Tired Photons

Tired Photons and the Universe Distribution of Mass

It turn out that a long time ago (1992), Professor Assis proposed a Tired Photon Theory to explain the Cosmological Red Shift. This is a revision of the quantization of a photon energy such that one can recover the Unlimited and Steady Universe that Einstein and others consider to be the correct Universe.

I have extremely strong objections to this model, specially starting with Equation (1), the Bouguer's Law (A.K.A. Beer's Law)where the energy of a Photon (any photon, any wavelength) decays according to an exponential decay law.

The problem one has with that is that energy is not conserved, since the energy that migrates from a higher wavelength to a lower wavelenght is not conserved.

That is itself is outrageous. The second problem I have is that when I tried to ask theoreticians whose theories hinges on such weak hypothesis, I did not obtained an answer to the following question:

"If current large scale Universe mass distribution is approximatelly uniform, moving from a linear mapping between red shift and distance to an exponenial mapping would result in our planet, galaxy to be on the top of a heap of galaxies. The Center of The Universe"

I have trouble whenever a theory tells me that I am the center of the Universe. My theory is the only one that can say that..:) But in my theory, we are not at the center of mass of the Universe.

Not to mention the obervation of Blasars. If there was a remapping of the red shift, those Blasars would be much closer and I supposed I wouldn't be writing this blog any longer. This is a qualitative statement, but it should be addressed, since the Blasar (a quasar whose Gamma Ray Jets are lined-up directly towards Earth) is captured (on a detector..:) ) for its Gamma Ray emission. That emissions was also supposed to be red-shifted from its distance using the exponential red-shifting.

Bythe way, my theory has no problem explaining how a Blasar very far alway emits Gamma Rays and how an event at the beginning of times (this time cycle) is totally red shifted into microwaves. It turns out that any event very close to the Big Bang is traveling away from us the speed of light. Anything that is half a way there (say 7.5 billion ligth years away) is just traveling at half the speed of light...Doppler shifting is quite sensitive to the speed of the source..:)

In summary, if the observed large scale mass distribution is more or less even, then changing the red-shift versus distance mapping from linear (Hubble) to exponential (Tired Photon)will imply that we are the The Ones..>:)

ECE theory (Cosmological Anomalies - EH Versus ECE Field Theory) tries to make a point that the Universe is uniform, static. Not unlike Barack Obama, I denounce the Tired Photon Hypothesis.

Cheers,

MP

The Signs you are in a Cult

The Signs you are in a Cult

During a sleepless night, I pondered what would be the signs to be looking for to know if one is in a Cult...:) You know, those groups of people held together by common believes, which many times do not warrant their allegiance...:)

Examples abound, for instance the member of the Standard Model Cult, M-Theory (M stands for Mattress - keep the last S for not saving the world...:)), or Higgs Boson Cult (awaiting for the appearance of that Boson on the tail of a Cometh...Notice that I didn't rant about Einstein or Ether..>:) Those are other Cults...:)

The most important aspect is the "Circling the Wagons", not let anyone with diverging ideas in and anyone out..:)

In a cult, nobody wants to learn anything about any ideas other than the ones that percolates their inculcated minds by fear of losing on a good thing... a promised land... :)

And by all means, nobody wants to be the Purveyor of Bad News...

I applied to be part of a Poster Session on a Gordon Conference on Nuclear Chemistry... In the past, I participated in many Gordon Conferences and always had the greatest experiences...:)

This time I just wanted to be on the side of a 2 by 2 foot cardboard with some pictures of the Hypergeometrical Universe topology (cross-sections), the Fundamental Dilator, the Coherent Nuclear Fusion process and maybe a Pion or two..:) Quietly awaiting for some scientist to pass by and ask the question: "What is this?"

As usual, I would give my one minute spill and hopefully open their minds into other possible explanations to what is currently called Nuclear Chemistry...

As you know, the Chemistry in the name reflects the current paradigm of reagents together in a hot caldron, randomly colliding until by chance they overcome the reaction barrier and skate into the product channel...

If I am right, the field will be called Nonlinear Hadronics or Coherent Nonlinear Hadronics in the future. This would reflect a new way to collide the reagents in a non-random manner and paying attention to silly things like reagent polarization and making sure that there is bunching (for peak power or peak density) on the particle flow. Not unlike in electron microscopes, Deuterium and Tritium (or other reagents)would be focused onto a very, very small spot. By controlling the velocity of the flow and the focal length of the magnetic lens, optimized Nuclear Fusion would be achieved. Of course, this is a simple experiment with a possible extremely high return.

I bothered to offer myself to stand patiently on the side of a cardboard while beer chugging scientists passes by, at the end of many days' worth of talks, just to deliver this new view of the Universe in an understated manner. It is worthwhile since it could save this planet.

If you feel relieved that Nasa was right about Apophis asteroid, I don't. As you know they are wrong every so often...:)

For one, the situation is fishy, acceptance of mistake followed by a denial...:)

In addition, knowing how uncertain are the initial conditions (e.g. velocity, mass, collisions along the path of the asteroid, solar wind along the trajectory, etc) I would consider our knowledge of Apophis trajectory 22 years from now very diffuse...

That would give a back-of-envelop one in two probability of collision... Well, since they didn't bother to present the details of the calculation, I have to go with my gut feeling...:)

A gram of prevention is worth a pound of remediation...:)

This brings me back to my motto that Physics is Important...Way too important to be left in the hands of a cult...:)

Below is my application to the poster session and the rejection letter:

From: Betty Tsang [mailto:tsang@nscl.msu.edu]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:05 AM
To: NY2292000@YAHOO.COM
Subject: Nuclear Chemistry Gordon Conference

Dear Mr. MP

Would you clarify your academic background in applying to attend the
2008 Nuclear Chemistry Gordon Research Conference?

Thank you
Betty Tsang
Chair, 2008 Nuclear Chemistry GRC

---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Dr. Tsang,

I am attaching my resume. Since I left academia, I don't keep a CV up to date.

My education is shown below:

...(PhD, MSc, MBA) graduate degrees, 22 years scientific career, the broadest (multidisciplinary) background possible...

My research was never directed towards Cosmology or Particle Physics. My only scientific production in that area is my theory.

The theory creates a framework where particles are described by coherences between stationary states of metric deformation (dilators).

The theory was successfully applied to unify Gravitation and Electromagnetism. I recasted Newton's Laws in geometrical terms (deformations of a Fabric of Space - the locus of a lightspeed expanding shock wave in a 4D spatial manifold).

This logical framework was used to produce a representation for all Hyperons and isotopes. They all can be represented in terms of variations of a Fundamental Dilator.

Above are the deformational states associated with the Fundamental Dilator where the in-phase phase is the electron phase.

The fundamental dilator can represent all four fundamental particles: proton, electron, antiproton, positron.

The paradigm can be understood through the following diagram:

The coherence is a shape-shifting deformation of the metric. This coherence not only change shape (electron corresponding displacement volume to the proton equivalent – circa 2000 time larger in both expansion and compression thus resulting in proton, electron and their counter particles). In this theory there are no compact spaces. Spin is an external degree of freedom, a real rotation as opposed to being an internal degree of freedom.

Dilators only interact when the overlapping between the Fundamental Dilator and the Fabric of Space is maximized. This together with a Quantum Lagrangian Principle provide the basis for Quantum Mechanics. The Quantum Lagrangian Principle was used to obtain Gravitation and Electromagnetism forces. It states simply that dilators will always dilate in phase with the surrounding dilaton field. Dilaton are the metric waves associated with the coherence.

An example of a hyperon explained in terms of space deformations is presented below:

This is the decaying equation for the pion minus. It decays into an muon minus and a muon neutrino.

Other examples is show below:



It decays into a Delta Zero, Pion Zero and Pion Minus.

The Fundamental Dilator paradigm eliminates the asymmetry between electrons and protons. This theory is developed in two cross-sections of a 5D spacetime. One of the cross-sections is the familiar 4DSPacetime where Relativity was described. This theory is totally compatible with that theory.

The other cross-section contains the 3D shockwave universe expanding along a Radial Direction

As one would expect dynamics forces (magnetism) are derived in the right panel (which contains time). Static forces (Gravitation and Electrostatics) are derived in the right panel.

Strong and weak forces are explained in metric deformation terms.

The theory has broad implications and it is difficult to present it in a short letter. The manuscript currently is around 80 pages.

This paradigm shift allow for a nonlinear hadronics paradigm shift for Nuclear Chemistry. Instead of the current paradigm of reagents, barrier to reaction, product channels, my theory permits understanding nuclear chemistry in a way similar to nonlinear optics. This means that it supports Coherent Nuclear Fusion processes. Of course, in the same way that nonlinear optical effects are many orders of magnitude more likely with coherent laser light (that using an incoherent light source), coherent nuclear processes should be order or magnitude more effective in bring about fusion products.

I would appreciate if I were permitted to explain the theory.

Thanks,

MP
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Dr. MP

I do not see how your interest matches with our program, please see http://www.grc.org/programs.aspx?year=2008&program=nuchem. Our program is full. There is no room for another talk. As the number of participants to the conference are limited, I have to limit the participants to scientists who are actively doing research in Reaction Physics in Nuclear Science.

Thank you
Betty Tsang
Chair, 2008 Nuclear Chemistry GRC
=========================

---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I know I am not a member of a cult, since there isn't anyone else with me at this time..:) A cult of one...:) Well, it is possible...:)

On the other hand, I failed to show the other symptoms..:) I vigorously pursue scrutiny, scientific debate and have no place to hide... If someone ask me to explain something, I would never exclude that person from a debate nor would I fail to provide a simple explanation of my theory... no matter the circumstances...

I feel relieve I am not in a Cult..:)

Cheers,

MP
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

PS- By the way, if I mentioned M-Theory as M for Mattress or complained about someone's theory is because I provide a simpler explanation which is ruled (without any disclosed reason) INNAPROPRIATE..:)

I've never mean a personal attack, after all, I don't personally know any one of the actors in this play..:) My attach is always on the merits of their science and on the horrors of censorship...:)

I also am quite aware of constraints on room and board for the attendees of the Gordon Conferences. That wouldn't be an issue -- I can always go to a Bed and Breakfast in the vicinity and can eat out or fast..:) I would be the last person on the planet to preclude a wide-eyed young scientist from being dazzled by science..:) I was in my time..:)

Sapor Similis Pullus

Sapor Similis Pullus

As I mentioned in a previous blog, I will be in a Castle in Wales in July, hopefully celebrating the existence of continued questioning in Science. Of course, this continuous questioning, pondering, revising of prior ideas doesn't take place in mainstream academia (e.g. Los Alamos Arxives, American and British Physics Societies, etc). There, everyone is a member of the Choir and they all profess the same Religion.

Don't try to read too much on my parabolas. What I've said just means that the people who control and publish Physics are all members of the String Theory, Inflation Theory, Standard Model etc... Family...:) dedicated members of incremental, forward moving, never revisiting or revising prior hypotheses, scientific stepwise improvers... and of course, powerful censors..>:)

By the way, despite of the last two blogs having a Religious framework, they were not about Religion. They were about Science. Science should be Science and Religion should be Religion in the sense that Religion has to have at least one Dogma (Existence of God) while Science should not have any.

I will be in Europe in July. I've heard that there are many philosophers, physicists (e.g. from CERN, LHC), great thinkers in general in the Old Continent...

I would love to part bread and drink some wine with my fellow Brainiac colleagues...:)

Please contact me through the email found in my profile or leave a comment.

I will be in UK from July 5th to 8th and in Rome from 9th to 13th. Hopefully the Philosophers from La Sapienza and Sorbonne would join me for dinner and discussions in Rome. CERN or otherwise physicists are, of course, welcome.

While in the UK, let me know if you have some time, Stephen Hawking..:) I will buy the first round of beers.

Cheers,

MP

Dr. Fate

Dr. Fate

I am not someone given to believe in Fate. Unless it is Scientific Fate or the Fate of my scientific theory...

My last Blog explored the need to believe or better the imperative for believing contained in certain widely accepted theories. As you might know, wide acceptance is not an assurance of correctness..:)

By the way, surrounding oneself just with friendly admirers is what academia has been doing and that is what precluded a stronger revaluation of current models and created the censorship conditions that prevail today. One should welcome ideas and their purporters if they pass basic scrutiny. I did that with Dr. Chucanov. If one idea is not good, it shouldn't take a big effort to pinpoint its flaws.

For example: The Standard Model started with some nicely defined Up and Down Quarks... As usual, they asked us to believe. Someday, in some huge accelerator we would meet those little things and be happy that we knew they would come..:) When they did not appear, they asked us to believe that they were glued together...:) Oh, Good Lord....

Peter Higgs demanded us to believe that a Boson would come out of collisions in the heart of another beast (another accelerator - Large Hadron Collider)... It is just the beast that changed, the request is the same ---- Faith ....

No wonder some people see some similarities between Religion and Science. Both can be dogmatic and censor iconoclastic non members of the choir...

Despite of this requirement of Faith, I believe that Fate is a slightly different concept. They sound pretty much the same to me, but in one we have to drop disbelieve, rationality, questioning (Faith) while in the other we only have Rationality, Questioning to hold us up...

My believe in Fate is that there will be a theory in which things will fit so well and make so much sense that Anyone Will Be Able To See That Truth Has Been Spoken.

Of course, that will have to be followed by hardcore experimental proof...:)

A theory is just a guide...... A great theory can be a map...

Currently, I am placing my bets on my theory. I had other "Theories" in the past, but I knew that they were just concoctions in which things pointed, maybe, in the correct direction but they didn't hold water properly..;)

I've never bother people with hare-brain schemes like Peter Higgs or Alan Guth (Higgs Boson and The Inflation Theory), but I decided that The Hypergeometrical Universe deserved a closer look.

There is a path for redemption for Peter Higgs and Alan Guth or any other Big Wig. It is very simple, just take a position in favor of bringing (my theory and others) back into the realm of discussion... Not unlike reopening the Plenarium for debate.

Unsettle Physics!!!

Of course, that would be slightly detrimental to your Superstar status but in History that would make you even Bigger. It takes a real scientist to second guess himself/herself, to revise one's own hypotheses and to appreciate the beauty in someone else's ideas.

Currently, I believe that the Fate of this theory is to have its own life. I am just the messenger.

Some people mentioned that Science requires a highly mathematical framework. I don't believe that to be the case. Any theory is just simple ideas dressed up in algebra. The ideas behind them are always quite simple...an Harmonic Oscillator here, a vibrating string there, mapping mass to a self-energy or not....making infinite equal to zero.... etc...etc...

All the math, the proposed Lagrangians, Green Function Propagators, Feymann Diagrams sums, Dyson Theorem, etc. are simple ideas... Superstrings wrapped around Calabi-Yau manifolds always reminds me Bacon Wrapped Scallops...:)

Those are simple analogies and they taste great...:)

I used Naked Science in my blog because it shows how rich this theory is and how much easier it is to think in terms of physical ideas than to get lost in algebra.

The goal is to See The Florest By The Trees..:)

If you oppose censorship, click the Chicken below and learn all about my plight...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- Read this with the musical background...:) By the way, I identify myself with Dr. Fate...:)

Of course, not being a connosseur of marvel comics, I suspect Dr. Fate is a Force of Good..:)

Sapor Similis Pullus

The God Particle

The God Particle

Forgive me saying something against a God Particle, but this is a stretch... Not unlike Inflation Theory ( in fact, these are my two pet peeves)...

I am not saying that the Fundamental Dilator is the only possible solution to the problem of Mass.

I made Mass totally disappear with it...:) I succesfully replaced Mass with displacement 4D volumes within a spinning coherence: The Fundamental Dilator

Above are two electrons with opposing spins...:) and the best explanation for the existence of Cooper pairs and the why of Hund's Law. Opposing spinning electrons show zero attraction or repulsion among each other...:) That is why you can put them neatly into orbitals...:)

I also explained why one Kilogram (inertial) of Electrons have Zero Gravitational Mass...:) Just a result of interaction averaging out to zero.

While Peter Higgs, François Englert and Robert Brout were trying to explain Mass using some God Given Particle or God Himself, I explained Mass Away...

People shouldn't mix Religion references and Science. It would be horrible if one cannot see the God Boson coming out of those Large Hadron Collider Collisions...

By the way, we know that we can make "Bosons" out of collisions (e.g. Delta Zero, Pion Zero).

Is Dr. Higgs telling me that Delta Zero, Pion Zero are The False ProphetParticles?

How would you know that you created a Boson that gives Mass to a particle... Just because it has some weight (Mass)..:) given to itself?? That would be a quite weak proof of the existence of the God Particle...

I would expect something along the lines of the God Boson coming down the pipe and interacting wih another humble particle and bestowing it the Gift of Masslessness...:) such that it would just fly faster than the speed of light out of there...:) That would make me a believer..

Of course, if one could keep such God Particle around one long enough, one could ask for larger favors like making an Apple to fall upwards or downwards at infinite speed...:)

In summary, I don't believe it is possible to attach to an extremely short-lived particle coming out of a collider the title of God Particle. It is my believe that I will have just to believe..:)

I already believe that the Truth is Out There...:)

I certainly know that whatever comes out of those collisions would be less relevant than Coherent Nuclear Fusion. I am partial...what can I say..>:)

Today, I learned that there is a great theory out there which is the most accepted geometric relativistic theory. I am looking forward to read about it... I've never managed to ask if that theory contains the concept of Mass. If a contain that awful concept, it can never be really geometrical..:)

Of course, I might be wrong, but in General Relativity, Mass takes a quite important place...:)

My theory is consistent with General Relativity but it doesn't contain Mass.

By the way, I somehow seek exactly the people who might disagree with me to collegially discuss ideas. There is little value in preaching to the choir...:)

Please, support the site...:) Everytime one clicks the Bird below, a matching grant is issued to help in the search of the God Particle...:)

I want to Believe..

Cheers,

MP

Sapor Similis Pullus