since childhood deep inside a cave. Not only are their limbs immobilized by the chains; their heads are chained as well so that their eyes are fixed on a wall.

Behind the prisoners is an enormous fire, and between the fire and the prisoners is a raised walkway, along which shapes of various animals, plants, and other things are carried. The shapes cast shadows on the wall, which occupy the prisoners' attention. When one of the shape-carriers speaks, an echo against the wall causes the prisoners to believe that the words come from the shadows.

The prisoners engage in what appears to us to be a game - naming the shapes as they come by. This, however, is the only reality that they know, even though they are seeing merely shadows of images. Suppose a prisoner is released and compelled to stand up and turn around. His eyes will be blinded by the firelight, and the shapes passing will appear less real than their shadows.

Similarly, if he is dragged up out of the cave into the sunlight, his eyes will be so blinded that he will not be able to see anything.

At first, he will be able to see darker shapes such as shadows and, only later, brighter and brighter objects.

The last object he would be able to see is the sun, which, in time, he would learn to see as that object which provides the seasons and the courses of the year, presides over all things in the visible region, and is in some way the cause of all these things that he has seen (The Republic bk. VII, 516b-c; trans. Paul Shorey).

This part of the allegory, incidentally, closely matches "Plato's metaphor of the sun" which occurs near the end of The Republic, Book VI.

Once enlightened, so to speak, the freed prisoner would no doubt want to return to the cave to free "his fellow bondsmen". The problem, however, lies in the other prisoners' not wanting to be freed: descending back into the cave would require that the freed prisoner's eyes adjust again, and for a time, he would be one of the identifying shapes on the wall. This would make his fellow prisoners murderous towards anyone who attempted to free them.

Plato's told us what I was suppose to expect when trying to bring that light to my peers. Of course, I am not getting close to any Cave after that...:)

The Allegorie is fully realized.

I showed you the missing dimension in your Universe and gave you a Glimpse of the Undiscovered Continent.

### Photon Disentanglement...:)

Action at Distance:
Quantum Mechanics Disentangled ..:)

If my theory were aimed at reading God's mind, I would also try to find out what is in God's Sleeves...:)

As you might know by now, I don't consider reading God's mind to foster Wisdom a good idea . My theory has been based on what was useful and profound in about all the contributions the great minds of Science... I paid close attention to what they implicitly assumed in their theories, many times without realizing.....:)

Let's wrap up the Action at Distance Puzzle. This has been the source of many outrageously speculative explanations, including infinite speed of information transfer, backwards time traveling, etc. It also spanned a new field, Quantum Encryption. Please read the blog and let me know what you think.

The Paradox derives from a polarization experiment: A excited molecule decays and emits two photons w1 and w2 with correlated polarizations and a tightly defined k-vectors. The k-vectors are defined by the setup of the experiment itself and linear momentum conservation.

The polarizations of the two outgoing photons are connected through the molecular frame of reference angle between transition dipole moments.

The experiment probe how information about what happens in one arm is reaching the other arm by what seems to be Magic and/or hyperluminal speed communication and/or time travel.

Experimental Details: On each of two arms, far from this light source, there are two polarizers and two detectors. The distance makes a strong selection on the k-vector cone. The fact that a detector have to absorb the incoming photon with high quantum yield, makes the detector itself a source of "vacuum noise" at the emission wavelenghts.

The puzzle is that according to Quantum Mechanics, the outgoing photons don't have a defined polarization until they meet the polarizers. This is certainly true from experiments slicing a light beam, such that subsequent polarizers have 45 degrees angle with the prior ones.

Since the two polarizers are far away from each other and the polarizers are placed at equal distance from the light source, a paradox is created: How is it possible for the information about the polarization of photon1 to reach photon2 in time for redefining its polarization? Remember that one is considering that the photons have ill defined polarization until they reach the polarizers.

Using a correlated photon counter and changing one polarizer orientation, one can confirm that the two photons emitted at any given time, keep correlated polarization even thought there isn't enough time for any luminal/subluminal speed signal to reach the other photon.

To solve this puzzle I had to resort to the basic understanding of light emission and absorption. The simple paradigm of a "Kid on a Swing" is the place to start. Bra's and Ket's are great for formalism but they hide the Physics, which always goes back to the "Kid on a Swing". This is my preferred analogy for emission/absorption.

Scientist oftentimes forget or never learn that for emission or absorption to occur, a dephasing process has to take place. This means that the swing has to be slightly out of phase from the "Excitation" for energy transfer to occur. If you push the swing in perfect synchrony there will be no energy transfer.

Our traveling photons might not know what they will have to become to pass that polarizer and hit the detector, but the emiting atom has perfect line of sight to the detectors through the polarizers.

Let's make a Gedanken Experiment. Imagine that the excited state molecule has two eyeballs. Since there is a polarizer between the excited molecule and the detector, the "vacuum" field along that very small spherical angle (k-vector cone) will be dominated by the polarized emission of the detector surface. Notice that I placed "vacuum" in parenthesis since there is something to learn about it from this experiment. I will come back to this point at the end of this blog. Since the excited state molecule will be dephased by radiation coming from the detector, the outgoing photon will have a pretty well defined polarization. This is the same problem one have in a laser. The excited state medium knows what is the polarization permitted within the lasing cavity. There is a degree of intensity on the "vacuum field". Within a laser cavity, the vacuum is not thought to be a vacuum but to the be the field within a Hi-Q resonant cavity. If one considers the high selectivity of the experiment performed, the result will be the same. The two polarizers and detectors act as a Hi-Q laser cavity. The distance between the two arms select the k-vector of the "vacuum". This experiment is done under low excitation since one wants to measure correlation between pairs of photons. A larger number of photons arriving at the same time would be just equally distributed among the two detectors of each arm.

This means that the detector itself (plus polarizer) and the geometry of the apparatus defines the polarization of the emission and thus eliminating any source of paradox. This means that the pre-selection of photon polarization occurs at the time of the emission. By the time the photon arrived at the polarizer its polarization was already compliant with a given polarization. As we know, if we send linearly polarized light along a properly aligned polarizer 100% of the light will pass through. This means that polarization is preserved and only changes if the polarizers are not aligned with the incoming beam.

This is an effect of the observer on what is being observed prior/during to the "observed event - photon emission". Eveything else is history by the time the photon departs from the source.

This is an example of estimulated deexcitation, in a regime of low photonic density. The noise with with the coherence couples doesn't come from some "vacuum" but directly from the detector itself.

My reference to vacuum states is that all emissions are stimulated deexcitation, but the source is not a function of space, as in field theory but a function of the surroundings.

This also means that zero point vacuum states for photons may not be a property of space.

This would explain why any calculation of the zero point vacuum energy for the whole Universe blows up by a factor of 10^56 or thereabouts... Field theory is being developed considering vacuum a property of space... The huge factor should be taken as a hint...:)

Any theory based upon stationary states of vacuum would have to be based upon the assumption of perfectly reflective boundary conditions at the end of the Universe and that is hardly a physical assumption.

In conclusion:

The photon that eventually passes through the polarizer and reaches the detector doesn't know a priori what is the orientation of the polarizer. The excited state molecule, on the other hand, knows perfectly everything about the polarizers and detectors at the time of emission and thus there is no need for information to travel back in time or from one arm to the other arm of the experiment... :)

The polarization of detected photon is defined with information from the detector/polarizer when the photon is emited.

My next blog is titled: He ain't fat... He is my Brother..>:) and I intend to make it understandable by the weekend...:)

I hope you missed my blog...:) I was on vacation in Paris... Beautiful city...:)

## Sunday, October 08, 2006

### Hypergeometrical Universe - Course Description

Hypergeometrical Universe
Course Description

We will start the course by describing its goals:

1. Model the Rotating 4D Deformation Potential Double Well from the Known Mass Spectrum
2. Model Collisional Excitation processes to explain collisional particle creation from nuclear scattering data.
3. Develop algorithms for Hypergeometrical Universe Quantum Mechanical "Molecular Dynamics" simulations.
4. Dress up this theory into a quantum covariant theory

For project 1, one needs particle physicists with deep knowledge of nuclear chemistry and access to scattering data.

For project 2, one needs to extend to four dimensions standard electronic collisional excitation theory. Most likely the people better suited for that are quantum chemists. Dudley Herschbach comes to mind...:)

For project 3, one needs Dudley Herschbach to be so kind to take another look at semiclassical methods for the Bohr Atom. What can I say, I am his fan...:)

For project 4, of course, I would need to borrow the sharp minds of the M-Theorists, String Theorists and/or Theorists in General...:) Your task is to make from this rough gem a beautifull diamond...:) Not unlike the polishing in the My Fair Lady movie... :) Make Eliza a Dame...:)

At the end of this course, we should be able to control gravitation, stored antimatter in a bottle of water...and do other equally exciting things.

Homework 1.

a)Describe the Neutron-Positron Decay HU representation and find out what is the channel for a positron.

b) React that channel with an electron and descover which states are involved with the resulting gamma radiation

Due next weekend...:)

The first to post the correct solution gets an A+

Cheers,

MP

### Infinitas Complicata

Infinitas Complicata

This is about String Theory, M-Theory etc...

First, I have to preface this by saying that the developement of those theories are extremely difficult and require a focused mind and a very special mind.

The search for the Theory of Everything has moved from the observation of Physics into the observation of Mathematics. These theories were created by tremendously intelligent people and attract the best minds...:)

Without any possible guidance, the theory has been trying to keep Maxwell's equations - e.g. Kaluza-Klein Theory, General Relative Gravitational Equations, Standard Model etc..

My point is that they know that in principle the theory, if written on the correct space will be simpler than our current perception. If you try to solve a problem with spherical symmetry using Cartesian coordinates, the problem will be awfully difficult. If you try to understand the Universe looking at the shadows on a wall, the Universe will be awfully difficult to understand.

After I proposed the Hyperspherical Expanding Geometry, I realized that the whole Physics have been looking at 3D projections.

Currently, Science in this area has been done with little guidance of Physics. A scientist guess a metric and a Lagrangian and see what are the solution for gravitational waves, Black Hole description or any other irrelevant problem. Neither Gravitational Waves nor Black Holes have been properly documented - experimental results are not available.

Instead, I replicated the experimental results we have and tried to explain the things we didn't understand.

I strongly dislike the idea of creating a compact Universe for each quantum number. It really seem not physical. The things get even worse, when one tries to starting from an infinitesimal (very small) floppy string to replicate the non-uniform distribution of the mass spectrum.

I think the choice of a String , no matter how Super it might be, is a poor choice. Not unlike choosing Cartesian coordinates for solving a problem with spherical geometry. The smallness of it (otherwise we could see it)...:) makes these states even higher in energy...:) It is a nightmare...

To make the SuperString to give in, space has been curled, bent to see if the energy levels would comply. I think that it is better to start with the Mass Spectrum and a meaningful topology and see if the model can explain reality...:) That is what I did.

Guessing left and right on how to torture space for it to give your solutions is no better than using the solutions (mass spectrum), a meaninful topology and deriving the deformational potential. That is a much simpler task, almost not worthy of a TOE... but such is life.. One should do the easy tasks first.

I proposed that if you rotate different initial states you might be able to replicate all the mass spectrum you have. The Electron-Proton paradigm further simplify the understanding of the particle zoo...

My interaction with the people that works in this field has been nill, not due to my lack of trying but due to the characteristics of this field.

The scientists who works in String Theory, M-Theory are extremely intelligent and the subject (TOE) is the largest EGO booster possible...:) No wonder they are so wary of crackpots (with crackpot ideas) and try to protect the integrity of their own thoughts.

A pursuer of the TOE cannot read anyone's else ideas otherwise he will cheat himself/herself from the Holy Grail of Physics in his/her mind.

Well, these are the boundary conditions. One has to deal with it.

I would be making a disservice to Science if I were to bash them for their behavior...:) and I don't want to do that. Those are just the Rules of the Game.

I would like to mention that their theory is awfully complicated...:) and that one should be carefull not to Fall in Love with the Beautiful Equation and have no eyes to a decent, physically fit, well presented theory (not of his/her own)..:)

It is not a Sin just to look at someone's else Mistress...:) Well, factually, it might be, but for sake of argument let's think it is not...:)

Cheers,

MP