Monday, March 26, 2007
First of all, thanks for making my Philica paper the most read paper in the whole Journal. I really appreciate your interest and your support in spreading information about my theory.
I have been very busy and haven't been able to write the last blog with the Hyperon Family Model. Sorry for that.
In the meantime, I reassembled the basis for the Hypergeometrical Universe, that is, the revision of Newton's Laws (all four) and the Quantization of Time.
Pseudo time-quantization is the seed for the Hypergeometrical Standard Model and the amazing concept of the Fundamental Dilator.
These four blogs are lined up in reverse chronological order..:) for your enjoyment.
Please review them and let me know your thoughts...
Hopefully next weekend I will have some time.
By now, I am sure you people are upset that I have been picking on poor Newton. It just happens that his work is fundamental and revising it is a sign of respect and something I couldn't avoid.
The last law states that the force sensed by two interacting bodies are equal and in opposing directions (signs).
This is the easiest one to recast.
I will be terse and brief since the reproduction of the forces is enough to show that they have the same value and opposite signs. I will only give you the physical (geometrical) interpretation of the Quantum Lagrangian Principle.
The picture above displays the Universe on the RX cross section (right panel in the Hypergeometrical Universe Icon). The age of the Universe is around 15 billion light years and lambda is the Compton wavelength of an atomic mass unit particle, so this is not draw to the correct scale..:)
I show two bodies about to step one de Broglie wavelength in the Universe lightspeed expansion.
It is impossible to draw things correctly and still be didactic. A large mass body, represented on the right, will have a very small Compton wavelength. In my calculations, I represent their wavelegnth as being zero for simplicity. Under those conditions the single dilator (one a.m.u. mass) interacts with a continuous field (it still oscillates but their maximae are too close together to affect the calculations). I just had to calculate the shift on the next maximae generated by the dilator along the radial direction. In the absence of interaction, the dilator's field would have a maximum exactly along the radial line. In the presence of the interacting body, that maximum shifts sidewise and one just has to calculate a dilaton gradient and equate it to zero (l'Hospital rule..:).
The effect of being a large (macroscopic) body is two-fold: it makes its effective Compton wavelenght to be zero and it scales the intensity by the number of dilators it contains. One kilogram of anything (mass or charge) would contain 1000 Avogrado's number of dilators. Thus the local dilaton field, in the proximity of the large body, would be much larger and the shift would be inversely proportional to that number of dilators.
Since the shift is proportional to the acceleration, one can see that the acceleration in the larger body would be inversely proportional to its "mass".
That should be enough for this law. I am eager to go back to the Hyperons. Please, feel free to ask any questions.
I had to reinterpret Newton's Second Law in the Hypergeometrical Universe to recover the Equations of Motion. This might hurt your Brain, but I promised it will be worthile...:)
The first thing I have to point out is that Newton's Law and everything you know about the Universe lies on the right panel of the Hypergeometrical Universe Icon (above, staring you in the face...:) I also should remind you to read the Blog - The Force be with you, Not...:) There, I mentioned that the correct paradigm doesn't have force, mass, charge.
The right panel contains only an unobservable absolute time, x and t ' and x' (I didn't draw the x' to avoid confusion and to emphasize that different inertial reference frames have different time projections t and t').
In my paper, I expressed Newton's equation as:
To achieve the appropriate paradigm just divide both sides by the mass and you will have acceleration.
Similarly one has an acceleration for the left panel:
First think about what an equation is. If you place two identical objects separated by an equal sign (e.g. 2=2) you end up with an equation but it contains no information. It is a simple tautology.
For an equation to be non-trivial it has to relate two different paradigms (e.g. 1+1=2). This contains information about the addition of integers, or unitary segments, or unidimensional vectors) etc...
Newton's equation does just that, it maps a vector Force (which lives in a different space from Mass and Acceleration) and maps their products in a Natural Law. Mass is a scaling factor (extensive property) in the same way that a Strain is scaled by the area where that strain occurred to give the causing Stress.
In the Hypergeometrical Universe, the Force (Stress) is the same on both panels. This paradigm can be easily modified if we realize that Force (Stress) causes the rate of deformation of the local Fabric of Space, being the Mass an scaling factor. Under this paradigm, instead of acceleration we have Strain which eventually should be scaled up by the appropriate "area" to yield the total Stress.
The equation below showcase this paradigm: This is Newton's equation in a purely geometrical perspective. There is still a generalized force (stress) which is alright, since the stress is explained by the Quantum Lagrangian Principle governing the position of dilators to follow the constructive interference of dilaton fields.
I will write the equation 4D Stress as:
with strain given by:
notice that the proper time is dimensionalized by its scaling with c (lightspeed). As you can see, Mo is the projection of an unitary 4D area (or 4D Displacement Volume). If you call 3D Stress as F you would have recover formally Newton's Second Law. F and M are just Words nothing else.
In my paper, I used the Stress4D to calculate both Gravitation and Electromagnetism. Where you see Area4D= One, I read Area4D= One Atomic Mass Unit (a Hydrogen atom for Gravitation or the Fat Electron for electromagnetism). At the time, I thought it would be easier for people to understand if I were just to calculate the Strain (dalpha/dr) and use that as dalpha/dtau) since for small angles artan(x) is approximately equal to artanh(x). Mutliplication by the corresponding 3D masses yielded the standard forces. At the time, I also reflected one panel over the other since they would be identical for small velocities.
I will rewrite that part in terms of 4DStrain and that should help people to understand the stuff. It is difficult to explain 4D geometry.
If you remember that all maximae displacement volumes of the fundamental dilator are performed in phase with the dilaton field, it becomes clear that the displacement at the Proton phase adds in phase with the displacement at the Electron phase, thus the dilator has a Area4D equal to an Hydrogen Atom (a spin zero Hydrogen Atom).
This might make your Brain spins but take my word for it, or better don't take my word for it and check the logic for inconsistencies. A clean mind is a sign of mental disease...:)
There is a reason for Newton's madness. He lived in a World of charges, masses, forces. Specially charges are evil...:) One cannot write from Gauss Electrostatics equation a simple equation for acceleration that doesn't depend upon the probe charge. This is solved by the Fat Electron paradigm working together with the Quantum Lagrangian Principle. With those simple concepts, I created the equivalent 4D-Mass or Area4D of an electron or proton to be one a.m.u. which was used within the left panel to calculate force. Thus the 4D Mass of an electron is the same as the 4D mass of a proton: one a.m.u.
Refinements are associated with the rotational motion and were considered in the paper (gyromagnetic ratio comes out of that refinement).
Well, that is that. Newton's Second Law, a Natural Law has a different interpretation in the Hypergeometrical Universe.
I hope Mr. Scientist will soon ask me some questions before I forget this subject. I am moving out of this paradigm pretty soon...:) By the way, I called Ms. Slack (this is not a joke) from Columbia U. to ask who is the person in charge of the physics departmental seminars. No answer yet, but I am cutting her some slack...:) ( I couldn't resist the joke)...:) I will call her back next week...:)
I mentioned that I was afraid that my legacy would be my Balls Diagram...:) but I am afraid I will have to challenge Newton's Laws also and them only my Intellectual Courage or Audacity will be remembered...:)
First let's review Newton's Laws with the help of Wikipedia:
The Three Laws of Motion
Newton's Laws of Motion describe the acceleration of massive objects. The modern understanding of Newton's three laws of motion is:
If no external force acts on a particle, then it is possible to select a set of reference frames observed from which the particle is seen to move without any change in its velocity. These reference frames are called inertial reference frames.
When observed from an inertial reference frame, the vector sum of all forces on a particle is proportional to the rate of change of its linear momentum with respect to time. Momentum is the product of mass and velocity. (In special relativity, a third factor is included — the Lorentz factor.) Notice that this is only true when the observation is made from an inertial reference frame, and since an inertial reference frame is defined by the first law, asking a proof of the first law from the second law is a fallacy.
Whenever A exerts a force on B, B simultaneously exerts a force on A with the same magnitude in the opposite direction. The strong form of the law further postulates that these two forces act along the same line.
The first Law was tackled in my paper where I provided a simple and clear explanation why things that are moving will keep moving at the same speed if there are no forces acting upon them. Of course, since my theory is geometrical in nature, that explanation will have to have space, space deformation and space relaxation. I will replay the argument here in a slightly syncopated fashion due the juxtaposition of the three laws and my effort to address each on its time..:)
Here is the plot that explains why Newton's first law exists:
At time t1 the 4D radius of the Universe was c.t1. Let's say that a force was momentarily applied to a body (initially at rest with the Fabric of Space) and it shots off at angle alpha1. It is clear that in this R versus X cross section of the Universe that the angle alpha1 is given by artan (v/c). It is also clear that after some time, at time t2 the angle alpha2 with the perpendicular to the Fabric of Space (relaxed 3D hypersurface) is smaller due to relaxation/motion.
I proposed that this relaxation process is the reason for motion in my paper and replicate the argument here for your enjoyment.
This takes care of the first law. The second law has to do with Inertia.
I will tackle the Newton's Second Law tomorrow. The clue is that when you see a law your have to question it..:) Be a rebel... think...:) There are so many physical questions behind the simplest mathematical equation....
Thursday, March 15, 2007
I thought it would be a good time to review the meaning of Time Quantization and its connection to the Fat Electron (Fundamental Dilator).
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.
I will give the answers…:)
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 necessary 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...:)
Feliz Aniversario, Joca...:)
Sunday, March 04, 2007
Physics, the understanding of Natural Laws is a captivating lifetime pursuit to me but it is also important to the survival of Mankind.
There are questions about the the exact trajectory of an incoming doomsday asteroid but there is certainty a high degree of self?-censorship with respect to information about that event.
Today, I read again about the 450 million tons asteroid that would cross Earth's path in 2026 at a distance closer than the Moon. It was written in the article that even that was not what the scientist were concerned about. There would be an even closer fly-by.
Well. I came to write this blog and came back to pick up the reference and link to the news. Google had already moved it around or eliminated it.
The case in point is that I have been hearing about this incoming asteroid since December and did not see any scientific discussion in the media about the validity of this information.
If a doomsday asteroid is coming, I would like to offer some fresh ideas on how to eliminate the problem. That will not happen if this theory is not properly evaluated. If theorists put their petty vanity ahead of the needs of Mankind.
I believe some classification of theories in a manner similar to the one that exists in Philica should be in place within the Los Alamos Arxives. One thing that should NOT exist is plain censorship.
Los Alamos Arxives is a taxpayer funded pre-print (eprint) repository, that is, it is the place for papers that were not necessarily sent to a journal or received a peer-review yet. Peers would provide a peer review and that is fair.
In the past, there was no censorship or obstacles to publishing. Eventually, the bar was raised and an endorser was required. I passed that obstacle just to receive an "Inappropriate" review. Nothing else than the word "Inappropriate" was said about the theory. There was no need for anything else. The one who "owns" the actives controls whatever is published there.
If a theory has evident flaws they should be told to the author and the paper should NOT be published. If that is not the case, the paper should be published (eprinted)and occupy some few bytes in some server some place. The incremental cost is zero. The resistance to new ideas by established scientific elites has been an obstacle to the progress of science since there are scientists.
Today we have the means to publish our ideas despite these obstacles, but that doesn't provide the extremely important peer-review and peer-recognition. By recognition I don't mean recognition of the author of the idea, but recognition of the idea itself.
An idea stands by itself long after the author is gone, but it has to be recognized by the Intelligentsia and to become part of the idea soup that feed our progress...:)
What we cannot have is to have physics theories censored willy-nilly by simple minded molecular biophysicists...:)
I believe that Physics is Fun but it is also Serious. The consequences of censorship, hipping of stupid ideas for sake of book selling can be high and maybe way too high for us to pay.
PS- My blogging of the mass calculation of the Hyperons is being delayed by mundane problems that require my attention. I hope I can do it next weekend.