The Aether Reality

Most structures have more than one function, and many in more than one or three dimensions. At least, to me, it seems most reasonable.

I think you you are making an excellent stand for quantum mechanics, and that is not an easy thing to do.

We need something in place of the equal sign, or summation more in line as probable.

reply to post by poet1b


Well we definitely need a more advanced form of Math to be able to even begin to attempt to calculate such things as our current math is lacking.

Thing is...it's just as hard to develop a form of Theoretical Math as it is to describe Quantum Mechanics so it's a Chicken and the Egg thing.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Yes

Second line, probability.

reply to post by poet1b


I believe that Probability dictates the number of Quarks in the Protons and Neutrons of either a person or any matter associated with a choice where a Divergent Universe could be created.

Since Quarks exist in a Proton or Neutron numerically at no less than a certain minimum and no more than a certain maximum or any number in between....as a choice must be made that alters a Universal State to diverge...I believe Quarks will exist close to or at Maximum and when there is low possibility of change by choise...exist close to or at minimum.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


No offense SI, but when I read about quarks and all the other named particles talked about, I feel like I am reading Lord of the Rings or something. They have lots of names of all these little critters which supposedly have all these magic powers, small force, large force, magnetism, electrical charge, and all that, but they might as well be describing elfin magic to me.

Maybe you could put a little oomph into the story, and explain how these forces are created, how they work, how they exist?

Or explain why you have such faith in these particles, how they exist in higher dimensions, something like that.

What it seems to me is that they smash particles together at really high speeds, and observe the impacts, and come up with these ideas, and give things lots of names, but I don't see how this move things forward. None of this explains force or fields.

An interesting paper argueing that quantum wavefunctions are physically real.

Quantum states are the key mathematical objects in quantum theory. It is therefore surprising that physicists have been unable to agree on what a quantum state truly represents. One possibility is that a pure quantum state corresponds directly to reality. However, there is a long history of suggestions that a quantum state (even a pure state) represents only knowledge or information about some aspect of reality. Here we show that any model in which a quantum state represents mere information about an underlying physical state of the system, and in which systems that are prepared independently have independent physical states, must make predictions which contradict those of quantum theory.

xxx.lanl.gov...

Young Einstien about Aether.

"When the electric current comes into being, it immediately sets the surrounding aether in some kind of instantaneous motion, the nature of which has still not been exactly determined. In spite of the continuation of the cause of this motion, namely the electric current, the motion ceases, but the aether remains in a potential state and produces a magnetic field. That the magnetic field is a potential state [of the aether] is shown by the [existence of a] permanent magnet, since the principle of conservation of energy excludes the possibility of a state of motion in this case. The motion of the aether, which is caused by an electric current, will continue until the acting [electro-] motive forces are compensated by the equivalent passive forces which arise from the deformation caused by the motion of the aether itself."

www.16pi2.com...

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Mankind was employing electricity and magnetism long before we understood the exact nature of electrons. And we're still learning about them. Just because we use something, doesn't mean we know everything about it.

Expect your analogy fails completely: nuclear subs, aeroplanes and the internet weren't just lying around waiting for us to use. Nobody "employed" a nuclear sub before they understood it.

They are not the product of nature, but of humanity's understanding of it.

reply to post by poet1b


OBVIOUSLY....if I could prove all that I am saying...and Physics and Cosmology is just a HOBBY....as I was going to go to MIT....which for me is just 89 Miles Away...so right down the street...but because I am fortunate enough to be a World Class Musician...I decided to get a few degrees in Business, Finance, Music and just minor in Physics....so I do not have the necessary knowledge to be able to express my Deep Concepts with the Math and neither do I have the Time anymore to go back to school.

I did meet Dr. Michio Kaku at a CD Release Party in New York City as because of my Recording Contract I must attend 4 of these release parties a year.

He said he didn't drink but after I surprised him after talking with him about this very subject and my own Theory about Quark transfer and exchange from within Protons and Neutrons in one Divergent Universal State to another Alternate Universal State.

After talking for about 5 minutes he dropped the...Oh...I don't drink and we started having Cocktails! LOL! He said he was glad I was there as he too has to go to these release parties because of his TV contracts and was glad he didn't have to answer such questions as...How come one side of the Moon never is lit by the Sun? LOL!

After telling him my theory he said it was interesting and he never thought about Probability being the engine that caused such transfer or determined the Quarks numerical existence within Protons and Neutrons. I asked him how I could attempt to prove this and he said...Well...unless someone creates a new form of Math or else we were able to experiment and detect this happening in an Alternate Universal State....we would have a long wait...but we had a GOOD TIME talking all night and he also told me he was just going to stay the manditory 30 Minutes but because I was there so he could actually TALK to someone...I ended up helping him into his LIMO as he walked out the place just as I did...with a good buzz on! LOL!

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Awesome, sounds like either you are famous, or play music in a very successful band, Great to hear you are living the dream. I like to thump around on the bass now and then.

I am an amateur physicist as well. I do work in and around R&D in Silicon Valley, and done a fair amount of testing in the lab, but never any hard core physics. In a different era, maybe, but as far as I am concerned, humanities technical prowess is currently above our emotional maturity as a species. So I am a poet 1ab.

Have you ever felt a strong static charge rub across your skin? It feels like soft hair. Once I started thinking of all force as a result of structure and shape, rather then some mysterious force or field, it all came together. who knows if I am right, but the concept explains so many things that current science doesn't seem to grasp. Gravity is a combination of momentum and structure. What gives the different elements their characteristics is the structure of the protons, electrons, neutrons, and neutrinos that combine together. A change of state is a change from one structure to another.

reply to post by poet1b


Oh Man!

I am VERY FAMILIAR with the effects on ones body of both Static Electricity as well as both A/C and D/C Currents! LOL!

When I have been on stage over the years and before Cordless Mikes were used...I can tell you I was made aware of what a Pop Tart feels like after going in the toaster! LOL!

As far as Gravity...I still see it as an Expression of One Dimensionality and the Math and Geometry would seem to support this.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


I definately feel a silky hair brush when I feel static electricity.

Gravity is believed by many to be the result of many forces, which makes sense to me. I don't know how 1 dimensional it is, but someone (maybe it was you) pointed out that it only works in one direction, boy band pun not intended. gravity only attracts, it does not repulse, which is a notable observation.

As a basic force gravity is mono directional. On the Earth we have 3 main sources of gravity Earth, Moon, Sun. If we could isolate and combine these sources more directions of movement would be possible. I wonder if gravity waves could be made and ridden somehow by being right on the edge of the deformation and having gravity in more than one direction. If gravity could be meshed then it would become multidimensional.

Once again it seems Bohm was right, this is par for the QM course these days, surely its only a matter of time before it becomes "mainstream".

physicsworld.com... e-secret-lives-of-photons-revealed

An international team of researchers has, for the first time, mapped complete trajectories of single photons in Young's famous double-slit experiment. The finding takes an important first step towards measuring complementary variables of a quantum system – which until now has been considered impossible as a consequence of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

"This weak momentum measurement does not appreciably disturb the system, and interference is still observed. Both measurements had to be repeated on a large ensemble of particles in order to gain enough information for the whole system, but we did not disturb the outcome at all," explains Steinberg. "Our measured trajectories are consistent, as Wiseman had predicted, with the realistic but unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics of such influential thinkers as David Bohm and Louis de Broglie."

And what did De Broglie think? Sound familiar?

De Broglie's explanation of the Bohr atom quantization rules, together with the accidental discovery of electron diffraction scattering by Davisson and Germer, make a very convincing case for the wave nature of the electron. Yet the electron certainly behaves like a particle sometimes. An electron has a definite mass and charge, it can move slowly, it can travel through a piece of apparatus from a gun to a screen. What, then, is the relationship between the wave and particle viewpoints? De Broglie himself always felt both were always present. He called the wave a pilot wave, and thought it guided the motion of the particle.

galileo.phys.virginia.edu... s.html

reply to post by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by primalfractal

 

The Quanta or Quantum Particles that exist in a Photon Wave Packet are VIRTUAL.

This means that such Particles existing as wave are never specific to any one position or one function or one reality. Such particles even when are shown in position as to location upon a Detector have been shown to also exist at either another position as they not only are detected but have been shown to simultaniously have Function.

The Double Slit Experiment is a testament to this fact.

Still...even if there is no lip...Light will be detectable at every vector withing 180 degrees from emmision. The Wave Packet will simply be reflected by any matter either focusing or generating such light in this manner and be emmitted always within 180 degrees of the plave of the matter emmitting it.

Split Infinity

The photon isnt virtual and can have its exact path plotted as shown in my previous post, that it is a wave as well we certainly agree on.

I think perhaps the 180 idea works with wave function but not with a wave packet, which only goes straight. A wave packet is

a short "burst" or "envelope" of localized wave action that travels as a unit.

en.wikipedia.org...
hence could not be at multiple vectors, being localised and quanta or unable to be split smaller.

The only way to detect the light at any other vector would be to move the device lol

Originally posted by primalfractal
An interesting paper argueing that quantum wavefunctions are physically real.

Quantum states are the key mathematical objects in quantum theory. It is therefore surprising that physicists have been unable to agree on what a quantum state truly represents. One possibility is that a pure quantum state corresponds directly to reality. However, there is a long history of suggestions that a quantum state (even a pure state) represents only knowledge or information about some aspect of reality. Here we show that any model in which a quantum state represents mere information about an underlying physical state of the system, and in which systems that are prepared independently have independent physical states, must make predictions which contradict those of quantum theory.

xxx.lanl.gov...

The paper is complex but the idea is inuitvely appealing.

How does one distinguish "physically real" vs "giving information about some aspect of reality"?

Philosophically, I can't, except to say that at a practical level, "physically real" means "giving ALL the extractable information about some aspect of reality, and without having anything else with physics or dynamics around".

This paper seems to show that the predictions of quantum mechanics are unique: if the wavefunction/state was only indicative and not identical to true physical reality (meaning there is something else), then necessarily there must be observable consequences different from a model in which the wavefunction is physical reality, namely quantum mechanics. And since we haven't seen any experimental deviation from quantum mechanics.....

Nobody really disputes whether for classical behavior, classical E&M fields are 'physically real'. And this is because Maxwellian electrodynamics + E&M fields predict all observed behavior without needing any other entities. Nobody bothered to find out if E&M fields were only 'indicative' of some deeper reality which might give different answers, because there was no experiment which showed different answers.

reply to post by primalfractal


I have been reading the website your link introduced me to: Secrets of the Aether.

On the page "The Aether" I see this reference to mainstream physics regarding the aether:

“Frame dragging” is another euphemism of the Standard Model intended to acknowledge the properties of Aether, but without calling it Aether. The frame dragging of General Relativity theory is tantamount to the notion of Aether moving with matter.

reply to post by poet1b


Gravity is created by existing Mass. The greater the amount of Mass...the greater the effect of Gravity.

Gvavity Effects EVERYTHING. This is unlike any Force as such Forces such as Magnetism which cannot effect Elements that have full outer Electron Orbits or similar materials with such elements present. So a bar of Gold will not be effected by a Magnet but Gravity will.

Gravity will even effect Light as a Gravity Well of a Celestial Body will effect Light that is passing within the Space/Time warpeture or Curve created by the created Gravity of such body. If there is enough Mass present such as in the case of a Black Hole....light passing will be drawn into the Black Holes Singularity never to escape.

Gravitational Effect is a Expression of One Dimensionality which means that Mass has caused Space/Time to exhibit a physical change of standard dimensional area and distance by employing the and existing in physical states that are governed by the conditions present in a One Dimensional existence.

Gravity in our Universe is created by not only normal Matter by by Dark Matter as well and over 80% of all Gravitational Effect in our Universe is created by Dark Matter.

Split Infinity

reply to post by primalfractal


As Quanta...an Electron is Virtual also. An example for this is an Electron Orbital Field. The Electron's position can never be specifically determined while in Orbit of an Atomic Nucleus as it does not orbit in the sence of a Planet orbiting the Sun where such a planets position and path can always be specifically located within our Universal Space/Time.

Instead...an Electron cannot have it's position calculated or determined because it is in an Orbiting as a Particle and Wave thus an Electron Orbit is called an Electron Orbital Field.

It is not even certain that Electrons actually ORBIT as they very well might exist at all positions both in and outside of our Universal Space/Time.

Electrons also can exist with Duel Functions thus are able to be converted into a Photon and at the same time Ground out to power an Electrical Motor. Many experiments of late have shown a supposed single Electron simultaniously being used as an energy source as well as Ground into a Mass that can take on additional Electrons in it's Outer Electron Orbits.

This duality is consistent with Photons ability to CHOOSE to travel through two slits and be reflected upon the wall behind.

Split Infinity

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by primalfractal

 

I have been reading the website your link introduced me to: Secrets of the Aether.

On the page "The Aether" I see this reference to mainstream physics regarding the aether:

“Frame dragging” is another euphemism of the Standard Model intended to acknowledge the properties of Aether, but without calling it Aether. The frame dragging of General Relativity theory is tantamount to the notion of Aether moving with matter.

I dont think that frame dragging has been confirmed as yet
and may never be