Light Created from a Vacuum

cool thread OP

i wanna warp speed to Gliese

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
reply to post by Maxmars

 

If particles are continuously "fluctuating in and out of existence"

When they are not in existence, where are they?

The virtual particles, from what I understand, typically come in particle/antiparticle pairs, and the pair only exists for a brief time before annihilating each other. They don't go anywhere, they simply cease to exist anywhere.

Star Trek-type Replicators are not far off...

reply to post by Maxmars


So if I understand this, "nothing" is actually "something"?

Force is knowledge and it acts as force because it knows how.
Vacuum is a principle, not some physical entity.
Absolute speed is actually standing, because speed is always relative. Absolute speed is not relative to anything but itself, it is a singularity.
When you say light moves at absolute speed, it actually means it is everywhere and nowhere at the same time.
Time is only the means of thinking, it is how we stack events in order to relate them (most commonly in linear fashion thus creating a "time line"). Time is not a physical entity.
When we deal with time and space, we actually reserve a time-out for ourselves to reflect upon reality. But, reality is popping out of nowhere, and it is our habit to see things in reflection that confuses us about the true nature of things. Perceived reality is the virtual reality because it is our interpretation and a construct, not the original, autonomous reality.

What it means to say that force is knowledge? Simply, knowledge is absolutely there and it "pops up" when you want to use it without a time/space delay. The force is knowledge and it manifests itself as difference in potential - differentiation is movement. In this experiment with light, the "mirror" is brought into the position of the absolute, and therefore it "reflects" light which did not "travel" to it. The mirror is actually emanating light instead of reflecting it.

The whole experiment is about revision of physical laws as we were made to believe to be for real. They are not for real and the Laws of Thermodynamics are fake. That is the significance of this experiment.

So, UFO's that resemble flashing lights or orbs could be merely be the result of the vacuum of space?

My knowledge of physics is nothing more than a passing interest but.... Creating something from nothing seems remarkably like how the origins of the universe would have occurred. Also does this not suggest that the 'alternate universe' or reality theory could well be correct- as these particles have to appear from somewhere.

if this suprises you, you haven't been paying attention.

im not going to repeat myself for the millionth time so, lets leave it at if you think 'space' is empty think again. research again.

Originally posted by tom171
My knowledge of physics is nothing more than a passing interest but.... Creating something from nothing seems remarkably like how the origins of the universe would have occurred. Also does this not suggest that the 'alternate universe' or reality theory could well be correct- as these particles have to appear from somewhere.

No. You have a particle and an anti-particle which are completely opposite and when you combine the two they make nothing, very simplistically +1 + -1 = 0.

Whether this can result in something functionally useful is anybody's guess.......but not a replicator or transporter a la Star Trek. Those kind of things require the conversion of matter to energy and vice versa so imagine the energy if a nuke converts minute quantities of matter !!

When matter meets antimatter, the result is explosion, not zero.
Explosion is (relatively) fast energy release and it will destroy bigger objects including some molecules, near zero ground.
Antimatter may exist next to us, but it can be prevented from contact by some strong energy field. We know very little of what is actually going on around us. Very, very little.

Ok, so I am supposed to believe the vacuum was devoid of all matter. Was it also devoid of all radiation? Isn't matter really just radiation going in infinite circles?

ENJOY!

ETransfer of Energy Through Time and Coupling of Parallel Universes

(Date: unknown; Source: Matrix III)

Leading Edge Research, P.O. Box 481-MU58, Washington State, C.F. 98597 C.F

V: Would you explain your theories about time and energy?

H: When I was in France, I was part of a group looking into theories of entropy states and the general thermodynamics of plasmas. The natural rate of entropy increase in a closed system defines the flow of what is perceived as time. We were trying to develop a better insight into the process of synchronization between apparently uncoupled systems, in other words to explain how time manages to flow at the same rate in different parts of the universe. We ended up deriving a set of mathematical expressions that interrelated entropy functions, quantum energy states, and spacetime coordinates of quantum events. In particular, certain variables that could be interpreted as time and energy turned out to be covariant.

V: Do you mean there was some kind of equivalence relationship?

H: Not quite. But you could almost think of it in that way. It meant that the universe could be represented by an ensemble of "events', each characterized by a set of energy states and spacetime numbers; nothing more. In such a representation of the universe, the idea of conservation of mass-energy did not hold; it was replaced by a conservation of the product of that quantity with spacetime. By means of math transforms, it was possible to transform one universe into another in which the quantity varied inversely with the other. If you made all the spatial variables constant, the spacetime functions reduced to pure time; you could transform energy to time and vice versa. We had no idea at that time what that meant.

V: What did it eventually mean?

H: What it seemed to say was that energy could be extracted from the universe, which is where ordinary conservation breaks down, and injected into another version of that universe in which the time coordinates of all the 'events" were shifted by some amount. The more energy you transformed, the greater the time shift would be. If that was interpreted as taking place within the same universe, it seemed to suggest that-energy could be transferred through time. We must conclude that all versions of the universe in which we exist, interpreted linearly as "Past", "future" etc. are equally real. Thus we have a continuum. The only model I can think of is a complex serial one in which altering the events in a past universe affects not only the future of that particular universe as it evolves in time, but also the "presents" of all the other universes that lie ahead of it. In other words, there is a mechanism of casual connection through the continuum that the simple serial model does not address.

V: Could you expand on that concept?

H: Everything we have discovered so far seems to add up to two things. First, the universe that we see around us and which forms part of us is simply one of many, equally real universes that appear to be strung sequentially along a single timeline. Second, events that happen in this universe affect not only its "future", but the situations in all the other universes that lie ahead of it. That,-of course, suggests a continuity throughout the system; the "future" universes ahead of us form a progression of states that are evolving from the present state. We need to ask ourselves what the mechanism is that provides that continuity. That same mechanism will enable an event in one universe to alter events in another universe. The continuity follows from the fact that objects, being mass, don't vanish; they endure in time.

V: Unless, of course, they are deliberately withdrawn from the coordinates they occupy.

H: Yes. Mass arranges itself into different patterns to produce the changes we associate with the passage of time, but in doing so it provides the connection and continuity that enables one universe to evolve from another. For example, if a candle has burned down, in the universe "behind" us it is still intact; in the universe ahead it probably does not exist at all in that form. The whole candle is the sum of all of them. I have a drawing here that will assist in an explanation. Try thinking of a two-dimensional analogy. Imagine that the universe is flat and everything it contains is flat. Now form a solid continuum by stacking an infinite number of zerothickness planes like that together, like the pages of an infinitely thick book. Every page is one universe. Mass continues through these pages in a thread-like manner. Anybody inside one of those universes will see mass patterns change sequentially.

Look at the diagram I drew. Each universe consists of a space containing objects and inhabitants that are all made up of particles, or at least that is what it looks like if you happen to live inside one of them.

Part II:

We, in our privelaged position as superobservers looking in from the outside, can see that every particle of mass is really an infinitesimally thin slice of a thread that passes through all the universes. As the universe moves along the threads in some kind of supertime, the particles or slices appear to move through space. That gives a visible rate of change that is observed as .. normal time" within the universe. From our position we can see that all the universes are equally real, only the one that you happen to be part of and moving with gives the illusion of appearing more real to you then the rest of them.

V: So you would be able to send signals or transport mass from one universe to the other.

H: Exactly.

V: If you send a signal from one universe to another which changes an event pattern, I assume that the memory of having a reason to change that event is erased as soon as the event is changed?

H: Yes, because our memories consist of electrochemical and DNA pattern changes. Everything that formed any record of the original pattern was reset. Hence, our memories are consistent with the new pattern that now exists. In actuality, causes and effects exist not on a series on a unidirectional time line, but the system is dynamic in that time loops exist, and these loops make it possible, in effect, for effects to be detected before the cause of the effect exists.

V: I think the holographic model of the universe would explain it, because of the interconnectedness of everything through hyperspacial formats. The superobserver that you are talking about is in fact consciousness itself - all wave and particle interchanges are, in actuality, consciousness as viewed from different perspectives. Access to what are perceived as different "spacetime" coordinates can ultimately be accomplished through the manipulations of consciousness, so any devices that are devised to accomplish this purpose simply mimic the mental operations in consciousness of more evolved beings. There are many transitionary instances where alien equipment is tuned to the specific patterns of a particular being, and the equipment functions as a modulator or transductor of consciousness. Time flow, as you mention it, applies within certain boundaries, and everything hyperspacial to those boundaries functions in terms of that which makes up the conceptual loops that you speak of. All in all, it makes for an interesting discussion.

Originally posted by DangerDeath
The whole experiment is about revision of physical laws as we were made to believe to be for real. They are not for real and the Laws of Thermodynamics are fake. That is the significance of this experiment.

The laws of physics can't be fake, they are just the best model we have to describe observable phenomena. There is no scientist trying to deceive you, just a model that may or not describe the world correctly. New observations are made that contradict a model? You revise it or make a new one. Even today, physicists use models that they know are partly wrong, but they are good at describing certain aspects, so they still use them until something better comes along.

@DangerDeath: What about theories that describe the universe as existing in a matter-antimatter equilibrium before big bang? This explains how it could burst out from nothing as quantum fluctuations disturbed the balance.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Maxmars

 

So if I understand this, "nothing" is actually "something"?

Yes in a nutshell, nothing is something.

May people have said this for a long time and that in our current state of being, five senses that we are not able to perceive everything in the nothingness.

Who knows maybe we do have more than five senses.

shameless bump.
this kind of news makes me whoop with joy, every time!
and that, we think, is worth writing a reply about.
peace n love

edit: nothing is nothing

www.physorg.com...

old news. They did this with a nanowire not terribly long ago.

Clearly they have found a way to use zero point energy and only need to refine it to become efficient for use as a power supply.

reply to post by Maxmars


We are learning as with Max Planck's revelation pertaining to ZPE (Zero Point Energy) is that space is not empty.

Sub atomic particles exist almost everywhere and vacuums are no exception.

Photons by definition are " A quantum of radiant energy" and also as to why they exude light when they expire.

Photons are also The same things that are illuminating your monitor's screen as well as that which travels through space to energize solar panels to create DC Current...

I am glad to hear of their discovery. Another example and proof of the world beyond that which can actually be seen.

Pics or it didn't happen need not apply.

Peace

reply to post by ChaoticOrder

They don't go anywhere, they simply cease to exist anywhere.

So the ones that reappear are new ones entirely? Or do the originals cease to exist, then reincarnate?

thought the article was awsome, i was only a tiny bit dissapointed at the end cause they referred to expansion theory and i for one don't personally beleive that the universe is expanding, although the distance from one end to the other may be getting larger due to the addition of new nebulas, stars, planets, etc. Is this what they refer to when they say, "The universe is expanding?" or do they literally mean that the size of every aspect of the universe is getting larger as we speak?(i find this unlikely)