21st Century "G-O-D"
Speculations on Gravity, O-Point, and Dark Theories
by Iona Miller, 2012
“I suddenly realized that in the language, or at any rate in the spirit of the Glass Bead Game, everything actually was all-meaningful, that every symbol and combination of symbol led not hither and yon, not to single examples, experiments, and proofs, but into the center, the mystery and innermost heart of the world, into primal knowledge. Every transition from major to minor in a sonata, every transformation of a myth or a religious cult, every classical or artistic formulation was, I realized in that flashing moment, if seen with truly a meditative mind, nothing but a direct route into the interior of the cosmic mystery, where in the alternation between inhaling and exhaling, between heaven and earth, between Yin and Yang holiness is forever being created.” (Hesse, Magister Ludi)
"The workshop and treasure of God is in nonexistence: You are deceived by existence,
so how should you know about nonexistence." ~Rumi
Reality is that which can be conceptually and mathematically modeled and fitted to the phenomena existing in one or more minds. Physical reality is that which can be modeled and fitted to the phenomena in one mind. Mental and physical realities comprise "normal" reality. Complex or "paranormal" reality is that which can be conceptually and mathematically modeled and fitted to phenomena which exist in more than one mind, but not in all minds. From pure nothing--empty vacuum, absence of thing--one can generate everything, the presence of thing. Here is direct proof that ultimately opposites are identical. [There is] identity of opposites on their common boundary.
~Thomas E. Beardon, Nuclear Engineer
so how should you know about nonexistence." ~Rumi
Reality is that which can be conceptually and mathematically modeled and fitted to the phenomena existing in one or more minds. Physical reality is that which can be modeled and fitted to the phenomena in one mind. Mental and physical realities comprise "normal" reality. Complex or "paranormal" reality is that which can be conceptually and mathematically modeled and fitted to phenomena which exist in more than one mind, but not in all minds. From pure nothing--empty vacuum, absence of thing--one can generate everything, the presence of thing. Here is direct proof that ultimately opposites are identical. [There is] identity of opposites on their common boundary.
~Thomas E. Beardon, Nuclear Engineer
"Jung found further that the mandala does not only mirror an inner state of order, but that its harmony or disharmony encompasses also the surroundings of the individual. Thus a mandala needs a symbol in which the outer and inner world merge. There is for Jung a ultimate reality beyond matter and psyche which he called the unus mundus, its empirical manifestation is the principle of synchronicity because in synchronistic events the inner world behaves as if it were outside and the outer world as if it were inside. As the mandala symbolism expresses the holistic order of matter and psyche it should have been investigated by physicists as well as psychologists because the mandala reappears in their hypothetical models of the atomic world. The atomic model of Niels Bohr is already a cosmic mandala and the models which the physicists construct nowadays to visualize the quarks are also mandalas."
--M-L von Franz
Imagine for a moment that the fate of the entire human race rested on your shoulders alone. That humanity's evolution out of brute self-interest depended entirely on your willingness to transform your consciousness.
What if you knew that the human race could advance past its smallness and negative conditioning --if you only became an exemplar of humanity's highest potential for the world? Imagine that for you, evolving beyond ego became an evolutionary imperative.
Would you approach your path any differently? Would the energy you brought to your spiritual practice intensify? Would the quality of awareness and care with which you approached your interactions with others become more profound? Would you find yourself reaching with inner muscles you didn't even know you had to actually stay awake to the depth you've tasted in your most profound spiritual moments? If you knew it all rested on you, would you have any choice but to change?
The Indian sage Ramana Maharshi once said that the spiritual aspirant must want liberation like a drowning person wants air. Why? Because the challenges of authentic spiritual growth and transformation are so great that most of us will choose to continue suffering in our smallness, rather than feel the pain of allowing that smallness to die forever.
Modern science has in recent decades been verifying what the ancient traditions intuited long ago: that, in both tangible and mysterious ways, we are all interconnected. Any one of us can have a profound effect on the whole.
Add to that the reality that we are evolving beings living in an evolving universe. We are all part of a grand, cosmic evolutionary process. Then the question of our obligation to the whole starts to cut close to the bone.
What if you realized that the entire human endeavor, the evolution of consciousness itself, depended on your willingness to evolve your own consciousness? How would it affect the choices you make every day if you knew that in a very real sense, those choices were either contributing to the evolution of the whole--or holding it back? At this time when it seems that our very future depends on our willingness to evolve as a species, would you have any choice but to act in alignment with the greatest evolutionary good? The point is that when we take a closer look at what spiritual work and growth is actually for, it quickly becomes clear that the path of awakening is not primarily about freeing ourselves from suffering or securing our own happiness. Sure, that's a nice by-product. But, as long as that's all we're seeking, we probably won't get very far.
Where the spiritual path really begins to get interesting is when we recognize that transforming ourselves in the deepest possible way is in fact an evolutionary imperative, with profound consequences far beyond ourselves.
If we begin to embrace the fact that our lives are not simply our own to do with as we please--that in everything we do, we are in fact accountable to the Whole--something truly miraculous begins to happen. Faced with the palpable responsibility to evolve for a greater good, we find that we suddenly have access to a seemingly infinite source of energy, intention, passion and courage to confront whatever challenges present themselves on our path.
What's more, all of the personal issues and problems--all of the fears and doubts and resistances that once seemed so insurmountable--begin to seem a lot less significant. Why? Because our attention is now captivated by something much bigger than ourselves. This is the power of context. We see our individual concerns, the worries we fret over day to day, from a different vantage point. Held up against this larger picture and greater purpose, those concerns suddenly seem very small indeed. Realizing "it's not all about me," and ignited by a noble calling to participate in the grand adventure of conscious evolution, we find we no longer even want to give those worries the time of day.
And in this freedom from self-concern, before long we discover that the deep inner peace and joy we were seeking all along has become the very ground we are walking on. To get a taste of the liberating context I'm pointing to, try the following experiments:
1) Before you meditate or engage in any spiritual practice, take 10 minutes to reflect on the profound significance of your practice. Ask yourself:
- Why do I need to awaken for myself?
- Why do other people need me to awaken?
- Why does God/evolution/humanity (your choice) need me to awaken?
Allow yourself to feel deeply into the most authentic answer you can find. Then, invite that deeper answer to come forward as a clear and present intention to engage your spiritual practice wholeheartedly, as if the universe depended on it. And engage your practice from this deeper intention. Notice how this exercise impacts the quality of your spiritual practice.
2) When you encounter a challenging and emotionally charged situation in your life, before you respond, take a few minutes to ask yourself:
- What is the most enlightened or evolved response I could have in this situation?
- Why is it important for my own evolution that I respond in the most enlightened, evolved way I can?
- Why does God/evolution/humanity (your choice) need me to respond in the most enlightened, evolved way I can?
Allow yourself to feel into the larger significance of your response to this challenging moment. Ground yourself in an intention to show up as an exemplar of humanity's potential. And then respond from this deeper intention. Notice how this approach changes your perspective on the situation and your ability to meet it. There is deep and powerful work that can be done to cultivate this perspective, to truly ground your life in this way of seeing--and even more importantly, acting.
mysticism claims to offer needs to be assessed from within the world of reality known to science.
"Spirituality without neuroscience is bullshit."
"There is no such thing as unprocessed perception."
Yes, the brain processes immediate experience according to past experience. Consciousness is the past responding to the present.
Krishnamurti said you must watch your conditioned response directly.
That's the only way to see the myth of the self directly.
The myth drops and leaves one in view of reality as it is.
beliefs founded on the brain's ability to hide from conscious awareness what is going on behind the neuronal curtain. It simply isn't true. Repeat: not true. There is no such thing as an experience unmediated by complex goings-on within the brain. Churchland tells us how it is:
The logic of the situation, however, is this: nothing follows about the metaphysical uniqueness of the mind from the existence of discriminable simples, i.e. judgments made without consciousness of the computational antecedents.
First, absolutely all knowledge involves some neural processing prior to conscious recognition that something is an X or a Y. This is so whether the cognition pertains to the mind or to the body, whether one is aware of a stimulus as hot or as lasting for seconds or as looming towards you.
There is no such thing as unprocessed perception.
...That one cannot articulate how the discrimination was made is simply explained by the fact that there is a vast amount of nonconscious neural activity to which one does not -- and perhaps cannot -- have conscious access.
"Spirituality without neuroscience is bullshit."
"There is no such thing as unprocessed perception."
Yes, the brain processes immediate experience according to past experience. Consciousness is the past responding to the present.
Krishnamurti said you must watch your conditioned response directly.
That's the only way to see the myth of the self directly.
The myth drops and leaves one in view of reality as it is.
beliefs founded on the brain's ability to hide from conscious awareness what is going on behind the neuronal curtain. It simply isn't true. Repeat: not true. There is no such thing as an experience unmediated by complex goings-on within the brain. Churchland tells us how it is:
The logic of the situation, however, is this: nothing follows about the metaphysical uniqueness of the mind from the existence of discriminable simples, i.e. judgments made without consciousness of the computational antecedents.
First, absolutely all knowledge involves some neural processing prior to conscious recognition that something is an X or a Y. This is so whether the cognition pertains to the mind or to the body, whether one is aware of a stimulus as hot or as lasting for seconds or as looming towards you.
There is no such thing as unprocessed perception.
...That one cannot articulate how the discrimination was made is simply explained by the fact that there is a vast amount of nonconscious neural activity to which one does not -- and perhaps cannot -- have conscious access.
The Light of Nature
All phenomena are known in empty nature. Eastern traditions say the mind can be emancipated by emptiness. Now physics and depth psychology are inclined to agree. This radical emptiness is the primordial ground of creation -- universal consciousness beyond prespacetime, which forms the ground for our individual consciousness which transduces and filters the massive data glut of the whole realm of being. In our brains this process is mediated by spin and biophotonic light (Hu and Wu).
All dependently originating forms are essentially conceptual constructs from potential reality -- these are holographic archetypes. New creation is possible at any time. We don't claim non-existence, we merely remove claims for existing existents. The Void is not devoid. Voidness does not mean nothingness, but rather that all things lack intrinsic reality, intrinsic objectivity, intrinsic identity or intrinsic referentiality. Lacking such static essence or substance does not make them not exist —- it makes them thoroughly relative.
Meditatively and experimentally contemplating Self, non-Self and Emptiness are a Way to return to our primordial awareness - the naked reality of the Nature mind, much as the alchemists fed their process and quest for the Unus Mundus by contemplating Nature through their alchemical experiments. In this process Nature, not merely our science is the ultimate guide. Jung called the ultimate reality beyond matter and psyche the unus mundus, following the alchemists. Buddha-nature has been described as a positive expression of emptiness, abiding core reality — empty of all mutability and error, fully present within all beings.
The spiritual path is ultimately not about our personal quest, but rather about participating consciously in something far greater than ourselves. When we dwell in the expanded worldview, the synchronistic life becomes more of a steady-state than an occasional numinous novelty. Creative life becomes synchronistic, much like an altered state of consciousness. Miracles seem to happen and creative work is accelerated and deepend, in totally unforseeable ways. The path opens to awakened or renewed consciousness. Coherent consciousness can be liked to a linear accelerator for our being.
The god-image of mysticism and synchronicity are the same, today emerging through the fusion of science and spirituality. Unifying symbols of the self or center (Mandalas, Seal of Solomon, Philosopher's Stone, Flower of Life, Hierosgamos, etc.) reflect the objective psyche or the collective unconscious and are symbolic equivalents of the unus mundus and synchronicity is its parapsychological aspect. Jung sought a unified psychophysical reality behind our artificial split into matter and spirit, transcending the spacetime barrier. The archetypal basis of the theoretical assumptions of physics explains not only phenomena but their deeper symbolic nature.
In the process of continuous creation from the virtual vacuum flux, archetypes are the filters of the creation of forms, much like our senses are filters of perception. Archetypes are the constants of nature. Psychologically, emptiness is the relinquishing of all views. It is explicitly used as a middle way between eternalism and nihilism, abiding radical nondualism. It does not specifically refer to an ultimate, universal, or absolute nature of reality. The virtual vacuum flux of physics, the prespacetime field correlates with the primordial reality from which phenomenal reality springs or the changeless reality empty of only that which is other than itself.
Hu and Wu describe spin (therefore polarity) as the ultimate pixel. Spin-mediated consciousness (neural membrane nuclear spin ensembles) theory that says spin is the linchpin between the mind and brain, that is, spin is the mind-pixel related to quantum entanglement. He and Dr. Wu have discovered evidence of nonlocal effects of chemical substances on the brain produced through quantum entanglement and evidence of nonlocal chemical, thermal and gravitational effects which support the notion of a quantum brain and demonstrate nonlocal signaling and nonlocal gravity.
He has recently also proposed, in collaboration with Wu, the principle of existence which is a theory of everything based on prespacetime (Consciousness). This theory describes the transduction of individual consciousness from primordial or universal consciousness. They argue that quantum entanglement originates from the primordial spin processes in non-spatial and non-temporal pre-spacetime, implying genuine interconnectedness and inseparableness of once interacting quantum entities. This plays a vital roles in biology and consciousness.
INTRODUCTION
All phenomena are known in empty nature. Eastern traditions say the mind can be emancipated by emptiness. Now physics and depth psychology are inclined to agree. This radical emptiness is the primordial ground of creation -- universal consciousness beyond prespacetime, which forms the ground for our individual consciousness which transduces and filters the massive data glut of the whole realm of being. In our brains this process is mediated spin and biophotonic light (Hu and Wu)
All dependently originating forms are essentially conceptual constructs -- these are holographic archetypes. We don't claim non-existence, we merely remove claims for existing existents. Voidness does not mean nothingness, but rather that all things lack intrinsic reality, intrinsic objectivity, intrinsic identity or intrinsic referentiality. Lacking such static essence or substance does not make them not exist —- it makes them thoroughly relative.
Meditatively and experimentally contemplating Self, non-Self and Emptiness are a Way to return to our primordial awareness - the naked reality of the Nature mind, much as the alchemists fed their process and quest for the Unus Mundus by contemplating Nature through their alchemical experiments. In this process Nature, not merely our science is the ultimate guide. Jung called the ultimate reality beyond matter and psyche the unus mundus, following the alchemists.
The spiritual path is ultimately not about our personal quest, but rather about participating consciously in something far greater than ourselves. When we dwell in the expanded worldview, the synchronistic life becomes more of a steady-state than an occasional novelty. Creative life becomes synchronistic, much like an altered state of consciousness. Miracles seem to happen and creative work is accelerated and deepend, in totally unforseeable ways. The path opens to awakened consciousness.
In the process of continuous creation from the virtual vacuum flux, archetypes are the filters of the creation of forms, much like our senses are filters of perception. Archetypes are the constants of nature. Psychologically, emptiness is the relinquishing of all views. It is explicitly used as a middle way between eternalism and nihilism, abiding radical nondualism. It does not specifically refer to an ultimate, universal, or absolute nature of reality. The virtual vacuum flux of physics, the prespacetime field correlates with the primordial reality from which phenomenal reality springs or the changeless reality empty of only that which is other than itself.
Hu and Wu describe spin as the ultimate pixel. Spin-mediated consciousness (neural membrane nuclear spin ensembles) theory that says spin is the linchpin between the mind and brain, that is, spin is the mind-pixel related to quantum entanglement. He and Dr. Wu have discovered evidence of nonlocal effects of chemical substances on the brain produced through quantum entanglement and evidence of nonlocal chemical, thermal and gravitational effects which support the notion of a quantum brain and demonstrate nonlocal signaling and nonlocal gravity. He has recently also proposed, in collaboration with Wu, the principle of existence which is a theory of everything based on prespacetime (Consciousness).
All phenomena are known in empty nature. Eastern traditions say the mind can be emancipated by emptiness. Now physics and depth psychology are inclined to agree. This radical emptiness is the primordial ground of creation -- universal consciousness beyond prespacetime, which forms the ground for our individual consciousness which transduces and filters the massive data glut of the whole realm of being. In our brains this process is mediated spin and biophotonic light (Hu and Wu)
All dependently originating forms are essentially conceptual constructs -- these are holographic archetypes. We don't claim non-existence, we merely remove claims for existing existents. Voidness does not mean nothingness, but rather that all things lack intrinsic reality, intrinsic objectivity, intrinsic identity or intrinsic referentiality. Lacking such static essence or substance does not make them not exist —- it makes them thoroughly relative.
Meditatively and experimentally contemplating Self, non-Self and Emptiness are a Way to return to our primordial awareness - the naked reality of the Nature mind, much as the alchemists fed their process and quest for the Unus Mundus by contemplating Nature through their alchemical experiments. In this process Nature, not merely our science is the ultimate guide. Jung called the ultimate reality beyond matter and psyche the unus mundus, following the alchemists.
The spiritual path is ultimately not about our personal quest, but rather about participating consciously in something far greater than ourselves. When we dwell in the expanded worldview, the synchronistic life becomes more of a steady-state than an occasional novelty. Creative life becomes synchronistic, much like an altered state of consciousness. Miracles seem to happen and creative work is accelerated and deepend, in totally unforseeable ways. The path opens to awakened consciousness.
In the process of continuous creation from the virtual vacuum flux, archetypes are the filters of the creation of forms, much like our senses are filters of perception. Archetypes are the constants of nature. Psychologically, emptiness is the relinquishing of all views. It is explicitly used as a middle way between eternalism and nihilism, abiding radical nondualism. It does not specifically refer to an ultimate, universal, or absolute nature of reality. The virtual vacuum flux of physics, the prespacetime field correlates with the primordial reality from which phenomenal reality springs or the changeless reality empty of only that which is other than itself.
Hu and Wu describe spin as the ultimate pixel. Spin-mediated consciousness (neural membrane nuclear spin ensembles) theory that says spin is the linchpin between the mind and brain, that is, spin is the mind-pixel related to quantum entanglement. He and Dr. Wu have discovered evidence of nonlocal effects of chemical substances on the brain produced through quantum entanglement and evidence of nonlocal chemical, thermal and gravitational effects which support the notion of a quantum brain and demonstrate nonlocal signaling and nonlocal gravity. He has recently also proposed, in collaboration with Wu, the principle of existence which is a theory of everything based on prespacetime (Consciousness).
ABSTRACT: The 21st century nature of a scientific "G-O-D" as an acronym describes the little understood elements of Gravity, 0-Point energy, and Dark Energy (DE) and Dark Matter (DM). Like electricity, we know more about exploiting them than we do about their essential nature. Even that is an over-statement -- we dream of manipulating gravity, harnessing zero point energy, and exploiting negative matter, which besides negative mass and negative energy might have a negative gravitational charge and repel normal matter.
Such puzzling conceptual issues of QM can hardly be solved here, but perhaps it is time to approach them in a slightly different way. In physics, 2012 is the year of the so-called God-particle, the Higgs boson, which underpins existence as the field that creates matter through resistance -- a sort of demiurgic potential. We still don't know just how GOD waves the magic quantum wand of creation that results in the power of being.
Rather than projections of exalted deity, what kinds of symbols or metaphors can open our minds to the truth of such a scientific GOD? We have some conceptual confidence about gravity and the Zero Point groundstate, but the jury remains out on Dark Matter and Dark Energy. DM and DE may not exist; likewise, negative matter and negative energy. Negative matter could be dark matter. Antimatter does exist. Antimatter has positive mass. Whereas negative matter is a parallel set of particles with NEGATIVE MASS, essentially a "mirror" universe.
Gravity and the vacuum are still revealing surprises and mysteries, such as the smoothness just discovered at the smallest scale in the vacuum. Some theories of quantum gravity claim the universe is not smooth but foamy—made of fundamental units called Planck lengths that are less than a trillionth of a trillionth the diameter of a hydrogen atom. We can think of it casually as "pixelated" spacetime. "We have shown that the universe is smooth across the Planck mass," Nemiroff said. "That means that there's no choppiness that's detectable." (Nemiroff).
http://www.sciencecodex.com/spacetime_a_smoother_brew_than_we_knew-97177
The assumption that matter is distributed evenly throughout the cosmos has allowed cosmologists to model the universe using Einstein's theory of general relativity, which relates the geometry of space-time to the matter spread uniformly within it. Recent research shows the universe is not a fractal, which further limits the possibilities of minute "pixels" at smaller scales than the Planck length. Mind-pixel is a term coined by biophysicist Huping Hu in 2002 to describe the elementary functional unit of mind from the reductionist's perspective. It has similar meaning as the better known term neural substrate of consciousness.
Hu and Wu describe spin as the ultimate pixel. Spin-mediated consciousness theory that says spin is the linchpin between the mind and brain, that is, spin is the mind-pixel. Further, he has recently discovered, in collaboration with Wu, evidence of nonlocal effects of chemical substances on the brain produced through quantum entanglement and evidence of nonlocal chemical, thermal and gravitational effects which support the notion of a quantum brain and demonstrate nonlocal signaling and nonlocal gravity. He has recently also proposed, in collaboration with Wu, the principle of existence which is a theory of everything based on prespacetime (Consciousness).
Hu, Huping and Wu, Maoxin (2008), ‘Concerning spin as mind-pixel: How mind interacts with the brain through electric spin effects', NeuroQuantology 6:1, pp. 26-31.
Hu and Wu also theorized that consciousness is intrinsically connected to quantum mechanical spin since said spin is embedded in the microscopic structure of spacetime and is more fundamental than spacetime itself, that is, spin is the “mind-pixel.” Applying these ideas to the particular structures and dynamics of the brain, they developed a qualitative model of quantum consciousness. Spin is a primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness. They conclude that these properties are indeed endowed to spin by Nature. One of the implications from their fundamental view is that the probabilistic structure of quantum mechanics is due to the self-referential collapse of spin state that is contextual, non-local, non-computable and irreversible. Therefore, a complete theory of the self-referential spin process is necessarily semantic, that is, it should be based on internally meaningful information.
Spin as primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu
The universe is fractal-like out to large distance scales, but at a certain point, the mathematical form breaks down. The researchers found that matter is distributed extremely evenly throughout the universe on extremely large distance scales, with little sign of fractal-like patterns (Scrimgeour). So, according to these researchers the universe is not fractal at either the largest or smallest scales. http://news.yahoo.com/universe-isnt-fractal-study-finds-215053937.html?_esi=1
Is Dark Energy really "Repulsive Gravity"? Negative matter could be behind this mysterious force, new theory says.
http://phys.org/news/2012-01-repulsive-gravity-alternative-dark-energy_1.html
Dark Energy has remained elusive. For all we know, DE is just a illusion caused by the gravity repulsion between antimatter and matter, but we haven't confirmed that. The problem is that we don't have NEGATIVE MATTER STABLE enough OR THOUGHT TO BE to test this idea. Negative matter gravity is the same as positive matter gravity.
Some scientists question DE's existence and tout alternatives to explain that accelerating expansion. But a new, two-year study by scientists at the University of Portsmouth and Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat Munchen concludes that dark energy does, indeed, exist. Those results just appeared in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. http://news.discovery.com/space/new-study-re-confirms-evidence-for-dark-energy-120912.html
Video - http://news.discovery.com/videos/space-study-sheds-light-on-dark-energy.html
In 1998, astronomers studying distant exploding stars called a Type 1A supernovae discovered that not only was the universe expanding, but that the rate of expansion was accelerating due to some type of unknown force or dark energy. And one of the explanations for this effect is -- you guessed it -- Einstein's cosmological constant.
While that discovery snagged its team leaders the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics, it's not the only evidence in favor of dark energy. For instance, last May, a team of scientists from Melbourne's Swinburne University announced their independent confirmation of both the existence of dark energy and its rate of expansion, based on four years of data collected by a powerful spectrograph at the Australian Astronomical Observatory.
That study included more than 240,000 galaxies going back over seven billion years and showed that the growth of galaxy clusters and super clusters has slowed down. This means that in the most distant parts of universe -- those further back in spacetime -- gravity dominates. It's only in our current part of the cosmos where dark energy dominates, and hence we are seeing accelerated expansion.
The Swinburne researchers also looked at the distances between pairs of galaxies, and the ripples in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB). They found that the average distance between galaxy pairs (about 500,000,000 light years) has been growing because of the expansion of space-time, providing further confirmation of dark energy.
One of the strongest pieces of evidence can be found in a unique feature of the CMB, known as the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe Effect, based on a 1967 prediction that light from the CMB would show a redshift -- i.e., it would become slightly "bluer" -- as it passed through gravitational fields of clumped matter.
ANALYSIS: Rare Cosmic Effect Sheds Light on Galaxy Cluster Motion
Scientists didn't detect the Sachs-Wolfe Effect until 2003 -- Science magazine deemed it the "discovery of the year." It showed up as tiny gains in energy among photons in the CMB, based on comparing the temperature of the CMB with maps of galaxies in our local part of the universe.
As exciting as that discovery was, it was pretty weak signal, and might have been caused by something else -- space dust, for instance. So Tommaso Giannantonio and Robert Crittenden took the lead on a two-year study to re-examine that data and improve the galactic maps used in the original work.
Their conclusion: there is a 99.996 percent chance that dark energy is responsible for those observed variations in the CMB where the photons are just a wee bit hotter than the rest. That's equivalent to the level of certainly of the recent announcement of the discover of a Higgs-like particle.
We still don't know what exactly the dark energy is, of course, and what all this will ultimately mean for modifications of general relativity. But its existence is looking like much more of a sure thing, although we can expect to see some pretty close scrutiny of these new results from those who remain skeptical.
This isn't the final word, is the point -- science marches on. As Giannantonio said via press release, "The next generation of cosmic microwave background and galaxy surveys should provide the definitive measurement, either confirming general relativity, including dark energy, or even more intriguingly, demanding a completely new understanding of how gravity works."
If there is no question the Big Bang happened, the question remains whether it was the FIRST big bang. Leonard Susskind (2011) is promoting the mind-boggling idea of a better and bigger multiverse, one that unifies the "inflationary multiverse", the "quantum multiverse", and the "holographic multiverse", but that is beyond the scope of this paper. (Bousso & Susskind) Still, it raises the question, "Is the fundamental totality of reality itself some hyperuniverse? Is that why we fail to get traction on forces unification? In other words, are there Dark Universes (DU), with enormous density of hyper-civilizations? http://www2.hu-berlin.de/leibniz-sozietaet/journal/archive/13_12/01_gribov.pdf http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3796
Dark Matter may be an illusion of the quantum vacuum. CERN physicist Dragan Hajdukovic suggests that the quantum vacuum has a gravitational charge stemming from the gravitational repulsion of virtual particles and antiparticles. Previously, he has theoretically shown that this repulsive gravity can explain several observations, including effects usually attributed to dark matter. Hajdukovic has proposed that the illusion of dark matter may be caused by the gravitational polarization of the quantum vacuum. Additionally, this additional gravity suggests that we live in a cyclic Universe (with no Big Bang) and may provide insight into the nature of black holes and an estimate of the neutrino mass. In his most recent paper, published in Astrophysics and Space Science, he shows that the quantum vacuum could explain one more observation: the Universe’s accelerating expansion, without the need for dark energy. http://phys.org/news/2012-01-repulsive-gravity-alternative-dark-energy_1.html http://phys.org/news/2011-08-dark-illusion-quantum-vacuum.html
Like his previous study, [arguing the Big Bang could have been a quick conversion of antimatter into matter] about a cyclic universe successively dominated by matter and antimatter, Hajdukovic’s paper on a dark matter alternative is also an attempt to understand cosmological phenomena without assuming the existence of unknown forms of matter and energy, or of unknown mechanisms for inflation and matter-antimatter asymmetry. In the case of the fast rotational curves of galaxies, he explains that there are currently two schools of understanding the phenomenon. “The first school invokes the existence of dark matter, while the second school invokes modification of our law of gravity,” he said. “I suggest a third way, without introducing dark matter and without modification of the law of gravity.” His ideas (like those in the previous paper) rest on the key hypothesis that matter and antimatter are gravitationally repulsive, which is due to the fact that particles and antiparticles have gravitational charge of opposite sign. (Though like matter, antimatter is gravitationally attractive with itself.) Currently, it is not known whether matter and antimatter are gravitationally repulsive. . .If matter and antimatter are gravitationally repulsive, then it would mean that the virtual particle-antiparticle pairs that exist for a limited time in the quantum vacuum are “gravitational dipoles.” That is, each pair forms a system in which the virtual particle has a positive gravitational charge, while the virtual antiparticle has a negative gravitational charge. In this scenario, the quantum vacuum contains many virtual gravitational dipoles, taking the form of a dipolar fluid. “We can consider our universe as a union of two mutually interacting entities,” Hajdukovic said. “The first entity is our ‘normal’ matter (hence we do not assume the existence of dark matter and dark energy), immersed in the second entity, the quantum vacuum, considered as a sea of different kinds of virtual dipoles, including gravitational dipoles.” If matter and antimatter repel each other, the quick conversion of one into the other inside a supermassive black hole may look like a Big Bang. He proposes that, in a gravitational version of the Schwinger mechanism, gravitation could create both charged and neutral particle-antiparticle pairs from virtual particles.
http://phys.org/news/2011-07-big-quick-conversion-antimatter.html#jCp
http://phys.org/news/2011-08-dark-illusion-quantum-vacuum.html#jCp
http://phys.org/news/2011-07-big-quick-conversion-antimatter.html
From an open-minded perspective, we therefore have questions about the modelling of spacetime. Science likes to make observations and measurements in static rather than dynamic reference frames. That essentially takes time out of the equation and may skew observational results in some instances. Is time a property of absolute space, or is something else happening?
Spyentist and scalar engineering specialist, K. Thomas says, "Yes". His expertise comes from learning by doing in extensive benchwork and advanced fieldwork for a global government from the 1970s forward. His is more than theoretical knowledge. Thomas summarizes his action learning in the following:
"The Randall-Sundrum theory was the leading contender for a GUT a few years ago. It crashed spectacularly because it rested on finding a graviton at about one TEV - nothing was found. i expect a spin 2 particle to be found at about 4TEV (8 tev for collider) which is as close as we will ever get to a "graviton". Nearly all the gravity we see and feel is NEAR FIELD which requires no carrier and the graviton has no special importance in any case except that it has a cult status among physicists. The particle at 4 TEV is an entangled gluon pair which is functionally somewhat similar to a theoretical graviton but is, additionally, intimately involved in the manufacture of space itself. The expanding universe requires ever more "space". It gets made."
"Very recently, I learned that the particle has been found but nobody can make anything out as to just what it is. This year's higher LHC energies should make it more clear - and possibly promote the underweight 125 TEV Higgs "fragment" to full Higgs status which would rehabilitate some version of Randall-Sundrum and trigger immediate grand unification with gravity as the unifying force."
Thomas further suggests a 5-D Kaluza-Klein universe, with an inherent "mirror universe" or "co-universe" of negative matter. A viable KK model is reconsidered in this context. Forcing the non-existent graviton IN to accommodate Minkowski "spacetime" makes it APPEAR to fail. Gravity doesn't weaken at microscale. It is similar to old Kaluza-Klein theory, but drops the restrictive ‘cylinder’ and ‘compactification’ conditions, yielding a rich and fully covariant algebra. This can be interpreted to provide new insights to what is commonly called rest mass and matter. Such virtual physics is a theory of an energetic vacuum. If antimatter exists, NEGATIVE matter exists, and it constitutes part of the missing mass. Dark matter / energy is just a LABEL and says nothing about properties). The 5th dimension is the minimalist mirror universe. For realistic purposes it's the vacuum.
We need to reexamine the nature of the groundstate in the light of new theories and postulates of Virtual Physics rather than irrelevant mathematical vagaries and flawed conventional theories. Mathematics should follow, not precede observation and inference. The ramifications of plausible alternative theories must be worked through to separate the lead of the unviable from the gold of new insights on the nature of reality. For the sake of this article, we call such an approach Virtual Physics. Others might call it "Dissident Physics." The Standard Model does not explain the gravitational force or the most vexing problem in physics--unifying the laws of gravity with those of quantum mechanics.
Keywords: Gravity, Zero Point, Dark Matter, dark energy, big bang, acceleration, process physics, negative matter, antimatter, Kaluza-Klein, unification
Introduction: Creative Force & Source
This universe is characterized by certain interacting life-supporting values (Rees):
1). The strength of the force that binds atomic nuclei making atomic structure possible;
2). The strength of the forces that hold atoms together;
3). The density of material in the universe;
4). Cosmic antigravity that controls the expansion of space;
5). The amplitude of ripples in the expanding universe that seeds macro-structures such as galaxies, solar systems, and planets;
6). The number of spatial dimensions (3-D).
The worldview of materialism is false. Modern science revolutionized our understanding of the natural world, and can help expand our understanding of the creative potential we have historically called Divine. Related topics include astronomy and cosmology, evolution, genetic engineering, extraterrestrial life, psychology, religious experience, spirituality, medicine, and artificial intelligence. There is no consensus in quantum physics about the deep nature of reality, much less quantum cosmology, and this has given rise to many schools of thought.
The enduring Newtonian worldview works for engineering and technology and provides a comprehensible scientific model of the world that enables us to understand astronomical phenomena such as the orbit of the planets, the universal law of gravitation, and more. But Newtonian mechanics really does not tell us the truth about the world. Nor do our senses. Quantum mechanics has very little to do with our senses, its inherent abstractness being its own enemy. Materialists readily admit QM is both weird and profound. But it only seems weird because our view of the world is so wrong in the first place. We find it strange because it generates dissonance between our common sense view of the world in the most fundamental and profound way possible by showing its illusory nature.
So far, the best minds, even Stephen Hawking, can’t come up with a coherent theory that incorporates both gravity, as described by general relativity, and quantum mechanics. Such a melding--a workable quantum cosmology--has frustrated generations. The inescapable task of the quantum cosmologist is to propose laws of initial or boundary conditions for the universe. Hawking's idea is called the no-boundary proposal, which admits many possible histories.
Astronomer David Lindley contends, "Inflation is a nice idea; it would be pleasing if particle physics worked in such a way that it made the universe large and uniform. But there is no substantial evidence that inflation actually occurred...Nevertheless, so enamored are particle physicists of the idea of inflation as a cosmic panacea that they have taken to inventing theories that do nothing except make inflation work. The argument is circular -- cosmologists like inflation because particle physicists can provide it, and particle physicists provide it because cosmologists like it -- and has proved, so far, immune to test."
Perhaps, the universe has tunneled from "nothing." The evolution described by inflation and the Big Bang would have subsequently occurred after tunneling.
"The negative energy is not a ridiculous idea, between two parallel metal plates in the vacuum there will be a negative energy is less than the outside vacuum energy. This is because the normal vacuum as the rolling sea waves, the formation of the wave is far from suitable for the gap between two parallel metal plates, metal plates between the energy will come lower than outside. Scientists have calculated that the surface of the vacuum negative energy to m The negative energy is not a ridiculous idea, between two parallel metal plates in the vacuum there will be a negative energy is less than the outside vacuum energy. This is because the normal vacuum as the rolling sea waves, the formation of the wave is far from suitable for the gap between two parallel metal plates, metal plates between the energy will come lower than outside." (Choun) http://ronbarak.tumblr.com/post/19236709528/intergalactic-subway-all-aboard-the-wormhole-express
According to foreign media reports, the team of physicists from Germany, found by calculating the exclusive "wormhole" is not science fiction, do not need to enter any negative energy can create time and space "wormhole". From Dr. Burkhard, Burkhard Kleihaus, Craven House, University of Oldenburg, Germany, said: open a wormhole in the universe do not even need the positive energy, which means that the wormhole can not depend on any material to complete the open was born from the "void". We can through the "wormhole" time travel, instant Pluto near or distance of the Andromeda galaxy of millions of light years.
The Big Bang and Inflation, the "Standard Model of Cosmology", show the only thing that’s really mattered is gravity, pulling matter into structures like stars and galaxies, and slowing the curious expansion rate of the Universe through gravitational attraction. An alternative model to consider has arisen, according to researchers that explains the abundances of the light elements and the cosmic background radiation.
The discrete photon is the physical form of the quantum. As the smallest bundle of light, it is a messenger for oscillating EM forces, carrying information without substance (mass). A photon is a mode of oscillation of an EM stress field in the cosmic medium. Light beams contain trillions of photons.
Photons of different energy values carry electromagnetic force of different wavelengths, which unfolds over time. The absolute vacuum is devoid of all structure, but the false vacuum contains frozen and decomposing subatomic energies as fermions, bosons, quarks, photons, electrons and gravity. Radiant energy is a quantum of energy measured in joules. It is transferred as photons emanating in short bursts, the wave train.
The vacuum and its emanations are the central ingredients of 21st century physics. Science is learning to produce, manipulate and detect single photons, though QM doesn’t help us visualize the interactive processes that lead to their emanation. An electron is a closed-loop photon. It is a transducer of other forms of energy. A photon may simply be an artifact of nonlinear EM events. Resonant photon-graviton conversion takes place in EM fields.
According to Thomas, "the standard model graviton, I'm sure, does not exist. There could be exchange particles for some of the gravities but not gravitons. The idea that gravitons are distorted photons is very damaging and comes from extending Maxwell the way Maxwell extended Newton - just add or remove electric charge. It doesn't work like that but it's so appealing that almost everybody adopts it. All my ideas have been unchanged for a long time and I have insisted on the organic carbon argument that space is Euclidian, since 1958. I can agree with that one. The similarity between EM and gravity is probably overstated."
Only single-quantum events become measurable, as something emerges from subspace. They deliver a finite flux density in time. Light is a self-propagating harmonic EM undulation. EM radiation is photon release. Photon EM energy affects the "steady state" EM fields of matter (electrons) by displacing them from their ground states. We need to determine the nature and bounds of the primordial field strength.
Sources of cosmic microwave radiation and dark matter identified: millimeter black holes
Antonio Alfonso-Faus, Marius Josep Fullana i Alfonso (Submitted on 13 Apr 2010) http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.2251
The universe is filled with blackbody millimeter radiation (CMBR), temperature 2.7{\deg} Kelvin[1]. Big-bang cosmology explains this by the initial thermalization of photons scattered by electrons[2]. This explanation requires ad hoc previous existence of photons and thermal electrons. On the other hand most of the mass of the universe is unknown dark matter3. It explains anomalous dynamical properties, like that of stars in galaxies[4,5,6] . Alternatively the anomalies have been explained by adjusting and modifying well known laws ("Modified Newtonian dynamics"[7]). Here we show that millimeter black holes (m.b.h.) explain both: the background radiation, by its partial "evaporation", and the dark matter. Black holes emit blackbody radiation (Hawking[8] evaporation), and this is what is observed in the CMBR. Millimeter size black holes emit blackbody radiation at a temperature of 2.7{\deg} Kelvin, and this is the resulting CMBR . Partial evaporation of ~10^30 m.b.h. gives the observed background field of photons being emitted and absorbed at the same rate by the m.b.h. The number of photons is constant, as observed. Their temperature decreases with time because the mass of the m.b.h. (and therefore its size) increases with time (the mass-boom effect[9]). The total mass of the m.b.h. is the dark matter. Hence dark matter is not so "dark" after all. Two important cosmological items are here identified by only one source: millimeter black holes. The universe is filled with blackbody millimeter radiation (CMBR), temperature 2.7{\deg} Kelvin[1]. Big-bang cosmology explains this by the initial thermalization of photons scattered by electrons[2]. This explanation requires ad hoc previous existence of photons and thermal electrons. On the other hand most of the mass of the universe is unknown dark matter3. It explains anomalous dynamical properties, like that of stars in galaxies[4,5,6] . Alternatively the anomalies have been explained by adjusting and modifying well known laws ("Modified Newtonian dynamics"[7]). Here we show that millimeter black holes (m.b.h.) explain both: the background radiation, by its partial "evaporation", and the dark matter. Black holes emit blackbody radiation (Hawking[8] evaporation), and this is what is observed in the CMBR. Millimeter size black holes emit blackbody radiation at a temperature of 2.7{\deg} Kelvin, and this is the resulting CMBR . Partial evaporation of ~10^30 m.b.h. gives the observed background field of photons being emitted and absorbed at the same rate by the m.b.h. The number of photons is constant, as observed. Their temperature decreases with time because the mass of the m.b.h. (and therefore its size) increases with time (the mass-boom effect[9]). The total mass of the m.b.h. is the dark matter. Hence dark matter is not so "dark" after all. Two important cosmological items are here identified by only one source: millimeter black holes.
The novel idea is that millimeter-sized black holes (between the masses of Pluto and the planet Mercury) could cause the cosmic background radiation! We can examine the idea, and see if this is an exciting new possibility, or whether we can demonstrate swiftly and easily that this is not feasible. They conclude that "the effects explicated with dark matter could be stated with such black holes. The unknown nature of dark matter will then disappear. The distribution of such
black holes would be the same postulated for dark matter. Finally, we identify the scale as the intermediate one, in a geometric mean sense, between Planck´s scale and the scale of the visible Universe."
WHAT IS SPACE?
Ironically, there is no pressing need to know the answer. It is only a concern because of the confusion caused by the thoroughly dishonest elevation of the idea of a space-time continuum , to further the petty, personal interests of a faction of the numerological priesthood.
Einstein defended his theory that spacetime was a new form of ether that served as a reference for inertia. With this metric the geodesic of general relativity (GR) is an identity, and all accelerating trajectories are geodesics. This theory also agrees with special relativity, with a new perspective.
Dynamic 4-D scale transition is unproven, but solves many problems in cosmology with scale expansion. This solution to inertia is compatible with special relativity, also. The pace of time is regulated by time dilation in inertial frames, consistent with GR. Where does gravity come from? Inertia is a gravitational-type effect. Discrete scale transition offers us one way to think out of the box about this old conundrum.
A space-time notion is just a rephrasing of the question, not an answer. Time is made the fourth dimension and is narrowed in definition to an indicator of the degree of curvature of space at any given point. The fourth dimension is, properly, a dimension of space with time-like properties. Adopting space-time and adjourning the court precludes any future inquiry into "time", which cannot be a dimension, in any case.
So, what is "space"? We don't know but there are possibilities. Space could be a skeletal residue of the strong nuclear force left behind as it extruded the weak force. If the "pixelation" of space equals the Planck length - as seems likely, at present - that would be evidence for the above. - but it doesnt matter. To produce the present universe, space would have to have expanded at millions of times the speed of light in the early universe. So there's no limit on the expansion -or any other motion- of space itself. Gravity curves space, or gravity IS curved space. Either way, the disturbance generated has no practical speed limit and can carry information.
Dispense with the non-existent "graviton" and DeBroglie-Bohm answers Bell's inequality - as anyone knows who experiments with parametric amplifiers and mixers for any length of time can attest. Carbon parametric amplifiers existed in the 19th century (Nathan Stubblefield, Edward Hughes and many others).
Deeming the quasi graviton a "team" of 2 spin1 particles is probably the only untried scheme to make GR fully compatible with Maxwell, which deficit constitutes a big part of conflict between GR and QM.
Standard theory says space is expanding at a constant rate but space has no mass to move relative to itself. So what force drives the expansion? As the size of the universe expands, rate of growth increases, driving expansion faster. What is the relationship of mass, velocity, distance and time? Time may be relative to velocity.
Masreliez (2006) suggests acceleration changes the four metrical coefficients in the Minkowskian line element. This means a new kind of dynamic process involves four-dimensional scale transition (SEC). Depending solely on velocity, this dynamic scale factor is [1-(v/c)2)]. It models inertia as a gravitational-type phenomenon. Inertia is resistance to accelerating motion - a cosmic drag that exerts tangible force. Inertia is a spacetime effect.
Einstein defended his theory that spacetime was a new form of ether that served as a reference for inertia. With this metric the geodesic of general relativity (GR) is an identity, and all accelerating trajectories are geodesics. This theory also agrees with special relativity, with a new perspective.
Dynamic 4-d scale transition is unproven, but solves many problems in cosmology with scale expansion. This solution to inertia is compatible with special relativity, also. The pace of time is regulated by time dilation in inertial frames, consistent with GR. Where does gravity come from? Inertia is a gravitational-type effect. Discrete scale transition offers us one way to think out of the box about this old conundrum.
In a scale-invariant expanding cosmos, many of these phenomena evaporate because they are unnecessary in this model as corrections or approximations. The potential for tapping Radiant Energy increases. Time is quantized; a quantum of time = 1x10^-88. This doesn't mean time is discontinuous but that time is a quantum potential. Time dilation contains potential energy. What is called dark matter is probably a crude first approximation of quantized time.
Time can change with reference to mass and distance. In nature, time is always expressed in quanta, such as frequency, vibrations, transitions. Potential time energy is transduced into dynamic spatial energy as cosmic jitter (ZPE; zitterbewegung), cosmic acceleration, radiant energy, and mass. All quantum frequencies are processing time potential.
Research suggests we may eventually be able to tap the flow of time, itself. Some speculate that in a scale expanding cosmos (SEC), radiant energy is time or close to it and non-EM. We suggest a high frequency tunnel transistor with excess charge carriers is capable of tunneling under the junction barriers. It is much like sticking a waterwheel in time’s one way flow. Under ideal conditions, the the overunity of this system could be as much as 125%.
Gravitation
Vacuum potential is not known. It is known and infinite only if you equate vacuum potential with time. Existence of gravitons is suspect. Gravitation may be a bundle of forces not closely related {Sakarov}. Anti-gravity is not negative gravity but loss of mass and may be the first differentiation from time. Slowing, decaying time creates matter which is exploding outward, as is space-time. The outward push is antigravity/slightly degraded time. We will discover antigravity and time travel together as they would be mostly identical.
If there is a particle associated with the 4 or 5 pseudogravities, it would be the photon but could be called the graviton. Photons probably move at "c". Incompletely formed, semi-virtual photons {semi-scalars, radiant energy} might move at c squared if emerging from virtual or at any speed if lingering near virtual/real, QM-LIKE boundary, which they do seem to do.
So, c is only for photon and its antiparticle or photon and graviton; since there is no exterior difference between photon and pseudogravitational graviton - the difference being internal bending. Since the total number of supposed gravitons appears to equal the total number of photons, the left-over geometric gravitation is REAL gravity or slightly decayed time.
Space is the instantaneous effect of creation of outward rushing matter by time, which is thus slowed. Some of it becomes indistinguishable {at present} from space-time. As time slows more, more space-time is created. Time's arrow may not be reversible. Light may or may not vary in speed.
Kaluza-Klein Model
Since we cannot observe information coming from unseen dimensions, we are missing information to complete our description of reality and of the time dimension. Seeking to unify Gravitation and EM, Kaluza-Klein offers an elegant geometrical model that is invariant in circular rotation. In KK five-dimensional Schwarzschild solutions should not be interpreted as black holes.
The KK vacuum decays into a geodesically complete space. But the holes form spontaneously and expand instantly to infinity at the speed of light. Technically, space does not exist inside these bubbles. KK and SEC, which both include a scalar field, are both thoroughly incompatible with string and M-theory. KK's fifth dimension is a compactified space. EM can be described as a circular bundle by gauge theory.
KK is not limited to 4 and 5 dimensional models and may be modeled with 11-d. 5d KK can be used to model unknown gravitomagnetism now demonstrable in micro-, meso- and macro- scales. Problems with the Ricci tensor as it moves from GR to QM to SEC remain to be worked out. Both KK and DGP are higher dimensional theories of GR with a scalar component. In DGP theory, gravity may be 4-d over short distances and 5-d over long distance. This unstable theory hints at the cosmic acceleration of dark energy.
Cosmic drag in SEC is partly or entirely gravitomagnetism; ether drag. Theoretically, there is an analog to the magnetic field in gravity. This is sometimes called gravitomagnetism, and other times called frame dragging. Gravitomagnetism = frame dragging = cosmic drag. Beyond is only the microworld of QM.
Cosmic drag is just the distubance in the subspace field from anything OF ANY SIZE that spins. The "any size" part is the key concept. It has already been proven in pieces by groups unaware of each other (cite examples). It means that drag – gravitomagnetism -- is a general phenomenon that permeates everything like gravity.
Its effects are not limited to quantum effects, or the microworld. This is a fundamental shift in conceptualization. It changes the environment of all virtual and realtime entities. Its as if the strong nuclear force dimension had suddenly unfurled and you could use it like electricity for motors and lights. Cosmic drag is the revelation of SEC -- new AND unexpected.
Gravitomagnetism is established on the mesoscale and almost proven to be due to spin alignment and acceleration by addition of magnetic field. Gravitomagnetic tapping of time/gravity is more plausible than harnessing zero-point energy (ZPE) through magnetic energy. Frame dragging is established on all scales micro meso and macro. This is identical with the cosmic drag in SEC theory. Curled dimensions as a mathematical convenience are not required because the #5 macrodimension is the bridge to QM. It is 11-d but a different 11-d than strings or M-theory.
"Pixelated Space"?
What is the texture of Reality, the scintillating fabric of absolute space? Is space relative or quantized by Planck-length?
Thomas says he chose the "undesirable term pixel" to distinguish from graininess foamyness.; the indentation left by intersecting gluons is probably close to Planck length but very pliable in shape- and could be seamless once formed. the graininess of favored quantum gravities is way too big. http://www.sciencecodex.com/spacetime_a_smoother_brew_than_we_knew-97177
It would appear that the Newton, classical gravitational constant defines the exact size of the pixels of space where QM takes over, partially, from GR. What is bizarre and tantalizing is that the pixel size dictated by gravitational constant - from Newton- is exactly the size of the axion in M-theory and the radion in KK. Virtual Physics resolutely insists that the strong force is the weak force in drag. It's not a proper force but an artifact of the pixel size where everything joins.
the strong force is the weak force in drag.
- WF determines border of pixel of space, SF is concentrated in center of pixel.
- this also applies to atoms and particles.
- entangled gluon pairs break loose at about 4TEV (8TEV for colliding protons).
- newtons grav. constant makes total mass of visible universe Machian and is not just a number.
- same size as dilaton/ axion and planck mass.
IT'S A GRAVE MATTER
Very soon, the evidence from gravity probes and dark energy probes will disprove everything previously (and without justification) "assumed" . All that's left will be something like this: E2= m2c4 c2 p2
The prima facie proof is that we know from experiment that antimatter exists and behaves as predicted by Dirac. Dirac DERIVED anti-matter from the negative "m" in the complete E=mc2 which, due to personal attacks by Heisenberg on Dirac (1932-34) was dropped.
Bottom line is: if antimatter exists, NEGATIVE matter exists, and it constitutes part of the missing mass. Dark matter /energy is just a LABEL and says nothing about properties). The PROPERTIES of negative matter are NOT what would be "assumed" from any conventional thinking but are completely exotic. The gravity of negative matter has some unusual characteristics. For example, it should be possible to hit 2 billiard balls with a cue ball such that both spin (direction of spin doesn't matter); when one is forcibly stopped, the other speeds up. In any case, NONE of the properties are as expected or predicted by ANYONE. Tom Bearden correctly stated that the negative term in Dirac's solution CANNOT just be swept under the already lumpy rug.
The graininess of space is a fundamental constant - its the Planck length. That rules out a holographic universe as presently proposed - but does not rule out a holo CO- universe.
(A) New genesis "in the beginning was the strong force (God). The strong particle was one planck length - so size mattered and space and gravity were manufactured de novo by jostling gluons which could only move one planck lengyh at a time and only when a vacancy occurred. All other sizes never got going in the one-force stage.
(B) because the universe remembers: At first, the one force universe is holographic; time's arrow is perfectly reversible.
The weak force breaks off which keeps the universe moving in one direction (expansion, cooling, more complexity). ALONE, the weak force time-arrow is not reversible , thus there is a past present and future completely independent of reversible time - and it is probably holographic because it can REMEMBER (store information) This is equivilent to a co-universe including everything on non-reversible time, which is weak force, holographic storage and space/gravity manufacture (to a degree) and all biological clocks. We are all on weak-force time, for good or ill.
Soon the graininess of space will be proved, conclusively, exactly = to planck length. General relativity is mostly untouched except gravity is STRONG at the microscale and it is GRAVITY, Newton's gravity, that prevents the electron from gradually spiralling into the nucleus - because it's the flip-side of the cosmological constant/darkmatter which is the flip side of the planck length.
It's Going to Take Some Time
Time stops completely at "c" so light crosses the universe in zero seconds. But we are prohibited from observing that directly because we have (rightly) chosen "c" as the universal yardstick and the yardstick can't measure itself. Most types of gravity are also infinite speed but gravity is geometry and is no good for a yardstick. A universe that is naturally 3D not 4D will help (there are eleven dimensions but you can push all but 3 out of the foreground)
So "space-time" is a misnomer; such a thing doesn't exist. Time is outside the spatial dimensions so is not a dimension. It is just the allowed sequence of actions and reactions. That is the biggest problem between QM and GR and it is a SEMANTICAL ONE! But it counts because it erroneously imposes a diluted weak gravity on the microscale - for no reason. If you discard space-time and replace it with space and time you are halfway to a GUT (which still may be a right GUT or a wrong GUT).
An atom is THE RESULT of a pucker in space -- that resolves everything. The pucker is caused by the contact of the larger universe whose function is to repackage energy into a more compact form. This touches on plausible ideas about holographic-like aspects of universe, especially the idea that info on 3D could be encoded in 2D. In these ideas all matter is precipitated from somewhere else. It doesnt mean that materiality is illusory.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/07/14/why-is-quantum-gravity-so-hard-and-why-did-stalin-execute-the-man-who-pioneered-the-subject/
A GRAVITATIONAL near-field effect can only happen in a tiny, tiny area due to tetrahertz frequency of associated EM.
in gravitational induction, LENZ , backvoltage has THE WRONG SIGN. This was predicted in 1926 by a Welsh mathematician named LLEWELLYN THOMAS. He predicted the tiny effects that should ultimately be found in the gravity probe b data bottom line:
Gravity can be switched to EM in an ordinary transformer, but only in a tiny microscopic point rising from a surface (or an array of points). It will never be easy to do but it isn't impossible. One test would be to sharpen a steel bar magnet - a very long one-to a fine microscopic point on one end and try to detect needle thin laser-like emanation, which would coincidently radiate enough light to possibly be detected by current photoamplifiers.
QM is an approximation using statistical analysis - somewhat blindly. GR would have agreed on entanglement, but without the grandiose and disqualifying witchcraft, but for the politics of appeasing the QM crowd at Solvay, 1927. The present time would be a good one for ending the idiocy.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34365659/The-Duality-of-Matter-and-Waves
An ensemble of pseudo-gravities, in addition to the basic non-propagating gravity, ala Sakharov, is assumed.... BECAUSE , the standard model firmly requires a ninth gluon. Construction can be partly from that. The standard graviton is an artifact of too-slavish imitation of Maxwell back when the only forces were thought to be gravity and EM. Some of the minor or pseudo gravities could have an exchange particle but not the graviton as presently defined. It is enough to point out that the 125gev particle is already being accepted as Higgs boson. That makes the universe much wilder.
Gluons can be like gravitons in many ways - and are. Gluons can hybridize (fuse) with photons , and do. the basic significance of gluon is that is the only exchange particle that also PARTICIPATES in the actions of its force. It doesn't just mediate the strong forcel IT IS the strong force to an unknown degree. That's the necessary trait the standard graviton is missing.
ACCELERATION
Unless the universe is much bigger than ANY model will accommodate (and it may be so ) mini-black holes evaporate too fast .http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1004/1004.2251.pdf
The Principle of Mach is reproduced here by the convergence of the two cosmological equations of Einstein. From this a Mass Boom concept is born given by M = t, M the mass of the Universe and t its age. Also a decreasing speed of light is the consequence of the Mass Boom, c = 1/t, which explains the Supernovae Type Ia observations without the need of expansion (nor, of course, accelerated expansion). Our Mass Boom model http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0701104
".....Gravitomagnetic arguments also predict that a flexible or fluid toroidal mass undergoing minor axis rotational acceleration (accelerating "smoke ring" rotation) will tend to pull matter through the throat (a case of rotational frame dragging, acting through the throat). In...."
gravity probe "B" has detected 2 additional gravities beyond gravitomagnetic but they are too tiny to prove until more complete data is available
one is the meissner-gravity effect; predicted only by me (so far); when superconductors change phase they expell the magnetic field which stresses space analogously to the biefeld-brown electric effect
the difference is the magnetic effect can be LEVERAGED by making the suoerconductor like a smoke ring, then spinning through the throat as fast as possible
This is fz on duality. it contradicts itself but the fz constant is stated in realistic terms and no longer a function of domain size tom valone is a pe like fz and is positive on him. It's just very rough, not essentially wrong
It's dead wrong to say particles and waves don't exist. they just don't exist SEPARATELY most of the time
BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME THING, MEASURABLE ASPECTS OF A SINGLE DISCRETE ENTITY.
Matter exists, like it or not. its made of energy, its frozen energy, but thats a meaningless distinction and semantical game playing. other than that and the necessary fine discrimination on phonons , fz is saying exactly what ive been telling you over last 2 months. no surprise. valone is a jefimenko proponent and acquaintance of fz for a long time and is a bearden associate, bigtime
a PE is the next step in engineering beyond PhD but you can still get it by exam. university of indiana was big on cold fusion , bearden stuff in 1990s when fz was there. this was partly due to eldon byrd's influence. jefimenko laboriously worked out the mathematical "proof" of the various gravities acting strongly at atomic size. QM is deliberately blind to all that, it contradicts idea of graviton which is their security blanket the picture of gravity at atom scale is very much jefimenko's picture. Princeton checked jefimenko in 2009 with supercomputer. (the only way it can be done) and , at MINIMUM, His math is flawless.
5-D Kaluza-Klein Banishes Spacetime
The 5-D universe assumes that all LENRs are weak force mediated. If a single exception is found, the whole is invalid. The 5-D universe assumes gravity is geometry; if a gravitational exchange particle is found, the whole is invalid.
- in dimensions 1 through 4 , pi = 3.1415927
- in dimensions 5 to 11, pi= 3.16, the square root of 10
- assume a spherical universe that is so large that the observable universe is euclidian (flat)
- you have, then , a bumpy universe in which no dimensions are curled up but instead are superimposed, "layered"- this moves a little toward the holographic model but only a little
- everything is confined to base 10 number system
- you have a 5 dimensional model where everything works and QM is the part of the 5th dimension where the bumps (caused by additive superimposition) are small
- gravity is flexure of the ensemble of dimensions , in part or in whole and it normally travels at infinite speed (in most configurations)
- there are 2 times , based on light speed and on infinite speed
- there are more than 11 but less than 23 "gravities"
- accurate predictions can be made beginning with explanation of anomalous beta decay.
A holographic universe is a 5D warty universe except for admission of electroweak as basic force as opposed to EM - that's why it can make predictions. For example it DOES predict a difference in the same DNA packaged in a different number of chromosomes and predicts 23 will out-evolve 24 which is static, not dynamic and ever changing to the extent of 23.
- The actual universe is at least 100 times larger than the observable universe
- higher dimensions are not compacted
The electric force takes on extra significance because the radius of curvature of the space of dimension 5 is determined by the reciprocal of the strength of the ordinary electric force --which means that electromagnetism and gravity are unifiable in 4 dimensions due to special, previously unpredicted, properties of the electric force, especially, electrostatic potential. An exact equation can be written for this. im working on it
- there is no fifth force
- the strong force controls stellar nucleosynthesis, but the weak force has the final say on the relative abundance of the elements outside the stellar interior.
- the superabundance of elements 6,7,8 is entirely due to weak force; it's as if it wanted to trigger the assembly of DNA by flooding the planetary environments with the precursors
- in any given epoch, weak force keeps fine structure constant fine tuned by the expedient of becoming stronger or weaker as required
- the weak force is slightly stronger than in standard model; size of detectable Higgs boson 119gev
http://uva.onlinejudge.org/index.php?option=onlinejudge&page=show_problem&problem=2061
The size of the the entire universe has been reliably established by NASA. It's about 6 times the size of the OBSERVABLE universe. This is a little too small for me because it constrains the nature of the 2 co-universes (but it's probably about right). It causes a big headache in that the two universes now occupy the same space . This explains why 4-D "space-time" gives a good rendition of reality. The kiss of death, peer review-wise, is that three eighths of pi divided by one (,8488) which is about = to the inverse of the 7th root of pi is now elevated (superficially) to status of universal constant which is the third rail of mathematics (and rightly). This is all because the detectable universe is a sphere whose measurement involves pi in a million ways.
- It has been proven and accepted that the electron is a material, spherical particle by detecting circulation of weak force on surface
- the portion of Weak Force (WF) directed inward is Strong Force (SF) (not proved, but probable. also lattice based theories quantum field and quantum gravity fail irretrievably.) If experiments validate stuck gluons then primary (geometric) gravity is bent space and also an aspect of weak force. That's all the forces
- whether the strong or weak force is primordial depends on your specific query
In our time and epoch, WF dominates. Earlier, SF dominated. QM is concerned mostly with SF dominated universe {5th dimension IS mirror universe). Think of Strong Force as being concentrated gravity, or better, UNDIFFERENTIATED gravity, because THAT'S WHAT IT IS. In our epoch, Weak Force dominates because it's the 'VALVE' or BALANCER between dimension 5 and the other 4. http://archive.sciencewatch.com/july-aug2001/sw_july-aug2001_page3.htm
Conventional physicists won't let go of gravitons - they may even mention a "strong force" -like carrier for gravity but the fail to understand that YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH.
Temple makes a case for Einstein's "simple universe". His first and best effort which is the only one i have ever used because it comports with reality as we think we know it. Only in the last 10 years, since the" discovery " of dark matter and the proof that space is Euclidian over large scales, has the simple and elegant universe been buried so deep you can't find exact data for it anymore. It elevates pi to a dimensionless constant, of sorts, unintentionally, and estimates mass "erroneously" by neglecting to multiply by pi one extra time (due to assumed complications of 4-D.
Fourth dimension is a space dimension with a few necessary time-like qualities. Minkowskis space-time screwed it all up (as Blake Temple strongly intimates.) There is no a priori prohibition on FTL transmission.except by pure EM waves - for the simple reason that light is chosen as invariant and can only move at "x" in whatever medium is under scrutiny. Light CANNOT accelerate. It is born from the electron already moving at "c". That is the essence of Special Relativity.
Einstein generally laughed off all the space time stuff pronouncing it not real and a great big illusion.
The light from supernova 1987a which I predicted in detail, even giving the correct headline from time magazine 5 years later ("STAR EXPLODES"), WAS PRECEDED BY THE GRAVITY DISTURBANCE WHICH TRAVELED 1.00003 "c". That doesn't sound like a lot but it is and it doesn't conflict with Temple's GR or ANY version of GR because it is a deformation of space itself.
"..Recent attempts to explain the nature of particle mass have focused on the idea that the world could have more than the 4 dimensions of spacetime. Specifically, 5-D noncompactified general relativity has been the subject of intense study in recent years [6-15], and agrees with all extant observations [16-20]. It is similar to old Kaluza-Klein theory, but drops the restrictive ‘cylinder’ and ‘compactification’ conditions, yielding a rich and fully covariant algebra. This can be interpreted to provide new insights to what is commonly called rest mass and matter. In 5D membrane theory, all of the interactions are confined to a hypersurface which is identified with spacetime, except gravity...." -Wesson
According to Thomas, strong evidence exists for all of the above. Unexpectedly, by positing 2 times, which demands 2 universes anything you visualize in 3-D also holds most of the time- in 5 through 11D. Nobody can otherwise "picture " more than 4-D. As to rest mass, it falls out of the numbers for the larger radius universe automatically, which is why it is matterless.
All hexagonal YELLOW diamonds could be mutually entangled and have such strong QM properties that no special conditions need be met to detect macroscale effects. Secure, instantaneous communications at any distance via the yellow diamond quantum computer on your signet ring special conditions
Thomas reports from long and unique experimentation and experience:
The emissions from a sharp flexure of the fabric of space, itself, happen outside of relativity and have no speed limit.
Due to the multicomponent nature of gravity, which is a consequence of deformed space, [first cogently proposed by Sakharov and now championed by the Tashkent group], the emitted radiation is of all conceivable structures and velocities.
BUT, only the emissions near the speed of light (slightly faster, since an unusual effect is the desired aim) are similar enough to ordinary radio waves to be detected and amplified by an ordinary amplifier. With specially designed amplifiers much more can be done. Some can be made from available parts used in unusual configurations. This we can do until we learn FROM THE DOING how to generate exotic energies from primary sources and not have to relay on the distant sources.
april 17 sci amer: "..The unitarity method, however, has allowed us to actually do calculations that were contemplated in the 1980s but seemed hopelessly beyond reach then. We have found that some of the supposed inconsistencies are in fact absent. Gravity does look like the other forces, albeit in an unexpected way—it behaves like a “double copy” of the strong subnuclear force that binds the constituents of nuclei together. The strong force is transmitted by particles known as gluons; gravity should be transmitted by particles known as gravitons. The new picture is that each graviton behaves like two gluons stitched together. This concept is quite strange, and even experts do not yet have a good mental image of what it means. Nevertheless, the double-copy property provides a fresh perspective on how gravity might be unified with the other known forces...."
as i have been preaching. The particles of the strong force create space. Bent space is gravity. It IS 2 gluons stuck together (mirror universe, from which is derived modern 5d KaluzaKlein.) But you can't properly call it a charge carrier or a "graviton" If they stay stuck, and one is mirror universe counterpart of other (which i don't know because i am strictly an empiricist and experimentalist) then it solves the unsolvable chicken and egg problem., "what provides the scaffold that it all hangs on?
The 2 paired gluons would hang on EACH OTHER , that's the framework, provided they also multiply by 2's (like an embryo) you get a blastula -- an expanding sphere. that's the only shape you CAN get.
Kaluza Klein doesn't fail. Forcing the non-existent graviton IN to accommodate Minkowski "spacetime" makes it APPEAR to fail. Gravity doesn't weaken at microscale. The 5th dimension is the minimalist mirror universe. For realistic purposes it's the vacuum. Most QM events are not strictly "real" because they take place in vacuum only, unless you add huge energies. They happen outside of GR but not SR. Using the moon's gravity, macroscale QM can be done w.o, the lhc -size energy, on rare but predictable, occasions. I have observed a couple dozen macro effects that haven't been predicted yet, EXPLOITING earth-moon barycenter.
MIRROR MIRROR
Negative matter [holographic] co-universe
Negative matter [holographic] co-universe
Gravity Waves
GRAVITY & Gravity Waves
QM still clings to the notion of the graviton and/or notions of quantum loop gravity, neither of which offer resolvable solutions. String theory sets the strings against a fixed background. Arguably, a better model would generate not only particles and forces but also the spacetime they inhabit. Loop quantum gravity describes space as a network of tiny volumes only 10-33 centimeter across. Although this approach has achieved some notable successes, such as predicting the properties of black holes, it has yet to pass an essential test: showing that the jumble of volumes always comes together to form the familiar four-dimensional spacetime of our everyday world.
In "Causal Dynamical Triangulations", CDT, dimensionality is turned into a dynamical quantity. CDT is a very simplified form of Loop Quantum Gravity. Individual points have no physical significance in empty space. Time really scales with the correct fraction of total spacetime volume. The wavefunction of the universe is a function of the scalar factor. The spectral dimension is really the effective dimension of the carrier space. The space-time dimension is scale-dependent.
The shape of units of quantization is assumed to be a sphere simply for convention and convenience. It can be any shape and probably is not a sphere, though we tend to forget that. CDT is an attempt to quantize space without quantizing time, which cant be done because space isnt primary. Rigorously it does not exist but as the precipitate of time. Quantized space-time iiself can't be separated. but the grains would have to be way smaller , (10^-33)^^3.
CDT represents conditioning of spacetime BY sub or other spacetime. The only difference between sub- and real spacetime is in fineness of grain. Regular spacetime cannot condition sub-spacetime without an input of energy. space does not really exist as such but is an artifact of quantized time.
Deriving 4-D spacetime 'from scratch" is an unprecedented result. More detailed information about the shortscale structure of quantum spacetime remains to be extracted. This approach is opposite to M-theoretical solutions with vast numbers of possible vacua. It eliminates the invocation of additional dimensions and extended objects. It is a model of fractal, scale-invariant lower dimensional structure at the Planck length that is classical at large scale. It is a nonperturbative quantum gravitational propagator. A four-dimensional universe arises from quantum fluctuations -- four-dimensional quantum gravity.
Physics still pushes a disguised, misapplied uncertainty principle to attach meaning to random wiggles of tiny particles that can be made to APPEAR as a challenge to the second law of thermodynamics. There are a couple of alternatives:
Gravity at the microscale wrecks QM:
"..... Until recently, physicists hadn’t measured gravity at extremely close ranges. “Astonishing, isn’t it?” says Eric Adelberger, the coordinator of several gravity experiments taking place in a laboratory at the University of Washington, Seattle. “But it wouldn’t be astonishing if you tried to do it”—if you tried to test gravity at distances shorter than a millimeter. Testing gravity isn’t simply a matter of putting two objects close to each other and measuring the attraction between them. All sorts of other things may be exerting a gravitational influence. “There’s metal here,” Adelberger says, pointing to a nearby instrument. “There’s a hillside over here”—waving toward some point past the concrete wall that encircles the laboratory. “There’s a lake over there.” There’s also the groundwater level in the soil, which changes every time it rains. Then there’s the rotation of the Earth, the position of the Sun, the dark matter at the heart of our galaxy. Over the past decade the Seattle team has measured the gravitational attraction between two objects at smaller and smaller distances, down to 56 microns (or 1/500 of an inch), just to make sure that Einstein’s equations for gravity hold true at the shortest distances, too. So far, they do...." http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Dark-Energy-The-Biggest-Mystery-in-the-Universe.html#ixzz1sjX7rIqN
The physics won't break down at ANY scale -- only the mathematics describing it, GR at planck length = GR at galaxy size. There is no difference whatsoever, according to Thomas.
Key prediction:
The 19 gravity model makes a very strong prediction that the electron is not quite stable but has an average lifetime of about 10 to the 30th power years --- that's LONG but not infinite since it (ELECTRON LIFETIME) is indirectly the basis of BOTH QM and GR (but in exactly opposing, conflicting ways) it has received some experimental attention and as of now it's known that electron lifetime is at least 10>(23)
What's so amazing is that a 10>(30) lifetime would automatically invalidate all currently tenable GUTs, whether GR or QM based. EXCEPT ONE!!!!!
and you know which one
PERFECT INCONTROVERTIBLE ACID TEST
this graph is a perfect match for the one on page 323 of jefimenko's book (Gravitation and Cogravitation) - published in 2006, 2 years before the eclipse- it shows the (predicted) formation of a negentropic, negative effective mass by action of astronomical bodies, like during an eclipse. also can happen, though effect is much weaker, when running an ordinary 120 volt induction motor at exactly 108 volts (my observation)
that's 1 gravity and 15 quasi-gravities. only 3 more to go to get to magic 19 needed for revised and simplified M-theory
QM is incompatible with gravity not with GR
What is now called dark/matter/energy used to be called the "missing mass problem" we all studied in high school, even grade school. The cosmological constant in GR makes the missing mass problem disappear for most purposes and
gr gives the right (observed) answer- but it would be nice to know just what cosmo-factor IS
QM gives an answer that is off by 123 orders of magnitude for that reason it has become hardened dogma that gravity is extra weak in the micro-realm. QM just ignores gravity. There is no experimental justification for that assumption; it was always a taboo. QM made the wrong assumption because gravity and GR HOLD TRUE at the micro level but the measurements which should have been done 80 years ago are only now being done (very quietly).
The Tashkent model and Virtual Physics assume , make-or-break, that GR holds at the micro level. No other scheme even CONSIDERS such a thing and they are all DEAD WRONG and they know it (vis recent summit of nobel laureates in bahamas to discuss this very problem).
tashkent and ionaverse MIGHT be right. Everything else CANNOT be right
if you don't assume that gravity is undiminished at quantum level, your whole scheme is 123 orders of magnitude OFF , FROM THE GET-GO.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Dark-Energy-The-Biggest-Mystery-in-the-Universe.html?c=y&page=4
As Tashkent's group correctly insists, the graviton is much like the "fast hole" in a semiconductor; it doesn't quite exist, is unnecessary but very convenient. The square root of ten divided by 10 seems to be a very important number RE: effective mass/"gravity" generation by fast holes.
http://www.groupkos.com/docs/russell_montgomery/Graviton_Induced_Nuclear_Fission.pdf
A gravity wave or gravitation wave is a curve in space time as explained by Einstein’s theory of relativity. Normally gravity just distorts space time slightly. However thanks to the Theory of Relativity physicists now know that really massive objects cause ripples or “waves” in space. Inherently, the greater the mass of an object the greater the gravitational wave it produces. Before relativity, classical physics viewed gravity as simply a force. While this properly explained its effects it did not full explain its nature.Einstein proposed that gravity is not simply a force but actually a curve in space time. The gravitational wave also is said to emit a special form of radiation called gravitational radiation.
Read more: http://www.universetoday.com/54996/gravity-wave/#ixzz25uHtP1XJ
Friday, May 25, 2012 9:02 PM in the ionaverse, there are several ways to combine various accessory gravities to get a net repulsion and it is linked to spin. The strongest effect would be on extra big galaxies that are spinning fast. Gravity is an attractive force only. There is no repulsive force as such except the chance that negative matter might fall "up".
THE GRAVITATIONAL WIND
The holometer is 2 stacked michaelson morley interferometers which is the same as one MM interferometer that can change its polarization 90degrees. exactly what the Tashkent group proposed in 2004 to validate gravity as grand unifier. the granularity can only be exactly = to planck length according to ionaverse; space is the shed snakeskin of the multiplying strong force exchange particles. SPACE-TIME is oxymoronic and does not exist as such - never did
hogan picked the one sneaky fudge factor that can prove essential validity of both ionaverse and Tashkent model by REMOVING it from the processed data, revealing the sparkly pixelation of the gravitational wind
PS alas, there are mucho flat mistakes in sci amer pdf
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&7
"...united fundamental forces. Their gauge field of action is strictly warping.
This curvature leads us once again to the conclusion that ether exists in
nature as a unique gravity which unites the strong and electroweak matter.
If such an idea is accepted, the purpose of the Michelson - Morley experi-
ence is reduced to the definition of speed of a gravitational wind concerning
the Earth and thereby to the establishment of its existence.
As a consequence, at the turn of interferometer at an angle 900, the two
light paths exchange their orientations in comparison with the direction of a
gravitational wind. In these conditions, one of light beams C(D) or C’(D’)
passing through the gravitational see from a half - transparent glass plate to
the optical device similarly to the above - mentioned angular deflection in
the nucleus field of the flux of longitudinal (transversal) polarized neutrinos
or photons suffers considerable warping on the trajectory, and not delay at
the time. Therefore, the observed shift of interference bends depending on
an angle of rotation of the apparatus must be either to the right or to the
left direction concerning a certain middle of their position.
Such a geometrical picture of the phenomenon unexpectedly discovered in
the Michelson - Morley experience may serve as the first laboratory confir-
mation of an angular deflection of light as a consequence of interconversion
of light beams in their spin polarization type dependence.
However, from point of view of general theory of relativity, gravity can
essentially change the trajectory of light. Thus, if an absolute emptiness is
nohaw in force to bend light, we must recognize that an ether see exists as a
gravitational field.
According to the suggested grand unification theory, this implies that grav-
ity is responsible for generalized principle of Einstein’s relativity. In other
words, all physical phenomena originate in an absolutely warping gravita-
tional see, in which nobody is in force to observe the strictly straight linear
and uniform motion of one particle concerning the second ones.
Such a unified world curvature reflects the availability of a unique harmony
of naturally warping forces.
Here an important circumstance is the fact that light used in Michelson’s
interferometer has the gravitoelectromagnetic structure. Its source must be
unified system of the photon and monophoton which come forwards in nature
either as a particle (15) or as an electromagnetic wave.
The fifth force idea was ruled out a long time ago. Contrary to title, this work completely rules out even a small fifth force; vindicates GR. The most interesting and potentially useful questions are those predicted by GR but have no immediate grantsmanship mojo. If there was a fifth force GPS wouldn't work. There are 18 sub gravities and most are predicted by GR. They have been ignored so long they are almost forgotten. They have only tiny effects on gr but have much larger possibilites application wise.
" Jain and his colleagues ultimately did not see variation between their control sample of screened galaxies and their test sample of unscreened ones. Their results line up exactly with the prediction of Einstein’s general relativity. This means that the potential range and strength of the fifth force is severely constrained. “We find consistency with Einstein’s theory of gravity and we sharply narrow the space available to these other theories. Many of these theories are now ruled out by the data,” Jain said.
Gravitational Aharonov Bohm effect, presumed to exist but not yet tested (the mechanics are very busy!) is one linkage between weak and gravity. If gravity, with its 19 efflorescences, is the unifying force (of which i no longer have any doubt) then linkage pre-exists; gravity, weak force, EM are triplets.
The foundation of Special Relativity (SR) is that gravity is an acceleration.
Einstein's "aha!" moment came when he realized that there can never be a way to distinguish between gravity and acceleration, therefore you can claim that gravity IS accelleration, which lets inertial forces in the back door. In SR, gravity is identical to an acceleration EXCEPT it is in 4 dimensions, not 3d + time "-c" comes with the extra dimension due to the time intervals used to measure distance in the fourth d. There's no way ro get rid of it.
what it means
Gravity is the grand unifying force AND gravity RESOLVES the infinity problem, the #1 one problem in physics
toms and the chinese guys will probably get nobel within 3 years (right now not many understand it)
Nature published Toms' paper AGAINST their usual policy. In the past, that has always meant big things
QM and GR were never UN-UNIFIED it was all a lot of hot air; i only understand it somewhat only because it has always been my belief anyway.
the quantum gravity mentioned is not the real QG its just quantized gGT (by adding an unnecessary graviton which can be removed later)
"-c" is the foundation of SR ...but it doesn't engender time dilation or length contraction . these are not real physical effects and there is no change in SR, that i can find, if you drop Lorentz transformation and the reason is :
the supposed Lorentz effects only occur during acceleration which is now the same as gravitational force and over 99% of the gravity we experience is near-field gravity which is curved space.
the instant acceleration can only be in one direction so that's why time becomes more involved (its half of the necessary measurement) but melting space and time together is going way too far. Lorentz transformation needs to be kicked out some way.
that comes to the issue of advanced potentials and causality
the negative "c" of the near field advanced potential is exactly the same negative c that is the foundation of SR. It isn't a photon going back in time -that's a typical Feynman cop-out. It's a part of a photon (electric field) traveling at infinite speed.
There might be a way for the electric field to grab onto space and bend it, but it goes to gluons and color force, which may be very much like photons-with-pretensions and which definitely do bend space without using mass to accomplish it.
http://www.numericana.com/answer/maxwell.htm
real causality is reasonable and logical and doesnt resemble the 19th century "causality" now mandated. Ive heard it said by QM-ers that this holds only for low frequency photons (radio waves) because cancelling out of retarded potential at higher freq results in a photon destructively interfering with a virtual graviton. implication is that radio waves (at least can have gravity-like effects ala Heaviside (now proved) ... but the gravity component is so weak as to remain almost virtual---- it takes an ensamble (sp) of coordinated electro gravities to get useful results.
"...
The so-called advanced potentials ( A+ and f+ ) are formally obtained by making c negative in the above retarded expressions (or equivalently by reversing the arrow of time). This is just like what we've already encountered in the case of planar waves, with two possible directions of travel. However, the physical interpretation is not nearly as easy now that we're dealing with some causality relationship between the field and its "sources". Advanced potentials make the situation here and now (potentials and/or fields) depend on the future state of remote "sources". Such a thing may be summarily dismissed as "unphysical" but this fails to make the issue go away. Indeed, quantum treatments of electromagnetic fields (photons in Quantum Field Theory ) imply that a field can create some of its sources in the form of charged particle-antiparticle pairs. What seems to be lacking is the coherence of such creations because of statistical and/or thermodynamical considerations (which feature a pronounced arrow of time). I don't understand this. Nobody does... What's clear, however, is that the distinction between past and future vanishes in stationary cases. This makes advanced potentials relevant and/or necessary, without the need for mind-boggling philosophical considerations. We've only shown (admittedly skipping the mathematical details) that potentials that obey the Lorenz gauge would necessarily be given by the above formulas (possibly adding advanced and free components). Conversely, we ought to determine now what restrictions, if any, (pertaining to the sources r and j) would make the above solutions verify the assumed Lorenz gauge. However, we shall postpone this discussion to present first a clarification of the physics..."
(2005-08-21) Electrodynamic Fields Caused by Moving Sources
An expression derived from the Liénard-Wiechert retarded potentials.
its what you get when you equate gravity with accelleration (which is the foundation of General Relativity and possibly Special Relativity) and then try to shoehorn time into it to make "space-time". Let's say you stop right there., keep space and time separated to the extent possible within GR, BUT CONNECTED BY A THIN LINK -- "-c"
well thats what i do all the time anyway, only non-sneaky way of eliminating "-c" GR and SR are really all about VARIABLE "c" - EXACTLY THE REVERSE OF ALL THE HYPE!
TEB and i had a 6 month long discussion on this in 1980. He cited my hero Sakhatov and his 1967 paper arguing that gravity is a conglomeration of many forces. But after endless explanations from rom, i realized that Sakharov had everything exactly BACKWARDS. He was saying that vacuum fluctuations (which are just naked space flapping in the gravity wind) are CAUSED by the presence of matter in motion. For most purposes the right way and backwards way are equivilant. TEB, QM and especially HAL PUTHOFF have it backward still and boy does it MATTER!
in a nutshell , they are expecting zero point energy from vacuum fluctuations to be very robust because it's just a bigger van der waals or casimir force. they are terribly wrong. The vacuum fluctuations are the wrestling match between 3D space and the 4rth spatial dimension (the sibling universe or 5th KK dimension) FROM WHICH ALL MATTER IS BORN
we're in trouble. this one has what i've been looking for: 5d uncompact kk, with 11d implied in a semiholographic way. i had a strong inclination that the changes in cosmic expansion are mandated by the structure of space itself. but could not think of a mechanism without driving myself cuckoo. here it is - albeit in tenative and preliminary form
An expanding 4D universe in a 5D Kaluza-Klein cosmology with higher dimensional matter
F. Darabi
Department of Physics, Azarbaijan University of Tarbiat Moallem, 53714-161, Tabriz, Iran .
Research Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha, 55134-441, Maragha, Iran.
December 3, 2009
Abstract
In the framework of Kaluza-Klein theory, we investigate a (4+1)-dimensional universe consisting of a (4+1) dimensional Robertson-Walker type metric coupled with a (4+1) dimensional energy-momentum tensor. The matter part consists of an energy density together with a pressure subject to 4D part of the (4+1) dimensional energy-momentum tensor. The dark part consists of just a dark pressure ¯p, corresponding to the extra-dimension endowed by a scalar field, with no element of dark energy. It is shown that the reduced Einstein field equations are free of 4D pressure and are just affected by an effective pressure produced by the 4D energy density and dark pressure. It is then proposed that the expansion of the universe may be controlled by the equation of state in higher dimension rather than four dimensions. This may account for the emergence of unexpected current acceleration in the middle of matter dominant era.
Key words: Dark pressure; inflation; accelerating universe; non compact Kaluza-Klein cosmology.
e-mail: [email protected]
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.0454v2.pdf
Heaviside's co-gravity(not the same as gravitomagnetism) was definitely confirmed by gravity probe b
if you simply opt out of the wholly unjustifiable PRESUMPTION that gravity weakens at the microscale, QM and GR are already unified. it can be stated a number of ways . very anti-climactic!?
gravity probe b has definitely confirmed heavisides extension of maxwell into gravitation - you can look it up (google, wikipedia, etc)
jefimenko also ferociously defends heavisides 1893 paper
in 1893 the bogus QM assumotion - already disproved by seattle group-that gravity is weak in the micro realm, DID NOT YET EXIST
a 5d kk, uncompact whixh is quasi holographically 11d is the same as what TEB has been saying all this time but it includes strong force, weak force etc
so zero point may be exploitable after all but not in any way consonant with ANYBODIES' current idea.including mine!
BTW the schrodinger wave equation just plopped out of the 5D KK. "who ordered that?"
gravity IS a conglomerate of (19) forces or lesser gravities but not as guessed at present. they took the wtong idea from sasakharov; he was talking about something completely unrelated
- and thats how it ALWAYS turns out
attatched are blake temples prepared answers to reporters which are ALL very interesting and accurate
at the time of GR the established dogma was that the milky way WAS the universe
to get published you needed a static universe
temple actually touches on the best way of getting rid of dark matter but doesnt pursue it , being a pure mathematition.
somewhere in the calculations of the mass of the universe, you mulriply by pi one time too many. this is the standard formula which einstein had to use (youre only allowed to demolish one paradigm per paper and then only if you are established and senior) right now i cant remember details but it was argued about and resolved about 1930 and to this day the cosmologists use the wrong recioe for the mass of the universe resulting in mass about 3 times too high (Actually 3.1415927 times too high) i always divide the mass by 3 and cut out the dark matter.
gravity is purely attractive but it can exert a very weak repulsion by interacting with its own derivative (gravitomagnetic force or heaviside secondary grav)
temple believes relativity is OK without the cosmoconstant and he is right and einstein was right to abandon it.
as i told you , dark matter is just the resurrected cosmo constant and is not consistent with GR which does not have a cosmo constant and only had it briefly due to need to present a static universe in order to get published
temple tries a different angle to CONFIRM GR (using an old argument but adding mathematical consistency)he thinks he has done that
hes the last person on earth to attack GR - thats the dark matter people
NEGATIVE energy/matter almost certainly exists but it doesnt fall up and may be scarce (my own personal # shows no energy gain under normal conditions so i assume its scarce)
news that einstein has been refuted sells newspapers and second tier journals. the writers plug it in to - keep employment by enhancing bottom line
to date, for more than 50 years at least, i have never seen a single accurate police report, press report, or official record where i had personal knowledge of the facts NOT ONE
BTW the gravity wrinkles in nearby novas get here before the light . my guess was 4 years. it took 5
i couldnt take time to go to australia so i made a crude guess and stated thats what it was
REAL UNEDITED quote from temple, prepared for press specifically to hinder malicious misquotes
Keep in mind that Einstein’s equations have been confirmed
without the need for the cosmological constant or dark energy,
in every physical setting except in cosmology.
Dark energy is the physical interpretation of the cosmological
constant. The cosmological constant is a source term with a
free parameter, (similar to but different from our a), that can be
12
http://www.fqxi.org/
effects of gravity and acceleration (i.e., the deviation from inertial motion) indistinguishable,
at least locally, by making them manifestations of one and the same
entity, now often called the inertio-gravitational field. If Mach’s principle were satisfied,
this field could be fully reduced to its material sources and all motion would
be relative. But Mach’s principle is not satisfied and the inertio-gravitational field
exists in addition to its sources. When two objects are in relative non-uniform
motion, this additional structure allows us to determine whether the first, the second,
or both are actually moving non-uniformly. In this sense, motion in general
relativity is as absolute as it was in special relativity. In his Princeton lectures,
however, Einstein (1956, 55–56) argued that there is an important difference between
the two theories: in general relativity, the additional structure is a bona fide
physical entity that not only acts but is also acted upon. As Misner, Thorne, and
Wheeler (1973, 5) put it in their textbook on general relativity: “Space acts on
matter, telling it how to move. In turn, matter reacts back on space, telling it how
to curve.”
By 1920, Einstein had probably recognized that Mach’s principle was predicated
on an antiquated 19th-century billiard-ball ontology (Hoefer 1994; Renn 2007b).
In the field ontology of the early 20th-century, in which matter was ultimately
thought of as a manifestation of the electromagnetic and perhaps other fields, it
amounts to the requirement that the gravitational field be reduced to these other
fields. A recognition of this state of affairs may have helped Einstein make his
peace with the persistence of absolute motion in general relativity. Instead of
trying to reduce one field to another, he now tried to unify the two. This can
be gleaned from Ether and relativity, the inaugural lecture Einstein gave upon
accepting a visiting professorship in Leyden in 1920. Einstein was not pandering
to his revered senior Dutch colleague Hendrik Antoon Lorentz when he presented
the inertio-gravitational field in this lecture as a new relativistic incarnation of the
ether eliminated by special relativity (Einstein 1920j).
maxwell and GR have been tested every which way for a hundred years. if you make a defensible extension of either one , it carries a lot of weight. the newly confirmed heaviside secondary gravity can be stretched to reveal that the sign on the gravity lobe is negative. that is near-proof that negative energy (less than zero energy) exists in its pristine form as postulated by dirac and promoted by bearden. the alternative is utter failure of maxwell/GR which is almost impossible- so unlikely as to be out of the question. the neg energy can be "dark matter" because geometric gravity interacting with EM related sub-gravity generates repulsive force (gravity interacting with itself, combining 2 attractions to make repulsion). i dont know how , thats what numbers say - but its much more than some jerk's tinkering and curve fitting- anybody betting against it will lose.
the catch:
it takes lots of regular energy to make neg energy so you still cant win, unless you can catch the EM like emanation from some shell star that wastes all its fuel on generating neg energy in the form of some sineusoid wave that doesnt need an associated particle, or some other trick.
only a 5d UNCOMPACTED KK can be real.
5-d origin of spin
in a nutshell, it's the mirror universe implied by Dirac's dangling negative mass in his solution for the relativistic electron, but gradually whittled down to conform to experimental evidence. It's the "adjacent" or near field" vacuum. It's where matter comes from.
For about 15 years, the consensus has been growing that the quickest exact solution to the "hierarchy problem" is to probe the weak force symmetry mechanisms at an energy of 4 to 5 TEV, and hope that a way to solve the gravity half of the problem will be illuminated by that. That is what's happening this year (2012) at the LHC.
it's the strategy and it's by design.
a higgs fragment at 125gev rules out the standard model because mass is too low.
hierarchy problem cant be resolved in supersymmetry (that is the OBJECT of supersymmetry! )
i figutrd out the theshold for direct excitation of 5th dimension and it is 4TEV
significantly , this forbids vacuum catastrophe (small black holes) but highlights connection between planck mass and newtons gravity constant and also permits solution of hierarchy (weak force particle mass)
in 5d uncompacted kk , there is a new constant, = to about 8/3pi according to the canadian 5d guy
so, fifth dimension is = to mirror universe
but dimension 5 of ANY kk or other theory cannot be detected directly by a collider, it has to be a straight accellerator
bottom line:
proof of ionaverse may be buried in recorded data from tevatron runII which will be public domain eventually
cheap and dirty proof and extractable if you already know what to look for
i no longer understand any of the above because i got a little heat stressed and everything is now a blank
planck mass is all tied up with newton constant and radion/axion but cannot remember details
the only practical way to exploit weak-tronics is to start with the MAGNETIC ISOTOPE OF MAGNESIUM (mg25) and its relation to variable beta decay. the larson idea of LENR's is a good example of what weak-tronics might do , IF we live in a universe where weak-tronics is POSSIBLE. Last years (2011) probe for the Higgs boson at LHC appears to be permissive for weak-tronics, putting the minimum energy for excitation of the fifth dimension (the vacuum) at about 4 TEV, down from 20TEV, but still higher than the 1 TEV predicted by some influential theorists (lisa randall et al).
I was holding out for my long time prediction of 19.5 GEV for the higgs resonance but 125GEV will do....and besides, i hadnt considered the possibility of the requirement of a shadow higgs (mostly because i considered the dominant heavy higgs theories to be ridiculous) in the 5th dimension/mirror universe/ adjacent vacuum to accompany the symmetry restoring right-handed weak force (or its equivilant).A higgs fragment at 19.5 means the vacuum is unstable and the universe could already be self destructing (hawking). i never worried about that because the universe has been here a very long time and cannot self destruct. NEVERTHELESS, a shadow higgs at 19.5 and a weak-force related higgs fragment at 125 would bode well for the future of our species, and a shadow higgs WAS discovered by CMS and it WAS significant (Ellis et al) but was dismissed -for now- by an accounting trick which is too complicated to get into here.
to comprehend the implications its necessary to consider the origin of "spin" and why that just about mandates a 5d (expandable to 11d) KK type universe with gravity - considered as an accelleration rather than a true "force" - as the unifying force.
next : 5d origin of spin
so they made their key prediction that 5thD, near (near meaning "warped" as well as "near" ) vacuum was directly excited at 1TEV (based on added warp from graviton) - thats beardens "sparking the vacuum" , and its unrelated to zero-point or casimir attraction
the minimum v for direct excitation of 5th dimension is 4TEV (my prediction) a;though there are tunneling processes involving exotic elements like cesium that can bring down the v but they cause other problems
photons have to be considered as travelling at infinite speed - but its a whiter shade of infinite, more difficult than gravitational infinite speed- but one thing is clear:
what has driven everything way off the mark is the universally held and unwarranted dogma thatgravity and EM are closely related when they are no more closely related than gravity and ANY OTHER "fundamental" force, gravity being the unifying force.
"space" is an entangled state of entangled gluon, spin 2, pairs ---double entanglement.
given Mach's principle and the above statement, when a photon is launched, its presence is instantly felt everywhere in the universe
they confuse all the definitions. this is presented as preliminary evidence for gravitational RADIATION, which can only be emitted from a sharply accellerating, massive body (analogue to EM) the stars are too close together . its actually evidence for non-propagating gravity (analogous to near-field E and M) propagating and non propagating gravity both exist. the former travels at c, the latter at infinite speed; a spaceship traveling at 1000c will have no contraction and the crew will experience no distortion in time. it only works that way for tiny objects.
on the gamma ray thing, any 3 gammas that came from great distance and are detectable on earth would have started out close together and parallel and would have experienced identical G-refraction and would have arrived simultaneously ANYWAY.
i learned last night that the biggest opponent of the spacetime silliness was Albert Einstein who repeatedly said the whole business about time was a great big illusion.
i also learned WHY. the 4D space+time was just a de rigour continuation of the conventional newtonian mechanics for moving obhects in use from 1697 till now.
explicitly AE insisted that space and time were not meant to be fused by GR into a continuum, but by that time he was marginalized. GR could not come into its own till after AE was dead and could no longer protest
1 Link to gravity wave article Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:18 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Goldminer or Rockbottom" cwrockbttm http://www.bbc. co.uk/news/ science-environm ent-19408363#
"...One possible response, given that we will inevitably have to face fullfledged
quantum gravity, is to take chronology protection as being so basic
a property that we should use it as a guide in developing our theory of
quantum gravity:..."
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
exactly right. if you know FOR SURE how causality works, everything else becomes very easy.
thats basically what ive been doing since about 1970
you can change the past, but unbelievable, impossible obstacles get thrown in your way; it has to be for something that invokes all your determination.
you cant make BIG changes and even tiny changes require motivation beyond our normal understanding. the first time i did this with no possibility of alternate explanation was in 1970 (there were 7 shocked and bewildered witnesses including my brother, father, myself and a trigger-happy local cop),
hawkings idea is the right one, except , in reality, the causality protection mechanism occasionally lets a violation squeak by''
only a 5d uncompacted kaluza klein with non propagating primary gravity, in which dimension 5 is a deformed mirror universe can accommodate 99% effective causality protection mechanism. the work on this has already been done by others.
"...There is also strong experimental evidence in favour of the
conjecture — from the fact that we have not been invaded by
hordes of tourists from the future...."
When you divorce "space" from the silly and puerile amalgam of "spacetime", everything comes clear; the classical electrodynamics - still used by professional EE's like frank z. and tom valone- with its sub-atomics expressed as simple refraction, carries new validity.
.....but it requires- as does special relativity- a variable "c", which plainly exists and is only a problem by way of the murderous trade union protectionism of the "theoretical" set who pride themselves on never actually DOING anything and who idiotically insist that mathematics can constitute "proof".
they cant get along without a graviton for no other justification than it's "required" for their weak minded notion of "symmetry".
fine, i'll toss them a graviton. its a photon --- or a gluon--- it just depends and the pre-assumptions you chose to make.
the photon cannot be its own antiparticle. heres why:
E=mc^2, E=m(-c)^2, >>> m(-c)^2 = mc^2
gravity is proximately caused by a flexure of space, which is a real entity and not a mere jumble of numbers.
circumstances exist where the ROOT cause of the forced flexure of space can be a forced variation of "c" (within fairly narrow limits).
simple refraction. only a little more involved than the engineers standard practice.
we only see the ENTANGLED photon-anti-photon pair which does not necessarily annihilate.
the negative velocity works out when "c" is forced to vary - as in a near field receiver/transmitter and , by maxwell and heaviside, you get gravity.
relativistic time dilation is only varying "c" seen with blinders on.
preliminary.
the graviton cannot exist, in consequence, minkowsky space-time cannot exist. kaluza-klein, COMPACTED models are ruled out. FTL photons can exist via specific local gravity distortions (which is what special relativity says anyway, and einstein took pains to repeatedly emphasize this) (i have a number of his in-print utterances). cool fission is way better than cold (or hot) fusion.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Ken Thomas <[email protected]>
To: Iona Miller <[email protected]>
Cc: ocie thomas <[email protected]>; k 2000 <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2012 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: cern makes soup- and entangled gluon pairs!
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/sep/23/curious-correlations-seen-by-cms
quark gluon plasmas from the heat of heavy ion collisions dont reveal much
in sept 2010, CMS found the beginning of entangled gluon pairs exactly where i predicted , at 3.5 tev FROM PROTON-PROTON COLLISIONS also exactly as i predicted. this demolishes standard model (i didnt know that)
CMS couldnt get to 4tev at that time. meanwhile, scrambling has gone on to obscure CMS' accidental and totally unexpected finding
FYI predictions are required to be made in terms if highest energy per particle ; ie, 8TEV =4TEV for colliding protons.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/08/hot-stuff-cern-physicists-create-record-breaking-subatomic-soup.html
copenhagen delusion
...is blocking all inquiry into GENUINE, exotic effects, which can be of immense benefit to the planet and our species.
3 Attached files| 1.4MB
as i previously intimated, the dilaton, newtons gravity constant are closely related. they are clumps of entangled gluonsplancks constant (pixelation of space} also intertwines
strong force=gravity; there can be no gtaviton, per se and 5D(11D) KK is the way to go, the simplest of available models
--kt
",,,where we see this axion-dilaton scalar field in the middle within the red font. We factor that out and we see that this is a graviton times a scalar field. So the graviton sector can be seen as the “square” of the gluon sector. There is a further bit I have brushed over, which is that general graviton states involve circular polarized states with the (b^†n)^β operator in superpositions. The graviton can be seen as a quantum entanglement state of gluons. Whether the (a^†n)^j(a^†n)^k type of states are axions or dilatons depends on the entanglement --- a complication I will just refer to here. ..."
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Q_qz3Nl3vxkJ:fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/gluons__gravitons.doc+is+the+gluon+a+graviton%3F&cd=13&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
true. the biphoton decay is a decay series. its termed biphoton for efficiency - but
the addled mechanics jump on that and do an "experiment" with public funds, which is designed to PREVENT any result but the one they want. if they entered an 8th grade science fair they would immediately be disqualified AND the fakery is so blatant and in-your-face that you can go right down the list of the latest "retroactive observer effects" and nail the experimental error, EVERY TIME. the truth is far broader, larger and more liberating than the 2D delusion.for example. gravity has to have charge or GR and maxwell fail utterly. maxwell and GR are thoroughly tested by LEGITIMATE experiment and not likely to fail. so its required that gravity have an associated electric sub-component, which means we can get at it electrically, which brings the zone between the capacitor plates to attention.
there are statements in frank z's duality paper that are exactly wrong on purpose, to get past the censors. everybody but me does that; its accepted, the idea is that the falsity is so out-to-lunch that truth is indirectly preserved. WRONG . the frenzied mob plucks out the falsity and uses it to attack the bearer of unadorned truth who is only rigidly adhering to the minutest detail of authenticity for the purpose of protecting the fools from themselves
TEB and others have mentioned an experiment from the late 1960's where some IBM people strung out a few miles of wire in a big reactionless loop and discharged a big capacitor through it. without the extra reaction, the speed of the ringing current was measured at 1.57"c" (pi/2 x "c")
the guy who directed that experiment is a mega physicist, a household name. he would have to be deceased by now. using a screen name he asked me the only question at "Ask Me" that ever stumped me, even momentarily. it took an hour of headscratching but i got it, then i demanded to know who or what he was and he IDed himself
the Q was "when a photon enters a dense medium, like a glass prism, it slows down and regains approximate "c" when it leaves the dense medium. what makes it speed up again?"
the answer contains the whole of special relativity. and is tantamount to proof that a photon crosses the entire observable universe in exactly zero seconds. its speed is infinite, though we can only observe it directly as "c". the barrier to observing it by indirect means is entirely philosophical and legalistic to the point of being monarchistic. "CAUSALITY"causality has no place in it.
SURFING THE PRIMORDIAL GRAVITY WAVES
Gravity waves are ripples of spacetime. The idea of spacetime iself as a dynamic entity--one that can bend, stretch and take on different shapes--still seems radical. Even more startling is Einsteein’s prediction that spacetime can ripple like a flag in a strong breeze. Perturbations of matter produce radiating ripples or waves, in the very fabric of spacetime. Gravity waves penetrate all matter. Gravitational waves can traverse the universe, carrying the imprint of the distant events that gave them birth, (Frank, 2000).
Einstein perceived that the best way to conceive of gravity would be to think of it not as affecting objects in space, but rather as affecting space itself. This realization that gravity bends space marked a key moment in Einstein’s path toward the general theory of relativity. The theory also predicted accurately that gravity bends light, because gravity bends space and light travels through space as directly as possible. It only travels straight in the absence of gravity. Einstein saw that if an object with mass--the sun, for instance--bends space into a sort of dimple, then the motion of any object with mass would move that dimple in space from place to place. This produces a changing distortion of space, which creates a ripple, a moving wave in the fabric of spacetime. Einstein realized that the ripple created by the motion of mass spreads outward in space in all directions. So any other mass it encounters is set in motion as the ripple passes by. These ripples make objects move with respect to one another as the wave passes by, but only in incredibly small amounts.
Gravity waves come in various types, which differ in their waveforms, that is, in the shapes of the waves that emerge from a violent event of a given kind. They also differ in their wavelengths, the average distance between wave crests, and in the total amount of energy that the gravity waves carry off from the scene of cosmic violence. The big bang that began the universe was by far the greatest explosion of all time. This bodes well for detectable gravity waves, since the more rapid motion of more massive objects leads to stronger waves. But they have traveled 15 billion light years, and the expansion of the universe has weakening these primordial waves. However, the early moments of expansion have actually strengthened these waves enough to detect with today’s technology. Detection still involves two unknowns: How strong are the primordial gravity waves, and how strong are competing sources of gravity waves which can create interference or false signals?
Astronomers are on the threshold of a solution to the problem of primordial gravity wave observation. They are trying to discern the subtle stretching and shrinking that passing gravitational waves would cause. The task is so challenging that detectors must measure changes in length that are less than a thousandth of the diameter of a proton! General relativity merges space and time into a seamless four-dimensional entity. The presence of mass or energy curves spacetime. That curvature manifests itself as an attractive force between objects--gravity. The motion of massive objects can generate waves of curvature--gravitational waves--that ripple through the fabric of spacetime. It is a shedding of energy in the form of gravitational waves. Nearly all models of the early universe produce a background of wave radiation, (Weiss, 2000). They distort spacetime, like tugging on a piece of woven fabric; it creates a strain on spacetime. It is a pressure wave, like sound; but unlike sound which is a wave of compression and expansion of a substance in space, gravitational waves are a warping of space itself.
According to Australian researcher Reginald Cahill.:
“Process physics claims to be a model of reality that is designed to replace general relativity and unify it with quantum theory. The limitations of formal information systems discovered by Gödel, Turing and Chaitin, are used to replace the geometric modeling of time constructed by Galileo, Newton and Einstein, and to account for the measurement process in quantum theory. Process Physics is distinguished by modelling time as process. The ongoing failure of physics to fully match all the aspects of the phenomena of time, apart from that of order, arises because physics has always used non-process models, as is the nature of formal or syntactical systems. Such systems do not require any notion of process – they are entirely structural and static. The new process physics overcomes these deficiencies by using a non-geometric process model for time, but process physics also argues for the importance of relational or semantic information in modelling reality. Semantic information is information that is generated and recognized within the system itself.”
“In Process Physics we start from the premise that the limits to logic, which are implied by Gödel’s incompleteness theorems, mean that any attempt to model reality via a formal system is doomed to failure. Instead of formal systems we use a process system, which uses the notions of self-referential information with self-referential noise and self-organized criticality to create a new type of information-theoretic system that is realising both the current formal physical modelling of reality but is also exhibiting features such as the direction of time, the present moment effect and quantum state entanglement (including EPR effects, nonlocality and contextuality), as well as the more familiar formalisms of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. In particular a theory of Gravity has already emerged.
In short, rather than the static 4-dimensional modelling of present day (non-process) physics, Process Physics is providing a dynamic model where space and matter are seen to emerge from a fundamentally random but self-organizing system. The key insight is that to adequately model reality we must move on from the traditional non-process syntactical information modelling to a process semantic information modelling; such information is `internally meaningful’.
The new theory of gravity which has emerged from Process Physics is in agreement with all experiments and observations. This theory has two gravitational constants: G, the Newtonian gravitational constant, and a second dimensionless constant which experiment has revealed to be the fine structure constant. This theory explains the so-called `dark matter’ effect in spiral galaxies, the bore hole gravitational anomalies, the masses of the observed black holes at the centers of globular clusters, and the anomalies in Cavendish laboratory measurements of G.” (Reginald Cahill)
Process physics is a reformulation of key concepts to include quantized space. Process-oriented science is a radical information theoretic approach to the modeling fundamental physics. It aims toward a theory of everything by abandoning the space-time construct of Galileo, Newton and Einstein, and by arguing that only a process can model time. Process physics uses a process model of time rather than a geometrical model. It includes differences in past, present and future not derivable from the geometric model.
Time in process physics is modelled as an iterative process, where each iteration is like the next present moment. Due to the randomness present in the iterative equation, the future is not completely predictable. Also, it is not possible to perform the inverse operation, meaning you cannot go backwards to the previous moments. Process physics thus predicts a static past, a continually changing present moment, and an unpredictable future – all of which is consistent with how we experience the passage of tim
QM still clings to the notion of the graviton and/or notions of quantum loop gravity, neither of which offer resolvable solutions. String theory sets the strings against a fixed background. Arguably, a better model would generate not only particles and forces but also the spacetime they inhabit. Loop quantum gravity describes space as a network of tiny volumes only 10-33 centimeter across. Although this approach has achieved some notable successes, such as predicting the properties of black holes, it has yet to pass an essential test: showing that the jumble of volumes always comes together to form the familiar four-dimensional spacetime of our everyday world.
In "Causal Dynamical Triangulations", CDT, dimensionality is turned into a dynamical quantity. CDT is a very simplified form of Loop Quantum Gravity. Individual points have no physical significance in empty space. Time really scales with the correct fraction of total spacetime volume. The wavefunction of the universe is a function of the scalar factor. The spectral dimension is really the effective dimension of the carrier space. The space-time dimension is scale-dependent.
The shape of units of quantization is assumed to be a sphere simply for convention and convenience. It can be any shape and probably is not a sphere, though we tend to forget that. CDT is an attempt to quantize space without quantizing time, which cant be done because space isnt primary. Rigorously it does not exist but as the precipitate of time. Quantized space-time iiself can't be separated. but the grains would have to be way smaller , (10^-33)^^3.
CDT represents conditioning of spacetime BY sub or other spacetime. The only difference between sub- and real spacetime is in fineness of grain. Regular spacetime cannot condition sub-spacetime without an input of energy. space does not really exist as such but is an artifact of quantized time.
Deriving 4-D spacetime 'from scratch" is an unprecedented result. More detailed information about the shortscale structure of quantum spacetime remains to be extracted. This approach is opposite to M-theoretical solutions with vast numbers of possible vacua. It eliminates the invocation of additional dimensions and extended objects. It is a model of fractal, scale-invariant lower dimensional structure at the Planck length that is classical at large scale. It is a nonperturbative quantum gravitational propagator. A four-dimensional universe arises from quantum fluctuations -- four-dimensional quantum gravity.
Physics still pushes a disguised, misapplied uncertainty principle to attach meaning to random wiggles of tiny particles that can be made to APPEAR as a challenge to the second law of thermodynamics. There are a couple of alternatives:
- 1- if two resonators of any kind are far apart, entropy can be preferentially loaded into one;
- 2- the fluctuations could be used to catalyze transmutation of the smallest nuclei, lowering the energy barrier for fusion by a sort of acoustic pseudogravity;
- 1 and 2 have in common a MECHANICAL linkage between cause and effect which points to phonons or mechanical "vibrations" as the most efficient tool.
Gravity at the microscale wrecks QM:
"..... Until recently, physicists hadn’t measured gravity at extremely close ranges. “Astonishing, isn’t it?” says Eric Adelberger, the coordinator of several gravity experiments taking place in a laboratory at the University of Washington, Seattle. “But it wouldn’t be astonishing if you tried to do it”—if you tried to test gravity at distances shorter than a millimeter. Testing gravity isn’t simply a matter of putting two objects close to each other and measuring the attraction between them. All sorts of other things may be exerting a gravitational influence. “There’s metal here,” Adelberger says, pointing to a nearby instrument. “There’s a hillside over here”—waving toward some point past the concrete wall that encircles the laboratory. “There’s a lake over there.” There’s also the groundwater level in the soil, which changes every time it rains. Then there’s the rotation of the Earth, the position of the Sun, the dark matter at the heart of our galaxy. Over the past decade the Seattle team has measured the gravitational attraction between two objects at smaller and smaller distances, down to 56 microns (or 1/500 of an inch), just to make sure that Einstein’s equations for gravity hold true at the shortest distances, too. So far, they do...." http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Dark-Energy-The-Biggest-Mystery-in-the-Universe.html#ixzz1sjX7rIqN
The physics won't break down at ANY scale -- only the mathematics describing it, GR at planck length = GR at galaxy size. There is no difference whatsoever, according to Thomas.
Key prediction:
The 19 gravity model makes a very strong prediction that the electron is not quite stable but has an average lifetime of about 10 to the 30th power years --- that's LONG but not infinite since it (ELECTRON LIFETIME) is indirectly the basis of BOTH QM and GR (but in exactly opposing, conflicting ways) it has received some experimental attention and as of now it's known that electron lifetime is at least 10>(23)
What's so amazing is that a 10>(30) lifetime would automatically invalidate all currently tenable GUTs, whether GR or QM based. EXCEPT ONE!!!!!
and you know which one
PERFECT INCONTROVERTIBLE ACID TEST
this graph is a perfect match for the one on page 323 of jefimenko's book (Gravitation and Cogravitation) - published in 2006, 2 years before the eclipse- it shows the (predicted) formation of a negentropic, negative effective mass by action of astronomical bodies, like during an eclipse. also can happen, though effect is much weaker, when running an ordinary 120 volt induction motor at exactly 108 volts (my observation)
that's 1 gravity and 15 quasi-gravities. only 3 more to go to get to magic 19 needed for revised and simplified M-theory
QM is incompatible with gravity not with GR
What is now called dark/matter/energy used to be called the "missing mass problem" we all studied in high school, even grade school. The cosmological constant in GR makes the missing mass problem disappear for most purposes and
gr gives the right (observed) answer- but it would be nice to know just what cosmo-factor IS
QM gives an answer that is off by 123 orders of magnitude for that reason it has become hardened dogma that gravity is extra weak in the micro-realm. QM just ignores gravity. There is no experimental justification for that assumption; it was always a taboo. QM made the wrong assumption because gravity and GR HOLD TRUE at the micro level but the measurements which should have been done 80 years ago are only now being done (very quietly).
The Tashkent model and Virtual Physics assume , make-or-break, that GR holds at the micro level. No other scheme even CONSIDERS such a thing and they are all DEAD WRONG and they know it (vis recent summit of nobel laureates in bahamas to discuss this very problem).
tashkent and ionaverse MIGHT be right. Everything else CANNOT be right
if you don't assume that gravity is undiminished at quantum level, your whole scheme is 123 orders of magnitude OFF , FROM THE GET-GO.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Dark-Energy-The-Biggest-Mystery-in-the-Universe.html?c=y&page=4
As Tashkent's group correctly insists, the graviton is much like the "fast hole" in a semiconductor; it doesn't quite exist, is unnecessary but very convenient. The square root of ten divided by 10 seems to be a very important number RE: effective mass/"gravity" generation by fast holes.
http://www.groupkos.com/docs/russell_montgomery/Graviton_Induced_Nuclear_Fission.pdf
A gravity wave or gravitation wave is a curve in space time as explained by Einstein’s theory of relativity. Normally gravity just distorts space time slightly. However thanks to the Theory of Relativity physicists now know that really massive objects cause ripples or “waves” in space. Inherently, the greater the mass of an object the greater the gravitational wave it produces. Before relativity, classical physics viewed gravity as simply a force. While this properly explained its effects it did not full explain its nature.Einstein proposed that gravity is not simply a force but actually a curve in space time. The gravitational wave also is said to emit a special form of radiation called gravitational radiation.
Read more: http://www.universetoday.com/54996/gravity-wave/#ixzz25uHtP1XJ
Friday, May 25, 2012 9:02 PM in the ionaverse, there are several ways to combine various accessory gravities to get a net repulsion and it is linked to spin. The strongest effect would be on extra big galaxies that are spinning fast. Gravity is an attractive force only. There is no repulsive force as such except the chance that negative matter might fall "up".
THE GRAVITATIONAL WIND
The holometer is 2 stacked michaelson morley interferometers which is the same as one MM interferometer that can change its polarization 90degrees. exactly what the Tashkent group proposed in 2004 to validate gravity as grand unifier. the granularity can only be exactly = to planck length according to ionaverse; space is the shed snakeskin of the multiplying strong force exchange particles. SPACE-TIME is oxymoronic and does not exist as such - never did
hogan picked the one sneaky fudge factor that can prove essential validity of both ionaverse and Tashkent model by REMOVING it from the processed data, revealing the sparkly pixelation of the gravitational wind
PS alas, there are mucho flat mistakes in sci amer pdf
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&7
"...united fundamental forces. Their gauge field of action is strictly warping.
This curvature leads us once again to the conclusion that ether exists in
nature as a unique gravity which unites the strong and electroweak matter.
If such an idea is accepted, the purpose of the Michelson - Morley experi-
ence is reduced to the definition of speed of a gravitational wind concerning
the Earth and thereby to the establishment of its existence.
As a consequence, at the turn of interferometer at an angle 900, the two
light paths exchange their orientations in comparison with the direction of a
gravitational wind. In these conditions, one of light beams C(D) or C’(D’)
passing through the gravitational see from a half - transparent glass plate to
the optical device similarly to the above - mentioned angular deflection in
the nucleus field of the flux of longitudinal (transversal) polarized neutrinos
or photons suffers considerable warping on the trajectory, and not delay at
the time. Therefore, the observed shift of interference bends depending on
an angle of rotation of the apparatus must be either to the right or to the
left direction concerning a certain middle of their position.
Such a geometrical picture of the phenomenon unexpectedly discovered in
the Michelson - Morley experience may serve as the first laboratory confir-
mation of an angular deflection of light as a consequence of interconversion
of light beams in their spin polarization type dependence.
However, from point of view of general theory of relativity, gravity can
essentially change the trajectory of light. Thus, if an absolute emptiness is
nohaw in force to bend light, we must recognize that an ether see exists as a
gravitational field.
According to the suggested grand unification theory, this implies that grav-
ity is responsible for generalized principle of Einstein’s relativity. In other
words, all physical phenomena originate in an absolutely warping gravita-
tional see, in which nobody is in force to observe the strictly straight linear
and uniform motion of one particle concerning the second ones.
Such a unified world curvature reflects the availability of a unique harmony
of naturally warping forces.
Here an important circumstance is the fact that light used in Michelson’s
interferometer has the gravitoelectromagnetic structure. Its source must be
unified system of the photon and monophoton which come forwards in nature
either as a particle (15) or as an electromagnetic wave.
The fifth force idea was ruled out a long time ago. Contrary to title, this work completely rules out even a small fifth force; vindicates GR. The most interesting and potentially useful questions are those predicted by GR but have no immediate grantsmanship mojo. If there was a fifth force GPS wouldn't work. There are 18 sub gravities and most are predicted by GR. They have been ignored so long they are almost forgotten. They have only tiny effects on gr but have much larger possibilites application wise.
" Jain and his colleagues ultimately did not see variation between their control sample of screened galaxies and their test sample of unscreened ones. Their results line up exactly with the prediction of Einstein’s general relativity. This means that the potential range and strength of the fifth force is severely constrained. “We find consistency with Einstein’s theory of gravity and we sharply narrow the space available to these other theories. Many of these theories are now ruled out by the data,” Jain said.
Gravitational Aharonov Bohm effect, presumed to exist but not yet tested (the mechanics are very busy!) is one linkage between weak and gravity. If gravity, with its 19 efflorescences, is the unifying force (of which i no longer have any doubt) then linkage pre-exists; gravity, weak force, EM are triplets.
The foundation of Special Relativity (SR) is that gravity is an acceleration.
Einstein's "aha!" moment came when he realized that there can never be a way to distinguish between gravity and acceleration, therefore you can claim that gravity IS accelleration, which lets inertial forces in the back door. In SR, gravity is identical to an acceleration EXCEPT it is in 4 dimensions, not 3d + time "-c" comes with the extra dimension due to the time intervals used to measure distance in the fourth d. There's no way ro get rid of it.
what it means
Gravity is the grand unifying force AND gravity RESOLVES the infinity problem, the #1 one problem in physics
toms and the chinese guys will probably get nobel within 3 years (right now not many understand it)
Nature published Toms' paper AGAINST their usual policy. In the past, that has always meant big things
QM and GR were never UN-UNIFIED it was all a lot of hot air; i only understand it somewhat only because it has always been my belief anyway.
the quantum gravity mentioned is not the real QG its just quantized gGT (by adding an unnecessary graviton which can be removed later)
"-c" is the foundation of SR ...but it doesn't engender time dilation or length contraction . these are not real physical effects and there is no change in SR, that i can find, if you drop Lorentz transformation and the reason is :
the supposed Lorentz effects only occur during acceleration which is now the same as gravitational force and over 99% of the gravity we experience is near-field gravity which is curved space.
the instant acceleration can only be in one direction so that's why time becomes more involved (its half of the necessary measurement) but melting space and time together is going way too far. Lorentz transformation needs to be kicked out some way.
that comes to the issue of advanced potentials and causality
the negative "c" of the near field advanced potential is exactly the same negative c that is the foundation of SR. It isn't a photon going back in time -that's a typical Feynman cop-out. It's a part of a photon (electric field) traveling at infinite speed.
There might be a way for the electric field to grab onto space and bend it, but it goes to gluons and color force, which may be very much like photons-with-pretensions and which definitely do bend space without using mass to accomplish it.
http://www.numericana.com/answer/maxwell.htm
real causality is reasonable and logical and doesnt resemble the 19th century "causality" now mandated. Ive heard it said by QM-ers that this holds only for low frequency photons (radio waves) because cancelling out of retarded potential at higher freq results in a photon destructively interfering with a virtual graviton. implication is that radio waves (at least can have gravity-like effects ala Heaviside (now proved) ... but the gravity component is so weak as to remain almost virtual---- it takes an ensamble (sp) of coordinated electro gravities to get useful results.
"...
The so-called advanced potentials ( A+ and f+ ) are formally obtained by making c negative in the above retarded expressions (or equivalently by reversing the arrow of time). This is just like what we've already encountered in the case of planar waves, with two possible directions of travel. However, the physical interpretation is not nearly as easy now that we're dealing with some causality relationship between the field and its "sources". Advanced potentials make the situation here and now (potentials and/or fields) depend on the future state of remote "sources". Such a thing may be summarily dismissed as "unphysical" but this fails to make the issue go away. Indeed, quantum treatments of electromagnetic fields (photons in Quantum Field Theory ) imply that a field can create some of its sources in the form of charged particle-antiparticle pairs. What seems to be lacking is the coherence of such creations because of statistical and/or thermodynamical considerations (which feature a pronounced arrow of time). I don't understand this. Nobody does... What's clear, however, is that the distinction between past and future vanishes in stationary cases. This makes advanced potentials relevant and/or necessary, without the need for mind-boggling philosophical considerations. We've only shown (admittedly skipping the mathematical details) that potentials that obey the Lorenz gauge would necessarily be given by the above formulas (possibly adding advanced and free components). Conversely, we ought to determine now what restrictions, if any, (pertaining to the sources r and j) would make the above solutions verify the assumed Lorenz gauge. However, we shall postpone this discussion to present first a clarification of the physics..."
(2005-08-21) Electrodynamic Fields Caused by Moving Sources
An expression derived from the Liénard-Wiechert retarded potentials.
its what you get when you equate gravity with accelleration (which is the foundation of General Relativity and possibly Special Relativity) and then try to shoehorn time into it to make "space-time". Let's say you stop right there., keep space and time separated to the extent possible within GR, BUT CONNECTED BY A THIN LINK -- "-c"
well thats what i do all the time anyway, only non-sneaky way of eliminating "-c" GR and SR are really all about VARIABLE "c" - EXACTLY THE REVERSE OF ALL THE HYPE!
TEB and i had a 6 month long discussion on this in 1980. He cited my hero Sakhatov and his 1967 paper arguing that gravity is a conglomeration of many forces. But after endless explanations from rom, i realized that Sakharov had everything exactly BACKWARDS. He was saying that vacuum fluctuations (which are just naked space flapping in the gravity wind) are CAUSED by the presence of matter in motion. For most purposes the right way and backwards way are equivilant. TEB, QM and especially HAL PUTHOFF have it backward still and boy does it MATTER!
in a nutshell , they are expecting zero point energy from vacuum fluctuations to be very robust because it's just a bigger van der waals or casimir force. they are terribly wrong. The vacuum fluctuations are the wrestling match between 3D space and the 4rth spatial dimension (the sibling universe or 5th KK dimension) FROM WHICH ALL MATTER IS BORN
we're in trouble. this one has what i've been looking for: 5d uncompact kk, with 11d implied in a semiholographic way. i had a strong inclination that the changes in cosmic expansion are mandated by the structure of space itself. but could not think of a mechanism without driving myself cuckoo. here it is - albeit in tenative and preliminary form
An expanding 4D universe in a 5D Kaluza-Klein cosmology with higher dimensional matter
F. Darabi
Department of Physics, Azarbaijan University of Tarbiat Moallem, 53714-161, Tabriz, Iran .
Research Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha, 55134-441, Maragha, Iran.
December 3, 2009
Abstract
In the framework of Kaluza-Klein theory, we investigate a (4+1)-dimensional universe consisting of a (4+1) dimensional Robertson-Walker type metric coupled with a (4+1) dimensional energy-momentum tensor. The matter part consists of an energy density together with a pressure subject to 4D part of the (4+1) dimensional energy-momentum tensor. The dark part consists of just a dark pressure ¯p, corresponding to the extra-dimension endowed by a scalar field, with no element of dark energy. It is shown that the reduced Einstein field equations are free of 4D pressure and are just affected by an effective pressure produced by the 4D energy density and dark pressure. It is then proposed that the expansion of the universe may be controlled by the equation of state in higher dimension rather than four dimensions. This may account for the emergence of unexpected current acceleration in the middle of matter dominant era.
Key words: Dark pressure; inflation; accelerating universe; non compact Kaluza-Klein cosmology.
e-mail: [email protected]
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.0454v2.pdf
Heaviside's co-gravity(not the same as gravitomagnetism) was definitely confirmed by gravity probe b
if you simply opt out of the wholly unjustifiable PRESUMPTION that gravity weakens at the microscale, QM and GR are already unified. it can be stated a number of ways . very anti-climactic!?
gravity probe b has definitely confirmed heavisides extension of maxwell into gravitation - you can look it up (google, wikipedia, etc)
jefimenko also ferociously defends heavisides 1893 paper
in 1893 the bogus QM assumotion - already disproved by seattle group-that gravity is weak in the micro realm, DID NOT YET EXIST
a 5d kk, uncompact whixh is quasi holographically 11d is the same as what TEB has been saying all this time but it includes strong force, weak force etc
so zero point may be exploitable after all but not in any way consonant with ANYBODIES' current idea.including mine!
BTW the schrodinger wave equation just plopped out of the 5D KK. "who ordered that?"
gravity IS a conglomerate of (19) forces or lesser gravities but not as guessed at present. they took the wtong idea from sasakharov; he was talking about something completely unrelated
- and thats how it ALWAYS turns out
attatched are blake temples prepared answers to reporters which are ALL very interesting and accurate
at the time of GR the established dogma was that the milky way WAS the universe
to get published you needed a static universe
temple actually touches on the best way of getting rid of dark matter but doesnt pursue it , being a pure mathematition.
somewhere in the calculations of the mass of the universe, you mulriply by pi one time too many. this is the standard formula which einstein had to use (youre only allowed to demolish one paradigm per paper and then only if you are established and senior) right now i cant remember details but it was argued about and resolved about 1930 and to this day the cosmologists use the wrong recioe for the mass of the universe resulting in mass about 3 times too high (Actually 3.1415927 times too high) i always divide the mass by 3 and cut out the dark matter.
gravity is purely attractive but it can exert a very weak repulsion by interacting with its own derivative (gravitomagnetic force or heaviside secondary grav)
temple believes relativity is OK without the cosmoconstant and he is right and einstein was right to abandon it.
as i told you , dark matter is just the resurrected cosmo constant and is not consistent with GR which does not have a cosmo constant and only had it briefly due to need to present a static universe in order to get published
temple tries a different angle to CONFIRM GR (using an old argument but adding mathematical consistency)he thinks he has done that
hes the last person on earth to attack GR - thats the dark matter people
NEGATIVE energy/matter almost certainly exists but it doesnt fall up and may be scarce (my own personal # shows no energy gain under normal conditions so i assume its scarce)
news that einstein has been refuted sells newspapers and second tier journals. the writers plug it in to - keep employment by enhancing bottom line
to date, for more than 50 years at least, i have never seen a single accurate police report, press report, or official record where i had personal knowledge of the facts NOT ONE
BTW the gravity wrinkles in nearby novas get here before the light . my guess was 4 years. it took 5
i couldnt take time to go to australia so i made a crude guess and stated thats what it was
REAL UNEDITED quote from temple, prepared for press specifically to hinder malicious misquotes
Keep in mind that Einstein’s equations have been confirmed
without the need for the cosmological constant or dark energy,
in every physical setting except in cosmology.
Dark energy is the physical interpretation of the cosmological
constant. The cosmological constant is a source term with a
free parameter, (similar to but different from our a), that can be
12
http://www.fqxi.org/
effects of gravity and acceleration (i.e., the deviation from inertial motion) indistinguishable,
at least locally, by making them manifestations of one and the same
entity, now often called the inertio-gravitational field. If Mach’s principle were satisfied,
this field could be fully reduced to its material sources and all motion would
be relative. But Mach’s principle is not satisfied and the inertio-gravitational field
exists in addition to its sources. When two objects are in relative non-uniform
motion, this additional structure allows us to determine whether the first, the second,
or both are actually moving non-uniformly. In this sense, motion in general
relativity is as absolute as it was in special relativity. In his Princeton lectures,
however, Einstein (1956, 55–56) argued that there is an important difference between
the two theories: in general relativity, the additional structure is a bona fide
physical entity that not only acts but is also acted upon. As Misner, Thorne, and
Wheeler (1973, 5) put it in their textbook on general relativity: “Space acts on
matter, telling it how to move. In turn, matter reacts back on space, telling it how
to curve.”
By 1920, Einstein had probably recognized that Mach’s principle was predicated
on an antiquated 19th-century billiard-ball ontology (Hoefer 1994; Renn 2007b).
In the field ontology of the early 20th-century, in which matter was ultimately
thought of as a manifestation of the electromagnetic and perhaps other fields, it
amounts to the requirement that the gravitational field be reduced to these other
fields. A recognition of this state of affairs may have helped Einstein make his
peace with the persistence of absolute motion in general relativity. Instead of
trying to reduce one field to another, he now tried to unify the two. This can
be gleaned from Ether and relativity, the inaugural lecture Einstein gave upon
accepting a visiting professorship in Leyden in 1920. Einstein was not pandering
to his revered senior Dutch colleague Hendrik Antoon Lorentz when he presented
the inertio-gravitational field in this lecture as a new relativistic incarnation of the
ether eliminated by special relativity (Einstein 1920j).
maxwell and GR have been tested every which way for a hundred years. if you make a defensible extension of either one , it carries a lot of weight. the newly confirmed heaviside secondary gravity can be stretched to reveal that the sign on the gravity lobe is negative. that is near-proof that negative energy (less than zero energy) exists in its pristine form as postulated by dirac and promoted by bearden. the alternative is utter failure of maxwell/GR which is almost impossible- so unlikely as to be out of the question. the neg energy can be "dark matter" because geometric gravity interacting with EM related sub-gravity generates repulsive force (gravity interacting with itself, combining 2 attractions to make repulsion). i dont know how , thats what numbers say - but its much more than some jerk's tinkering and curve fitting- anybody betting against it will lose.
the catch:
it takes lots of regular energy to make neg energy so you still cant win, unless you can catch the EM like emanation from some shell star that wastes all its fuel on generating neg energy in the form of some sineusoid wave that doesnt need an associated particle, or some other trick.
only a 5d UNCOMPACTED KK can be real.
5-d origin of spin
in a nutshell, it's the mirror universe implied by Dirac's dangling negative mass in his solution for the relativistic electron, but gradually whittled down to conform to experimental evidence. It's the "adjacent" or near field" vacuum. It's where matter comes from.
For about 15 years, the consensus has been growing that the quickest exact solution to the "hierarchy problem" is to probe the weak force symmetry mechanisms at an energy of 4 to 5 TEV, and hope that a way to solve the gravity half of the problem will be illuminated by that. That is what's happening this year (2012) at the LHC.
it's the strategy and it's by design.
a higgs fragment at 125gev rules out the standard model because mass is too low.
hierarchy problem cant be resolved in supersymmetry (that is the OBJECT of supersymmetry! )
i figutrd out the theshold for direct excitation of 5th dimension and it is 4TEV
significantly , this forbids vacuum catastrophe (small black holes) but highlights connection between planck mass and newtons gravity constant and also permits solution of hierarchy (weak force particle mass)
in 5d uncompacted kk , there is a new constant, = to about 8/3pi according to the canadian 5d guy
so, fifth dimension is = to mirror universe
but dimension 5 of ANY kk or other theory cannot be detected directly by a collider, it has to be a straight accellerator
bottom line:
proof of ionaverse may be buried in recorded data from tevatron runII which will be public domain eventually
cheap and dirty proof and extractable if you already know what to look for
i no longer understand any of the above because i got a little heat stressed and everything is now a blank
planck mass is all tied up with newton constant and radion/axion but cannot remember details
the only practical way to exploit weak-tronics is to start with the MAGNETIC ISOTOPE OF MAGNESIUM (mg25) and its relation to variable beta decay. the larson idea of LENR's is a good example of what weak-tronics might do , IF we live in a universe where weak-tronics is POSSIBLE. Last years (2011) probe for the Higgs boson at LHC appears to be permissive for weak-tronics, putting the minimum energy for excitation of the fifth dimension (the vacuum) at about 4 TEV, down from 20TEV, but still higher than the 1 TEV predicted by some influential theorists (lisa randall et al).
I was holding out for my long time prediction of 19.5 GEV for the higgs resonance but 125GEV will do....and besides, i hadnt considered the possibility of the requirement of a shadow higgs (mostly because i considered the dominant heavy higgs theories to be ridiculous) in the 5th dimension/mirror universe/ adjacent vacuum to accompany the symmetry restoring right-handed weak force (or its equivilant).A higgs fragment at 19.5 means the vacuum is unstable and the universe could already be self destructing (hawking). i never worried about that because the universe has been here a very long time and cannot self destruct. NEVERTHELESS, a shadow higgs at 19.5 and a weak-force related higgs fragment at 125 would bode well for the future of our species, and a shadow higgs WAS discovered by CMS and it WAS significant (Ellis et al) but was dismissed -for now- by an accounting trick which is too complicated to get into here.
to comprehend the implications its necessary to consider the origin of "spin" and why that just about mandates a 5d (expandable to 11d) KK type universe with gravity - considered as an accelleration rather than a true "force" - as the unifying force.
next : 5d origin of spin
so they made their key prediction that 5thD, near (near meaning "warped" as well as "near" ) vacuum was directly excited at 1TEV (based on added warp from graviton) - thats beardens "sparking the vacuum" , and its unrelated to zero-point or casimir attraction
the minimum v for direct excitation of 5th dimension is 4TEV (my prediction) a;though there are tunneling processes involving exotic elements like cesium that can bring down the v but they cause other problems
photons have to be considered as travelling at infinite speed - but its a whiter shade of infinite, more difficult than gravitational infinite speed- but one thing is clear:
what has driven everything way off the mark is the universally held and unwarranted dogma thatgravity and EM are closely related when they are no more closely related than gravity and ANY OTHER "fundamental" force, gravity being the unifying force.
"space" is an entangled state of entangled gluon, spin 2, pairs ---double entanglement.
given Mach's principle and the above statement, when a photon is launched, its presence is instantly felt everywhere in the universe
they confuse all the definitions. this is presented as preliminary evidence for gravitational RADIATION, which can only be emitted from a sharply accellerating, massive body (analogue to EM) the stars are too close together . its actually evidence for non-propagating gravity (analogous to near-field E and M) propagating and non propagating gravity both exist. the former travels at c, the latter at infinite speed; a spaceship traveling at 1000c will have no contraction and the crew will experience no distortion in time. it only works that way for tiny objects.
on the gamma ray thing, any 3 gammas that came from great distance and are detectable on earth would have started out close together and parallel and would have experienced identical G-refraction and would have arrived simultaneously ANYWAY.
i learned last night that the biggest opponent of the spacetime silliness was Albert Einstein who repeatedly said the whole business about time was a great big illusion.
i also learned WHY. the 4D space+time was just a de rigour continuation of the conventional newtonian mechanics for moving obhects in use from 1697 till now.
explicitly AE insisted that space and time were not meant to be fused by GR into a continuum, but by that time he was marginalized. GR could not come into its own till after AE was dead and could no longer protest
1 Link to gravity wave article Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:18 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Goldminer or Rockbottom" cwrockbttm http://www.bbc. co.uk/news/ science-environm ent-19408363#
"...One possible response, given that we will inevitably have to face fullfledged
quantum gravity, is to take chronology protection as being so basic
a property that we should use it as a guide in developing our theory of
quantum gravity:..."
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
exactly right. if you know FOR SURE how causality works, everything else becomes very easy.
thats basically what ive been doing since about 1970
you can change the past, but unbelievable, impossible obstacles get thrown in your way; it has to be for something that invokes all your determination.
you cant make BIG changes and even tiny changes require motivation beyond our normal understanding. the first time i did this with no possibility of alternate explanation was in 1970 (there were 7 shocked and bewildered witnesses including my brother, father, myself and a trigger-happy local cop),
hawkings idea is the right one, except , in reality, the causality protection mechanism occasionally lets a violation squeak by''
only a 5d uncompacted kaluza klein with non propagating primary gravity, in which dimension 5 is a deformed mirror universe can accommodate 99% effective causality protection mechanism. the work on this has already been done by others.
"...There is also strong experimental evidence in favour of the
conjecture — from the fact that we have not been invaded by
hordes of tourists from the future...."
When you divorce "space" from the silly and puerile amalgam of "spacetime", everything comes clear; the classical electrodynamics - still used by professional EE's like frank z. and tom valone- with its sub-atomics expressed as simple refraction, carries new validity.
.....but it requires- as does special relativity- a variable "c", which plainly exists and is only a problem by way of the murderous trade union protectionism of the "theoretical" set who pride themselves on never actually DOING anything and who idiotically insist that mathematics can constitute "proof".
they cant get along without a graviton for no other justification than it's "required" for their weak minded notion of "symmetry".
fine, i'll toss them a graviton. its a photon --- or a gluon--- it just depends and the pre-assumptions you chose to make.
the photon cannot be its own antiparticle. heres why:
E=mc^2, E=m(-c)^2, >>> m(-c)^2 = mc^2
gravity is proximately caused by a flexure of space, which is a real entity and not a mere jumble of numbers.
circumstances exist where the ROOT cause of the forced flexure of space can be a forced variation of "c" (within fairly narrow limits).
simple refraction. only a little more involved than the engineers standard practice.
we only see the ENTANGLED photon-anti-photon pair which does not necessarily annihilate.
the negative velocity works out when "c" is forced to vary - as in a near field receiver/transmitter and , by maxwell and heaviside, you get gravity.
relativistic time dilation is only varying "c" seen with blinders on.
preliminary.
the graviton cannot exist, in consequence, minkowsky space-time cannot exist. kaluza-klein, COMPACTED models are ruled out. FTL photons can exist via specific local gravity distortions (which is what special relativity says anyway, and einstein took pains to repeatedly emphasize this) (i have a number of his in-print utterances). cool fission is way better than cold (or hot) fusion.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Ken Thomas <[email protected]>
To: Iona Miller <[email protected]>
Cc: ocie thomas <[email protected]>; k 2000 <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2012 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: cern makes soup- and entangled gluon pairs!
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/sep/23/curious-correlations-seen-by-cms
quark gluon plasmas from the heat of heavy ion collisions dont reveal much
in sept 2010, CMS found the beginning of entangled gluon pairs exactly where i predicted , at 3.5 tev FROM PROTON-PROTON COLLISIONS also exactly as i predicted. this demolishes standard model (i didnt know that)
CMS couldnt get to 4tev at that time. meanwhile, scrambling has gone on to obscure CMS' accidental and totally unexpected finding
FYI predictions are required to be made in terms if highest energy per particle ; ie, 8TEV =4TEV for colliding protons.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/08/hot-stuff-cern-physicists-create-record-breaking-subatomic-soup.html
copenhagen delusion
...is blocking all inquiry into GENUINE, exotic effects, which can be of immense benefit to the planet and our species.
3 Attached files| 1.4MB
as i previously intimated, the dilaton, newtons gravity constant are closely related. they are clumps of entangled gluonsplancks constant (pixelation of space} also intertwines
strong force=gravity; there can be no gtaviton, per se and 5D(11D) KK is the way to go, the simplest of available models
--kt
",,,where we see this axion-dilaton scalar field in the middle within the red font. We factor that out and we see that this is a graviton times a scalar field. So the graviton sector can be seen as the “square” of the gluon sector. There is a further bit I have brushed over, which is that general graviton states involve circular polarized states with the (b^†n)^β operator in superpositions. The graviton can be seen as a quantum entanglement state of gluons. Whether the (a^†n)^j(a^†n)^k type of states are axions or dilatons depends on the entanglement --- a complication I will just refer to here. ..."
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Q_qz3Nl3vxkJ:fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/gluons__gravitons.doc+is+the+gluon+a+graviton%3F&cd=13&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
true. the biphoton decay is a decay series. its termed biphoton for efficiency - but
the addled mechanics jump on that and do an "experiment" with public funds, which is designed to PREVENT any result but the one they want. if they entered an 8th grade science fair they would immediately be disqualified AND the fakery is so blatant and in-your-face that you can go right down the list of the latest "retroactive observer effects" and nail the experimental error, EVERY TIME. the truth is far broader, larger and more liberating than the 2D delusion.for example. gravity has to have charge or GR and maxwell fail utterly. maxwell and GR are thoroughly tested by LEGITIMATE experiment and not likely to fail. so its required that gravity have an associated electric sub-component, which means we can get at it electrically, which brings the zone between the capacitor plates to attention.
there are statements in frank z's duality paper that are exactly wrong on purpose, to get past the censors. everybody but me does that; its accepted, the idea is that the falsity is so out-to-lunch that truth is indirectly preserved. WRONG . the frenzied mob plucks out the falsity and uses it to attack the bearer of unadorned truth who is only rigidly adhering to the minutest detail of authenticity for the purpose of protecting the fools from themselves
TEB and others have mentioned an experiment from the late 1960's where some IBM people strung out a few miles of wire in a big reactionless loop and discharged a big capacitor through it. without the extra reaction, the speed of the ringing current was measured at 1.57"c" (pi/2 x "c")
the guy who directed that experiment is a mega physicist, a household name. he would have to be deceased by now. using a screen name he asked me the only question at "Ask Me" that ever stumped me, even momentarily. it took an hour of headscratching but i got it, then i demanded to know who or what he was and he IDed himself
the Q was "when a photon enters a dense medium, like a glass prism, it slows down and regains approximate "c" when it leaves the dense medium. what makes it speed up again?"
the answer contains the whole of special relativity. and is tantamount to proof that a photon crosses the entire observable universe in exactly zero seconds. its speed is infinite, though we can only observe it directly as "c". the barrier to observing it by indirect means is entirely philosophical and legalistic to the point of being monarchistic. "CAUSALITY"causality has no place in it.
SURFING THE PRIMORDIAL GRAVITY WAVES
Gravity waves are ripples of spacetime. The idea of spacetime iself as a dynamic entity--one that can bend, stretch and take on different shapes--still seems radical. Even more startling is Einsteein’s prediction that spacetime can ripple like a flag in a strong breeze. Perturbations of matter produce radiating ripples or waves, in the very fabric of spacetime. Gravity waves penetrate all matter. Gravitational waves can traverse the universe, carrying the imprint of the distant events that gave them birth, (Frank, 2000).
Einstein perceived that the best way to conceive of gravity would be to think of it not as affecting objects in space, but rather as affecting space itself. This realization that gravity bends space marked a key moment in Einstein’s path toward the general theory of relativity. The theory also predicted accurately that gravity bends light, because gravity bends space and light travels through space as directly as possible. It only travels straight in the absence of gravity. Einstein saw that if an object with mass--the sun, for instance--bends space into a sort of dimple, then the motion of any object with mass would move that dimple in space from place to place. This produces a changing distortion of space, which creates a ripple, a moving wave in the fabric of spacetime. Einstein realized that the ripple created by the motion of mass spreads outward in space in all directions. So any other mass it encounters is set in motion as the ripple passes by. These ripples make objects move with respect to one another as the wave passes by, but only in incredibly small amounts.
Gravity waves come in various types, which differ in their waveforms, that is, in the shapes of the waves that emerge from a violent event of a given kind. They also differ in their wavelengths, the average distance between wave crests, and in the total amount of energy that the gravity waves carry off from the scene of cosmic violence. The big bang that began the universe was by far the greatest explosion of all time. This bodes well for detectable gravity waves, since the more rapid motion of more massive objects leads to stronger waves. But they have traveled 15 billion light years, and the expansion of the universe has weakening these primordial waves. However, the early moments of expansion have actually strengthened these waves enough to detect with today’s technology. Detection still involves two unknowns: How strong are the primordial gravity waves, and how strong are competing sources of gravity waves which can create interference or false signals?
Astronomers are on the threshold of a solution to the problem of primordial gravity wave observation. They are trying to discern the subtle stretching and shrinking that passing gravitational waves would cause. The task is so challenging that detectors must measure changes in length that are less than a thousandth of the diameter of a proton! General relativity merges space and time into a seamless four-dimensional entity. The presence of mass or energy curves spacetime. That curvature manifests itself as an attractive force between objects--gravity. The motion of massive objects can generate waves of curvature--gravitational waves--that ripple through the fabric of spacetime. It is a shedding of energy in the form of gravitational waves. Nearly all models of the early universe produce a background of wave radiation, (Weiss, 2000). They distort spacetime, like tugging on a piece of woven fabric; it creates a strain on spacetime. It is a pressure wave, like sound; but unlike sound which is a wave of compression and expansion of a substance in space, gravitational waves are a warping of space itself.
According to Australian researcher Reginald Cahill.:
“Process physics claims to be a model of reality that is designed to replace general relativity and unify it with quantum theory. The limitations of formal information systems discovered by Gödel, Turing and Chaitin, are used to replace the geometric modeling of time constructed by Galileo, Newton and Einstein, and to account for the measurement process in quantum theory. Process Physics is distinguished by modelling time as process. The ongoing failure of physics to fully match all the aspects of the phenomena of time, apart from that of order, arises because physics has always used non-process models, as is the nature of formal or syntactical systems. Such systems do not require any notion of process – they are entirely structural and static. The new process physics overcomes these deficiencies by using a non-geometric process model for time, but process physics also argues for the importance of relational or semantic information in modelling reality. Semantic information is information that is generated and recognized within the system itself.”
“In Process Physics we start from the premise that the limits to logic, which are implied by Gödel’s incompleteness theorems, mean that any attempt to model reality via a formal system is doomed to failure. Instead of formal systems we use a process system, which uses the notions of self-referential information with self-referential noise and self-organized criticality to create a new type of information-theoretic system that is realising both the current formal physical modelling of reality but is also exhibiting features such as the direction of time, the present moment effect and quantum state entanglement (including EPR effects, nonlocality and contextuality), as well as the more familiar formalisms of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. In particular a theory of Gravity has already emerged.
In short, rather than the static 4-dimensional modelling of present day (non-process) physics, Process Physics is providing a dynamic model where space and matter are seen to emerge from a fundamentally random but self-organizing system. The key insight is that to adequately model reality we must move on from the traditional non-process syntactical information modelling to a process semantic information modelling; such information is `internally meaningful’.
The new theory of gravity which has emerged from Process Physics is in agreement with all experiments and observations. This theory has two gravitational constants: G, the Newtonian gravitational constant, and a second dimensionless constant which experiment has revealed to be the fine structure constant. This theory explains the so-called `dark matter’ effect in spiral galaxies, the bore hole gravitational anomalies, the masses of the observed black holes at the centers of globular clusters, and the anomalies in Cavendish laboratory measurements of G.” (Reginald Cahill)
Process physics is a reformulation of key concepts to include quantized space. Process-oriented science is a radical information theoretic approach to the modeling fundamental physics. It aims toward a theory of everything by abandoning the space-time construct of Galileo, Newton and Einstein, and by arguing that only a process can model time. Process physics uses a process model of time rather than a geometrical model. It includes differences in past, present and future not derivable from the geometric model.
Time in process physics is modelled as an iterative process, where each iteration is like the next present moment. Due to the randomness present in the iterative equation, the future is not completely predictable. Also, it is not possible to perform the inverse operation, meaning you cannot go backwards to the previous moments. Process physics thus predicts a static past, a continually changing present moment, and an unpredictable future – all of which is consistent with how we experience the passage of tim
ZERO POINT
The zero-energy universe hypothesis states that the total amount of energy in the universe is exactly zero. When the energy of the universe is considered from a pseudo-tensor point of view, zero values are obtained in the resulting calculations. The amount of positive energy in the form of matter is exactly canceled out by the negative energy in the form of gravity. (Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe)
In conventional theory, Scalar EM wave vibrations occur in the time domain only. This longitudinal EM wave is called a “scalar” photon in QM, so long as it remains in subspace or hyperspace. The nonobservable scalar photon is the main operator of Quantum Field Theory (QFT). The combination of the scalar and longitudinal photon is observable as the instantaneous scalar potential. It reveals the threshold of manifestation – unfolding spacetime. Further the metrics of spacetime oscillating at high frequency may be the ontological source of the quantum world and particle/wave duality.
Zero point energy is the kinetic energy that remains in a substance when its temperature is absolute zero. The vacuum has zero point energy, also. Any potential is just a bunch of trapped dynamic vectors, hence trapped vector (translational) energy. It is translational energy that is locally trapped and not translating. The potential is thus like an accumulator or capacitor. It can be "charged up" and "discharged." The vacuum is increasingly being regarded as composed of an incredibly dense structure of virtual electromagnetic energy, even at zero degrees absolute.
Superspace consists of pure massless charge flux, pure scalar waves. If compacted this energy density of the vacuum is enormous. Here, in the vacuum, spacetime is incredibly dense, and matter is etherically thin. Spacetime goes through matter, rather than matter through spacetime. And this energy density of the vacuum does interact with electromagnetic fields and matter to give observable effects, such as the Lamb shift. In his inflationary model of the hot Big Bang, Alan H. Guth considers matter to consist of scalar-field particles, (SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, Dec. 1991).
"Such field particles are not the stuff of everyday life, but they do arise naturally in many theories." Indeed, they are believed to be the dominant form of matter under the extremely high energy conditions similar to those in the early universe. According to the inflationary model, they lead to a kind of negative pressure. Gravity effectively becomes a repulsive force, and inflation occurs. At the end of the inflationary era, the decay of the scalar-field matter producing the expansion heated the (initially cold) universe to a very high temperature. Although the scalar field is largely homogeneous, it still may have small, inhomogeneous parts. According to quantum theory, these inhomogeneous parts cannot be exactly zero but must be subject to small quantum fluctuations. (In fact, all types of matter are subject to such quantum effects, but for most purposes the fluctuations are so small as to be totally insignificant.)
The rapid expansion of the universe during inflation magnified these initially insignificant microscopic fluctuations, transforming them into macroscopic changes in density [ref. chaos theory and the pumping up of micro- to macroscopic changes as one of the characteristics of chaos]. Inflation itself depends on a number of assumptions. For example, it would have occurred only if the scalar field began with a large, approximately constant energy density. This approximately constant energy density is equivalent, at least for a brief time, to Einstein's famous (or infamous) cosmological constant. Therefore, like it or not, the success of inflation rests on certain assumptions about initial conditions [another aspect of chaos theory].
"What happened before inflation? How did the universe actually begin?" In the pre-inflation era, the size of the universe tends to zero, and the strength of the gravitational field and the energy density of matter tend to infinity. That is, the universe appears to have emerged from a singularity, a region of infinite curvature and energy density at which the known laws of physics break down. Near a singularity, space-time becomes highly curved; its volume shrinks to very small dimensions. Under such circumstances, one must appeal to the theory of the very small--that is, to quantum theory. In quantum mechanics, motion is not deterministic, but probabilistic. A quantity called the wave function encodes the probabilistic information about such variables as position, momentum and energy. For a single-point particle, one can regard the wave function as an oscillating field spread throughout physical space. Because of the uncertainty principle, the kinetic and potential energy of a system cannot both be exactly zero. Instead the system has a ground state in which the energy is as low as it can be. (Recall that in the inflationary universe, galaxies form from "ground-state fluctuations.") Such fluctuations also prevent the orbiting electron from crashing into the nucleus. The electrons have an orbit of minimum energy from which they cannot fall into the nucleus without violating the uncertainty principle.
the quantum mechanics have always assumed the large scale structure of 4 space has a positive curvature. this has been thoroughly disproven.
they ignore it. the large scale structure is almost perfectly euclidian. no counterarguement can be made . mass - in excess of the average causes positive curve. in the realm of the very small space is positive around all particles. space is positive around galactic center and othe concentrations of mass. where mass is sparse, space can be slightly negatively curved resulting in gravity have the effect of repulsion; thats what the dark matter insanity is about
in the big bang universe of the 1930's QM could operate on larger scales - BUT THATS NOT THE UNIVERSE WE LIVE IN
THATS ALL THERE IS TO IT. .... but you will meet instant violence if you mention it to the wrong person
(s)
the vacuum isnt that energetic. proof: the night sky is not brighter than the sun
"scalar waves, anti-resonance and gravitational ducting"* * im talking about the real thing- warping the space between receiver (target) and transmitter ( target from receiver end) thats how scalar waves get around. they dont propagate per se but compress the space in the direction of intended recipient
Experimental Evidence of Near-field Superluminally
Propagating Electromagnetic Fields
William D. Walker
Royal Institute of Technology, KTH-Visby
Department of Electrical Engineering
Cramrgatan 3, S-621 57 Visby, Sweden
[email protected]
1 Introduction
A simple experiment is presented which indicates that electromagnetic fields
propagate superluminally in the near-field next to an oscillating electric dipole source.
A high frequency 437MHz, 2 watt sinusoidal electrical signal is transmitted from a
dipole antenna to a parallel near-field dipole detecting antenna. The phase difference
between the two antenna signals is monitored with an oscilloscope as the distance
between the antennas is increased. Analysis of the phase vs distance curve indicates
that superluminal transverse electric field waves (phase and group) are generated
approximately one-quarter wavelength outside the source and propagate toward and
away from the source. Upon creation, the transverse waves travel with infinite speed.
The outgoing transverse waves reduce to the speed of light after they propagate about
one wavelength away from the source. The inward propagating transverse fields
rapidly reduce to the speed of light and then rapidly increase to infinite speed as they
travel into the source. The results are shown to be consistent with standard
electrodynamic theory
The zero-energy universe hypothesis states that the total amount of energy in the universe is exactly zero. When the energy of the universe is considered from a pseudo-tensor point of view, zero values are obtained in the resulting calculations. The amount of positive energy in the form of matter is exactly canceled out by the negative energy in the form of gravity. (Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe)
In conventional theory, Scalar EM wave vibrations occur in the time domain only. This longitudinal EM wave is called a “scalar” photon in QM, so long as it remains in subspace or hyperspace. The nonobservable scalar photon is the main operator of Quantum Field Theory (QFT). The combination of the scalar and longitudinal photon is observable as the instantaneous scalar potential. It reveals the threshold of manifestation – unfolding spacetime. Further the metrics of spacetime oscillating at high frequency may be the ontological source of the quantum world and particle/wave duality.
Zero point energy is the kinetic energy that remains in a substance when its temperature is absolute zero. The vacuum has zero point energy, also. Any potential is just a bunch of trapped dynamic vectors, hence trapped vector (translational) energy. It is translational energy that is locally trapped and not translating. The potential is thus like an accumulator or capacitor. It can be "charged up" and "discharged." The vacuum is increasingly being regarded as composed of an incredibly dense structure of virtual electromagnetic energy, even at zero degrees absolute.
Superspace consists of pure massless charge flux, pure scalar waves. If compacted this energy density of the vacuum is enormous. Here, in the vacuum, spacetime is incredibly dense, and matter is etherically thin. Spacetime goes through matter, rather than matter through spacetime. And this energy density of the vacuum does interact with electromagnetic fields and matter to give observable effects, such as the Lamb shift. In his inflationary model of the hot Big Bang, Alan H. Guth considers matter to consist of scalar-field particles, (SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, Dec. 1991).
"Such field particles are not the stuff of everyday life, but they do arise naturally in many theories." Indeed, they are believed to be the dominant form of matter under the extremely high energy conditions similar to those in the early universe. According to the inflationary model, they lead to a kind of negative pressure. Gravity effectively becomes a repulsive force, and inflation occurs. At the end of the inflationary era, the decay of the scalar-field matter producing the expansion heated the (initially cold) universe to a very high temperature. Although the scalar field is largely homogeneous, it still may have small, inhomogeneous parts. According to quantum theory, these inhomogeneous parts cannot be exactly zero but must be subject to small quantum fluctuations. (In fact, all types of matter are subject to such quantum effects, but for most purposes the fluctuations are so small as to be totally insignificant.)
The rapid expansion of the universe during inflation magnified these initially insignificant microscopic fluctuations, transforming them into macroscopic changes in density [ref. chaos theory and the pumping up of micro- to macroscopic changes as one of the characteristics of chaos]. Inflation itself depends on a number of assumptions. For example, it would have occurred only if the scalar field began with a large, approximately constant energy density. This approximately constant energy density is equivalent, at least for a brief time, to Einstein's famous (or infamous) cosmological constant. Therefore, like it or not, the success of inflation rests on certain assumptions about initial conditions [another aspect of chaos theory].
"What happened before inflation? How did the universe actually begin?" In the pre-inflation era, the size of the universe tends to zero, and the strength of the gravitational field and the energy density of matter tend to infinity. That is, the universe appears to have emerged from a singularity, a region of infinite curvature and energy density at which the known laws of physics break down. Near a singularity, space-time becomes highly curved; its volume shrinks to very small dimensions. Under such circumstances, one must appeal to the theory of the very small--that is, to quantum theory. In quantum mechanics, motion is not deterministic, but probabilistic. A quantity called the wave function encodes the probabilistic information about such variables as position, momentum and energy. For a single-point particle, one can regard the wave function as an oscillating field spread throughout physical space. Because of the uncertainty principle, the kinetic and potential energy of a system cannot both be exactly zero. Instead the system has a ground state in which the energy is as low as it can be. (Recall that in the inflationary universe, galaxies form from "ground-state fluctuations.") Such fluctuations also prevent the orbiting electron from crashing into the nucleus. The electrons have an orbit of minimum energy from which they cannot fall into the nucleus without violating the uncertainty principle.
the quantum mechanics have always assumed the large scale structure of 4 space has a positive curvature. this has been thoroughly disproven.
they ignore it. the large scale structure is almost perfectly euclidian. no counterarguement can be made . mass - in excess of the average causes positive curve. in the realm of the very small space is positive around all particles. space is positive around galactic center and othe concentrations of mass. where mass is sparse, space can be slightly negatively curved resulting in gravity have the effect of repulsion; thats what the dark matter insanity is about
in the big bang universe of the 1930's QM could operate on larger scales - BUT THATS NOT THE UNIVERSE WE LIVE IN
THATS ALL THERE IS TO IT. .... but you will meet instant violence if you mention it to the wrong person
(s)
the vacuum isnt that energetic. proof: the night sky is not brighter than the sun
"scalar waves, anti-resonance and gravitational ducting"* * im talking about the real thing- warping the space between receiver (target) and transmitter ( target from receiver end) thats how scalar waves get around. they dont propagate per se but compress the space in the direction of intended recipient
Experimental Evidence of Near-field Superluminally
Propagating Electromagnetic Fields
William D. Walker
Royal Institute of Technology, KTH-Visby
Department of Electrical Engineering
Cramrgatan 3, S-621 57 Visby, Sweden
[email protected]
1 Introduction
A simple experiment is presented which indicates that electromagnetic fields
propagate superluminally in the near-field next to an oscillating electric dipole source.
A high frequency 437MHz, 2 watt sinusoidal electrical signal is transmitted from a
dipole antenna to a parallel near-field dipole detecting antenna. The phase difference
between the two antenna signals is monitored with an oscilloscope as the distance
between the antennas is increased. Analysis of the phase vs distance curve indicates
that superluminal transverse electric field waves (phase and group) are generated
approximately one-quarter wavelength outside the source and propagate toward and
away from the source. Upon creation, the transverse waves travel with infinite speed.
The outgoing transverse waves reduce to the speed of light after they propagate about
one wavelength away from the source. The inward propagating transverse fields
rapidly reduce to the speed of light and then rapidly increase to infinite speed as they
travel into the source. The results are shown to be consistent with standard
electrodynamic theory
DARKNESS, DARKNESS
Cosmology has gone through an amazing revolution that has raised an enthusiastic interest in the ‘dark Universe’ we live in. If only 4% of the universe is conventional baryonic matter, scientists speculate that 22% is dark matter, and the remaining 74% is non-luminous dark energy. Even the cosmological constant has too low a value to make up the shortfall in total energy density.
Dark energy is one of the darlings of frontier science. We don't know what's making the universe expand faster and faster, but we've named it dark energy. But the cause of the acceleration may or may not be dark energy, which is supposed to be the inherent energy of space-time. But what if the fabric of space-time is the wrong model? What if the speed of light is not universally consistent? Another possibility is that gravity on larger scales doesn't operate the way we think it does.
This expansion rate, the non-zero value of the cosmological constant, and the allocation of mass density determine the age, size, shape, and fate of the universe. The original vacuum was a seething foam, full of virtual particles and antiparticles. Quarks, electrons, neutrinos, and their antiparticles are born from the vacuum. But as soon as they materialize, particles and antiparticles encounter and annihilate one another, turning into radiation. The packets of radiation (or photons), in their turn, disappear, giving birth to particle-antiparticle pairs. There is a constant interaction between matter, antimatter, and radiation.
The most popular alternative to a Cosmological Constant considers dark energy as a dynamical contribution associated to the evolution of a classical scalar field named quintessence which rolls down a suitably chosen potential. Most quintessence models, however, still suffer of the same worrying problems of fine tuning of the initial conditions which affect Λ, especially when trying to reproduce the cosmological conditions observed today, both in the value of the dark energy equation of state and in the amount of the dark energy density component. http://cosmology.unige.ch/topics/de
Many interesting alternatives have been proposed, including large-void models, warm dark matter models, non-Gaussian initial conditions as well as a variety of models in which gravitational attraction itself is modified, via chameleon mechanisms that make the dark energy influence relevant only at large scales and/or through interactions between dark energy and matter fields.
The inflationary model of the universe is giving way to what Stanford scientist Andrei Linde calls “the self-reproducing inflationary universe.” Linde’s model is based on advanced principles of quantum fluctuations in the inflationary universe. Because it is rooted in advanced principles of quantum physics, it defies easy visualization. Quite simplified, it suggests quantum fluctuations in the universe’s inflationary expansion have a wavelike character. Linde theorizes that these waves can “freeze” atop one another, thus magnifying their effects. The stacked-up quantum waves in turn can create such intense disruptions in scalar fields--the underlying fields that determine the behavior of elementary particles--that they exceed a sort of cosmic critical mass and start birthing new inflationary domains.
The vacuum itself is such a scalar field, a massless charge field, electrostatic scalar potential. In ordinary vector analysis, a scalar is a quantity completely characterized by magnitude only. Multiple vectors summing or multiplying to zero are present though virtual. The energy of each infolded dynamic vector component is trapped inside the local vector zero system. Physically a zero vector can be a system having a very distinct real substructure of nonzero vector components. These infolded vector components are highly dynamic. (Bearden, 1988).
Trapped energy constitutes a scalar potential in spacetime. Enormous energy may be enfolded and trapped. This constitutes vacuum polarization. The zero-vector system is thus a vacuum engine and a virtual state engine as well. The scalar field is composed of two time fields: one in positive time and one in negative time that is a phase conjugate replica of the first. Thus, the timeless, lengthless vacuum exists both in positive and negative time, and its potentials are scalar potentials. When the vacuum is uncurved, equal amounts and components of positive and negative time exist. When it is curved at a point, the positive and negative time components are unbalanced at that point.
The multiverse, Linde contends, is like a growing fractal, sprouting inflationary domains that sprout more inflationary domains, with each domain spreading and cooling into a new universe. In this model, our universe is just one of the sprouts. Each particular part of the multiverse, including our part, began from a singularity somewhere in the past, but that singularity was just one of an endless series that was spawned before it and will continue after it. Each universe in the multiverse is a separate closed volume of space and time. The other universes are unavailable to us, just as the interior of a black hole is unavailable.
We cannot even know if the universes are finite or infinite in number. Some details of the fluctuation of ripples in background radiation may help us determine the truth. Till then, the theory hangs on assumptions we must make about the physics of very dense states of matter, (Lemly, 2000). This is the cosmological aspect of the vacuum density energy, but it also has quantum mechanical implications. The non-zero value of the vacuum potential, a virtual or unzipped phase space, underlies quantum processes and influences the random perturbation of subatomic entities.
Sidney Coleman, a Harvard theoretical physicist, has been investigating the nature of the vacuum and its relationship to the cosmological constant. He, and other physicists can’t decide whether the total energy in the vacuum should be positive or negative, but they agree that it is huge.
Coleman asserts, “the cosmological constant is zeroed out by wormholes; invisible, submicroscopic rips in the fabric of spacetime that tunnel out of our universe, linking it to an infinite web of other universes.” The modern vacuum is a seething inferno of fiercly bubbling, fleeting particles. The vacuum has no fixed lengths or rate of time flow per se. The stress of the vacuum is a sort of conglomerate potential “pressure,” where the individual stresses of various types of particles, if integratd by external means, would sum into the overall stress (pressure). Variation of the stress of vacuum between two points in a frame represents a “curved spacetime” or “accelerated frame.”
The stress energy of the vacuum means “fragments” of energy, more subtle than electromagnetic energy, turn against themselves and lock into a “vector zero summation.” This zero-point energy of the vacuum is increasingly being regarded as composed of an incredibly dense structure of virtual electromagnetic energy, even at zero degrees absolute. This quantum foam was dubbed “superspace” by J.A. Wheeler. Superspace consists of pure massless charge flux, pure scalar waves. The actual electrical charge of the vacuum appears to be enormous, if we could only measure it discharging to an uncharged region. Thus it is space (actually spacetime) that is incredibly dense, and matter that is ethereally thin. Spacetime goes through matter, rather than matter through spacetime, (Bearden, 1988).
Bearden has suggested that the vacuum is spacetime. Only changes in (derivatives of) spacetime can be perceived, detected or observed, but not spacetime itself. In negative time, gravity is a repulsion not an attraction. Gravitational potential is revealed as simply infolded electromagnetics, and electromagnetics is simply the outfolding of the internal contents of gravitational potential. The key to engineering the vacuum is to let the EM force fields fight themselves to a cancellation, forming a vector zero. If we do this in a nonlinear medium (modulator), the summing/multiplying EM vector forces are locked together and remain as an infolded EM system inside the EM vector zero. This now is a gravitational system. By merely varying (in phase) the summing EM components, one varies the local energy density of vacuum. Rigorously that is a gravitational wave.
Q: What is dark energy?
Almost 15 years ago, two teams of scientists studied distant supernova explosions to measure how the universe has expanded over its lifetime. They expected to find that the expansion of the universe would be constant or even be slowing – due to galaxies pulling toward each other with their gravity. But to their surprise, the scientists found quite the opposite: The universe is expanding faster and faster. What causes this?
The answer is dark energy, which seems to stretch space. But what exactly dark energy is remains one of the biggest mysteries in astrophysics.
Q: What is dark matter? What is the difference between the two?
We know of galaxies that zoom through space so fast that their own gravity should not be able to hold them together; they should break apart. But this does not happen. Something is holding them together. Dark matter is invisible matter that provides this extra gravity that holds together galaxies. It is called “dark” because astronomers cannot see it in any wavelength of light. Scientists have different theories what dark matter is: It could be normal objects such as cold gas, dark galaxies or MACHOS (massive compact halo objects). Or it could be strange particles such as axions, WIMPS (weakly interacting massive particles) or neutrinos. We also know about the dark matter in the infant universe from the afterglow of the Big Bang.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/08/26/2293469/what-are-dark-energy-and-dark.html#storylink=cpy
Higgs field vs. Dark Energy What is the relationship between the Higgs field and Dark Energy? Would these balance off against each other to reduce the predicted Cosmological constant to its observed value? Hcobb (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Both can be explained with scalar fields, although dark energy doesn't require a particle, just a uniform potential as a physical property of spacetime (which is technically much simpler than a scalar field, but similar to the scalar fields used to explain cosmic inflation and the metric expansion of space.) Which predicted cosmological constant are you referring to? 75.166.207.214 (talk) 08:07, 14 August 2012 (UTC) I'm attempting to explain the Vacuum catastrophe. Universe starts tiny and empty and then zero-point energy causes Inflation (cosmology) until the Electroweak symmetry breaking limit is reached. At that point a uniform field of Higgs bosons almost pushes through to carpet the universe wall to wall, but is just slightly overmatched by the zero-point energy and the result of the cancellation is the very tiny amount of Dark energy that we see today. Hcobb (talk) 15:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC) The Higgs condensate contributes to the zero-point energy, so what you're proposing is really vacuum energy from the Higgs vs. other vacuum energy and cosmological constant. There's an interesting paper from 1980 by Kolb and Wolfram [2] in which they suggest that the vacuum energy of the Higgs condensate could be used to cancel out a cosmological constant; However, the famous factor-of-10^120 discrepancy is dominated by other fields, and the Higgs contribution is much too small to make a big difference. It generally makes things slightly worse. Even if you did manage to balance one large contribution against another to get a very small residual vacuum energy, you've only converted the matter into a terrible fine-tuning problem. The real problem is that we don't know how to calculate the vacuum energy even in a well-studied model like the standard one. --Amble (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Dark Energy (Astronomy) Updated: June 4, 2012, NY Times
Dark energy is a mysterious force in space that, according to scientists, is apparently accelerating the expansion of the universe. Dark energy certainly counts as frontier science. The discovery a decade ago that the universe is speeding up, in defiance of common sense or cosmic gravity, has thrown into doubt notions about the fate of the universe and of life within it, not to mention gravity and even the nature of the laws of physics. If the universe continues accelerating, astronomers say, rather than coasting gently into the night, distant galaxies will eventually move apart so quickly that they will not be able to communicate with one another and all the energy will be sucked out of the universe.
Physicists have one ready-made explanation for this behavior, but it is a cure that many of them think is worse than the disease: a fudge factor invented by Einstein in 1917 called the cosmological constant. Quantum theory predicts that empty space should exert a repulsive force, like dark energy, but one that is 10 to the 120th power times stronger than what the astronomers have measured, leaving some physicists mumbling about multiple universes. Abandoning the Einsteinian dream of a single final theory of nature, they speculate that there are a multitude of universes with different properties. We live in one, the argument goes, that is suitable for life.
VOID OF DARK MATTER
Is Dark Energy Really "Repulsive Gravity"? Antimatter could be behind mysterious force, new theory says.
Ker Than
for National Geographic News
Published February 15, 2012
A powerful repulsion between normal matter and hidden pockets of antimatter could be an alternate explanation for the mysterious force known as dark energy, according to a controversial new theory.
In 1998 scientists discovered that the universe is not only expanding but that its expansion is accelerating.
This totally unexpected behavior has been called the "most profound problem" in physics, because our current understanding of gravity says that attractions between mass in the universe should be causing the expansion to slow down.
The leading theory to explain the accelerating expansion is the existence of a hypothetical repulsive force called dark energy. (Related: "New Galaxy Maps to Help Find Dark Energy Proof?")
But in the new study, Massimo Villata, an astrophysicist at the Observatory of Turin in Italy, suggests the effects attributed to dark energy are actually due to a kind of "antigravity" created when normal matter and antimatter repel one another.
"Usually this repulsion is ascribed to a mysterious dark energy that would uniformly permeate the cosmos, but nobody knows what it is nor why it behaves this way," Villata said in an email.
"We are replacing an unknown force caused by an unknown element with the repulsive gravity of the well-known antimatter."
(Related: "Dark Matter Is an Illusion, New Antigravity Theory Says.")
Antimatter Hiding in "Holes" in the Universe?
According to Villata, the keys to accelerated expansion lie in large-scale voids that are seen scattered throughout the cosmos.
These holes in our map of the universe—which can each be millions of light-years wide—are inexplicably empty of galaxies and galaxy clusters. The nearest hole to us is called the Local Void, bordering the Virgo supercluster of galaxies.
Villata thinks these voids harbor vast quantities of antimatter, which could even be organized into antimatter galaxies, complete with antimatter stars and planets.
(Related: "Antimatter Found Orbiting Earth—A First.")
All this antimatter doesn't emit radiation that can be detected by current sensors, making it effectively invisible, Villata said.
"There can be various reasons why antimatter in voids should be invisible, but we do not know which of them is the right one," Villata said. "Moreover, antimatter in laboratories could have different behavior, since it is 'immersed' in a world of matter."
(See "Antimatter Atoms Trapped for First Time—'A Big Deal.'")
While we can't see antimatter superstructures, we can observe their effects on our visible universe, Villata argues, because antimatter must repel the normal matter in galaxies, pushing them farther from one another.
Villata says his theory, which will appear in an upcoming issue of the journal Astrophysics and Space Science, has the potential to solve other cosmic mysteries, such as the universe's "missing antimatter" problem.
According to standard physics, matter and antimatter particles should have been created in equal amounts during the big bang. Yet the visible universe appears to be dominated by structures made up of normal matter.
To determine how much antimatter might be contained in the Local Void, Villata calculated how much would be needed to create a repulsive force strong enough to explain the so-called Local Sheet. This collection of normal matter, which includes our Milky Way and other nearby galaxies, is all moving at the same speed.
"If each void contains a mass of antimatter similar to that calculated for our Local Void ... then our universe would host an amount of antimatter equivalent to that of matter, and [there] would finally be a matter-antimatter symmetric universe," Villata said.
But Do Matter and Antimatter Repel?
While Villata's theory doesn't require mysterious forces created from nothing, it does rely on the untested assumption that matter and antimatter are mutually repulsive.
There is as yet "no [experimental] evidence that antimatter repels matter," said physicist Frank Close of the University of Oxford in the U.K., although, he added, plans are underway at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Switzerland to test the idea.
In fact, Dragan Hajdukovic, a physicist at CERN, recently proposed a separate antigravity theory that also relies on repulsion between matter and antimatter to explain dark energy and dark matter.
Hajdukovic called Villata's theory "an interesting idea," be he added that he disagrees with the hypothesis of a matter-antimatter symmetric universe.
"The major problem is why [such] big quantities of antimatter in the voids are not observed," Hajdukovic said.
In Hajdukovic's theory, antimatter particles spontaneously pop in and out of existence in the quantum vacuum, which is the name physicists give to seemingly empty space.
"I use the reality of the quantum vacuum. For a physicist, it is more natural and plausible," Hajdukovic said.
"In order to explain the invisibility of antimatter, proponents of a matter-antimatter symmetric universe would be forced to invoke an additional hypothesis"—such as the emission by antimatter of so-called advanced photons, which travel backward in time and so wouldn't be detectable to current instruments.
(Related: "Time Travel Impossible, Mini 'Big Bang' Hints.")
"It is not a good sign for a theory if one hypothesis immediately demands introduction of other hypotheses."
But study author Villata argues that the assumptions in his theory—including matter-antimatter repulsion and advanced photons—are predicted by well-established theories in physics.
In that sense, he said, there is "no introduction of other hypotheses."
Remember a little thing called the space-time continuum? Well what if the time part of the equation was literally running out? New evidence is suggesting that time is slowly disappearing from our universe, and will one day vanish completely. This radical theory may explain a cosmological mystery that has baffled scientists for years.
Scientists previously have measured the light from distant exploding stars to show that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. They assumed that these supernovae are spreading apart faster as the universe ages. Physicists also assumed that a kind of anti-gravitational force must be driving the galaxies apart, and started to call this unidentified force "dark energy".
The idea that time itself could cease to be in billions of years - and everything will grind to a halt - has been proposed by Professor José Senovilla, Marc Mars and Raül Vera of the University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, and University of Salamanca, Spain. The corollary to this radical end to time itself is an alternative explanation for "dark energy" - the mysterious antigravitational force that has been suggested to explain a cosmic phenomenon that has baffled scientists. However, to this day no one actually knows what dark energy is, or where it comes from. Professor Senovilla, and colleagues have proposed a mind-bending alternative. They propose that there is no such thing as dark energy at all, and we’re looking at things backwards.
Senovilla proposes that we have been fooled into thinking the expansion of the universe is accelerating, when in reality, time itself is slowing down. At an everyday level, the change would not be perceptible. However, it would be obvious from cosmic scale measurements tracking the course of the universe over billions of years. The change would be infinitesimally slow from a human perspective, but in terms of the vast perspective of cosmology, the study of ancient light from suns that shone billions of years ago, it could easily be measured.
The team's proposal, published in the journal Physical Review D, dismisses dark energy as fiction. Instead, Senovilla says, the appearance of acceleration is caused by time itself gradually slowing down, like a clock with a run-down battery.* “We do not say that the expansion of the universe itself is an illusion," he explains. "What we say it may be an illusion is the acceleration of this expansion - that is, the possibility that the expansion is, and has been, increasing its rate."
If time gradually slows "but we naively kept using our equations to derive the changes of the expansion with respect of 'a standard flow of time', then the simple models that we have constructed in our paper show that an "effective accelerated rate of the expansion" takes place."*Currently, astronomers are able to discern the expansion speed of the universe using the so-called "red shift" technique. This technique relies on the understanding that stars moving away appear redder in color than ones moving towards us. Scientists look for supernovae of certain types that provide a sort of benchmark.
However, the accuracy of these measurements depends on time remaining invariable throughout the universe. If time is slowing down, according to this new theory, our solitary time dimension is slowly turning into a new space dimension. Therefore the far-distant, ancient stars seen by cosmologists would from our perspective, look as though they were accelerating.
"Our calculations show that we would think that the expansion of the universe is accelerating," says Prof Senovilla. The theory bases it’s idea on one particular variant of superstring theory, in which our universe is confined to the surface of a membrane, or brane, floating in a higher-dimensional space, known as the "bulk". In billions of years, time would cease to be time altogether.
"Then everything will be frozen, like a snapshot of one instant, forever," Senovilla told New Scientist magazine. "Our planet will be long gone by then."
Though radical and in many way unprecedented, these ideas are not without support. Gary Gibbons, a cosmologist at Cambridge University, says the concept has merit. "We believe that time emerged during the Big Bang, and if time can emerge, it can also disappear - that's just the reverse effect."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120418111923.htm
Dark matter detected?
By: Clara Moskowitz
Published: 08/17/2012 07:14 AM EDT on SPACE.com
Energetic light seen radiating from the center of the Milky Way may be the best evidence yet of dark matter, the invisible stuff thought to be hiding throughout the universe.
A new study has found a strong signal of gamma-rays — light of a very short wavelength — coming from the middle of our galaxy, which may be the result of exploding dark matter.
Scientists think dark matter, which seemingly makes up the majority of matter in the universe, is made of particles called WIMPs ("weakly interacting massive particles"). And WIMPs, when they get very close to other WIMPs, should annihilate each other, because these particles are thought to be their own antiparticles. (When particles of matter and their antimatter counterparts meet, they destroy each other.)
In the dense center of the Milky Way, enough WIMPs should exist that many bump into each other, exploding into pure energy that gives rise to other particles and, eventually, gamma-rays.
An abundance of gamma-rays is exactly what scientists see when looking toward the center of our galaxy with the Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope. In the new study, researchers found a definitive signal of gamma-rays that couldn't be traced to any known object in this region. [No WIMPS in Space? - NASA Scans For Dark Matter | Video]
'Something new'
"It's definitely something new and shining in the gamma-ray there, and it's not attributable to the existing sources in the catalog," said University of California, Irvine astrophysicist Kevork Abazajian, co-author of a paper reporting the findings submitted to the journal Physical Review D.
Abazajian, with his UC Irvine colleague Manoj Kaplinghat, searched for this light using Fermi data taken between 2008 and 2012. Previous studies by Dan Hooper, a scientist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) and the University of Chicago, also found evidence for this gamma-ray radiation, but other follow-up searches came up empty.
Abazajian said his study used the most complete data set yet and analyzed it with a comprehensive analysis specially tuned for investigating gamma-ray light in a crowded region.
"Definitely, definitely, there is a source," Abazajian told SPACE.com. "This is definitely not just a fluctuation."
However, whether this source was created by annihilating dark matter particles is somewhat less certain. It's also possible, Abazajian said, that a large group of dense, spinning stars called pulsars could be releasing the light.
However, he said, three characteristics of the detected gamma-ray radiation — its rate of emission, the variety of particular wavelengths of the light (its spectrum), and the overall shape of the emission — are all consistent with predictions for dark matter annihilation.
"I think it could be a very big finding," Abazajian said. "When I came across this, I was like, 'Holy cow, this is so consistent with the dark matter interpretation in many ways.' But until you can rule out the astrophysical potential sources for something similar, it's not going to be a smoking gun."
Ruling out alternatives
Fermilab's Hooper, for his part, is even more confident that scientists finally are seeing the elusive signature of dark matter.
"If you make a comparison to what they found and what we've been talking about — we're looking at the same source," Hooper said. "I still think dark mater annihilation is the easiest way to explain the signal. I think the signal is too spatially concentrated to be coming from pulsars."
Hooper acknowledged that many astrophysicists are skeptical. "There's vigorous debate going on about the astrophysical alternatives to explain this signal," he said. "I'm of the opinion that those are difficult to make work."
Many experts are waiting for scientists in the official Fermi telescope collaboration to weigh in with their own analysis of the radiation at the center of the galaxy.
"We will have results to report of this soon," said UC Irvine astrophysicist Simona Murgia, a member of the Fermi collaboration galactic center analysis team.
Murgia praised the study by Abazajian and Kaplinghat. "This is good work and the authors have considered a number of plausible interpretations" for the data, she wrote in an email.
"I can only emphasize that it is very difficult to disentangle all the different contributions to the observed data in this region of the sky, and I think more work needs to be done to make a definitive statement," she added.
Dwarf galaxies
For confirmation that dark matter has really been found at the center of the Milky Way, scientists may have to look outside the galaxy to the small dwarf galaxies orbiting it.
Theory predicts that WIMPs, if they exist, should be annihilating each other in the centers of those satellites, too. If the same type of gamma-ray emission can be observed in these galaxies, dark matter would be strongly implicated, Abazajian said. However, studies of such dwarf galaxies have so far turned up essentially no gamma-rays.
"The real smoking gun to show if this is dark matter annihilation or not is to look deeply at these low background sources and see if you see this signal or not," he said. "If you were able to see the same rate, spectrum or morphology in several sources, that would be a real abundance of evidence."
A new study has found no trace of the mysterious substance known as dark matter around the sun, adding a twist to current theories, researchers say.
Dark matter is one of the greatest cosmic mysteries of our time — an invisible, intangible material thought to make up five-sixths of all matter in the universe. Scientists currently think it is composed of a new type of particle, one that interacts normally with gravity but only very weakly with all the other known forces of the universe. As such, dark matter is detectable only via the gravitational pull it generates.
Astronomers first proposed the existence of dark matter to explain why stars moved the way they did in the Milky Way. It was as if extra matter was present, exerting a gravitational pull that influenced the motions of the stars.
http://www.space.com/15333-dark-matter-missing-sun.html
According to widely accepted theories, the neighborhood around the sun should be filled with dark matter, with billions of these particles rushing through us every second. However, the most accurate study yet of motions of stars in the Milky Way now has found no evidence for dark matter in a large volume around the sun. [Dark Matter Missing from Milky Way (Video)]
"Our results contradict the currently accepted models — the mystery of dark matter has just become even more mysterious," said study lead author Christian Moni Bidin, an astronomer at the University of Concepción in Chile.
Dark matter's elusiveness explained?
The findings could explain why all attempts to detect dark matter in laboratories on Earth have failed so far — there is much less of it in the sun's neighborhood than expected.
"Strictly speaking, the results do not say that dark matter does not exist — they only say it is not here," Moni Bidin told SPACE.com. "We have not proven that dark matter does not exist, and even if we do, at this point we cannot explain many other phenomena that today are explained only by dark matter."
One alternative to dark matter is known as Modified Newtonian Dynamics, or MOND, which tweaks how gravity works at large scales to help explain the motions of stars and galaxies that researchers observe. However, "to my knowledge, MOND also would have expected a massive 'phantom disk' to appear in our study, so our results should contradict its expectations, too," Moni Bidin said.
Future astronomical surveys, such as the European Space Agency's Gaia mission, could help shed further light on dark matter, Moni Bidin said. Gaia will collect data to reconstruct the movement of millions of stars. "Thus, we will be able to test the presence of dark matter in a wide region of the galaxy," he explained.
The scientists will detail their findings in a future issue of the Astrophysical Journal.
Follow SPACE.com for the latest in space science and exploration news on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook.
by Mitch Battros - Earth Changes Media
Gamma-ray photons seen emanating from the center of the Milky Way galaxy are consistent with the intriguing possibility that dark-matter particles are annihilating each other in space, according to research submitted by UC Irvine astrophysicists to the American Physical Society journal 'Physical Review'.
The research team found more gamma-ray photons coming from the Milky Way galactic center than they had expected, based on previous scientific models. Gamma-rays are electromagnetic radiation emitted during radioactive decay or other high-energy particle processes.
Kevork Abazajian, assistant professor, and Manoj Kaplinghat, associate professor, of the Department of Physics & Astronomy at University of California - analyzed data collected between August 2008 and June 2012 from NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope orbiting Earth.
"This is the first time this new source has been observed with such high statistical significance, and the most striking part is how the shape, spectrum and rate of the observed gamma rays are very consistent with the leading theories for dark matter," Abazajian said. "Future observations of regions with less astrophysical emission, such as dwarf galaxies, we will be able to conclusively determine if this is actually from dark matter."
Non-luminous and not directly detectable, dark matter is thought to account for 85 percent of the universe's mass. Its existence can only be inferred from its gravitational effects on other 'visible matter'. The UCI researchers' findings could support its presumed presence at the center of galaxies.
The prevailing hypothesis is that dark matter is composed of weak interacting massive particles. When two interacting massive particles meet, they annihilate each other to produce more familiar particles - including gamma rays.
What appears to be a new unknown source of charged particles - is also consistent with the spectrum signal of pulsars and other high energy particles interacting with gas in the galactic center. More studies are needed to determine what the source is and what are its possible outcomes.
A research group from University of Chile led by Moni Bidin looked carefully at the historical motions of some 400 nearby stars (up to 13,000 light years away) and found zero evidence that their motions are influenced in any way that could be attributed to the idea called Dark Matter.
Meanwhile a Russian researcher, Igor Karachentsev, looked at eleven thousand nearby galaxies to see where Dark Matter might be found around our galaxy (“Missing Dark Matter in the Local Universe“) – again finding nothing.
So if the Dark Matter conjecture is headed for the showers, then what’s going on with galaxy rotation curves?
Though the mainstream science media never reported it, in 2008, two researchers (James Feng and Charles Gallo) recalculated the galaxy mass distribution vs spin and found – Gasp! that there was no problem explaining galaxy rotation curves with with ordinary Newtonian gravity and dynamics using only known visible matter.
Charles Gallo said — “We have shown that Galactic Rotation data can be described with Newtonian Gravity and Newtonian Dynamics without ‘Massive Peripheral Spherical Halos of Mysterious Dark Matter around Rotating Disk Galaxies’ and without MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics).”
“Our studies only obviate the need for the standard unjustified concept of ‘Massive Peripheral Spherical Halos of Mysterious Dark Matter around Rotating Disk Galaxies’.”
So Dark Matter is simply not needed to explain galaxy rotations. Plain-vanilla ordinary gravity is all that is going on.
References:
Nearby dark-matter-free zone poses cosmic conundrum, by Lisa Grossman, 20 April 2012 (It includes a video of where the dark matter would appear if it were visible (and if it existed).)
“Kinematical and chemical vertical structure of the Galactic thick disk II. A lack of dark matter in the solar neighborhood” Moni Bidin et al: arxiv.org/abs/1204.3924 (Astrophysical Journal, in press);
“Missing Dark Matter in the Local Universe” I. Karachentsev, Astrophysical Bulletin, in press, arxiv.org/abs/1204.3377
“The dark matter crisis: falsification of the current standard model of cosmology” Pavel Kroupa, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia (in press) arxiv.org/abs/1204.2546
List of other Dark Matter Problems: “Problems Created by the Dark Matter Hypothesis”
Normal Newtonian Gravity and Dyanmics are Adequate (“No Dark Matter Needed”) Papers –
“Modeling the Newtonian Dynamics for Rotation Curve Analysis of Thin-Disk Galaxies, Feng and Gallo, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics 11 (2011) 1429-1448, www.raa-journal.org, http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.3236
“A Thin-Disk Gravitational Model for Galactic Rotation” By Gallo and Feng, Astronomical Society of Pacific Conference Proceedings, vol 413, p 289-303, Dec 2009, CCC2 Conference in Port Angeles, Sept 2008.
“Galactic Rotation Described by a Thin-Disk Gravitational Model Without Dark Matter” C. F. Gallo and James Q. Feng, Superconix Inc, MN. USA., Journal of Cosmology, April 2010, Vol 6, 1373-1380. http://journalofcosmology.com/Contents6.html (Paper #4)
Has Dark Matter Gone Missing? by Adrian Cho on 19 April 2012, 5:41 PM | 0 Comments Share on email Email Share on print Print | Share on facebook Share on google_plusone Share on reddit Share on stumbleupon More Sharing Services More Previous Article Next Article Enlarge Image Home sweet home. In the vicinity of the sun, our Milky Way galaxy seems to contain no dark matter, one team of astronomers claims. Credit: Serge Brunier/NASA If a new study is true, then the search for dark matter just got a lot weirder. Our little corner of the Milky Way contains no observable concentration of the mysterious stuff whose gravity binds the galaxy, claims one team of astronomers. That finding would present a major problem for models of how galaxies form and may undermine the whole notion of dark matter, the researchers claim. But some scientists doubt the reliability of the team's method for measuring the elusive substance.
"This is not just some piddling little detail," says Frederic Hessman, an astronomer at the University of Göttingen in Germany who was not involved in the work. "If this is right, it turns everything totally upside-down." But that's a big if, says Julio Navarro, an astrophysicist at the University of Victoria in Canada: "The argument is provocative, but it remains inconclusive, in my opinion."
According to standard cosmology, we should be swimming in dark matter. Measurements of the afterglow of the big bang—the so-called cosmic microwave background—and of the distribution of the galaxies suggest that 85% of all matter in the universe is dark matter. What's more, decades of astronomical observations show that the stars within galaxies swirl about faster than they could if only the gravity of the others stars were holding them in. In fact, the speed with which the sun goes around the center of our galaxy suggests that dark matter ought to be about as abundant as ordinary matter at our distance from the galactic center, about 27,000 light-years.
But that's not what Christian Moni Bidin, an astronomer at the University of Concepción in Chile, and colleagues find. Using data gathered with several telescopes, they studied old stars called red giants in a cylindrical region a couple of light-years wide and extending 13,000 light-years above the plane of the galaxy. Treating the stars a bit like atoms in a gas, researchers assumed that they were trapped in the gravitational "well" of the galaxy. So by studying distributions of the stars' speeds in three dimensions, they could deduce the well's shape and hence the total distribution of mass from both dark and ordinary matter along the cylinder. Subtracting the distribution of ordinary matter as determined from star counts would then reveal the distribution of dark matter.
A Weekly Chat on the Hottest Topics in Science Thursdays 3 p.m. EDT When Moni Bidin and colleagues did the analysis, however, they found that no dark matter was needed to explain the stars' speeds. The researchers had expected to detect a complicated mass distribution with a contribution from the galaxy's disk of stars and gas and the presumably spherical "halo" of dark matter surrounding the disk. Instead, they found that the disk alone neatly explained their data, as they report in a paper in press at The Astrophysical Journal.
The data don't disprove the existence of dark matter, Moni Bidin is quick to say. Astrophysicists still need the stuff to explain the speed of the stars in the galaxy. However, the data do suggest that there isn't any dark matter in our neck of the woods. "We're not saying that there isn't any dark matter," Moni Bidin says. "We're just saying that there isn't any dark matter here."
But that could lead to a major problem with the whole idea of dark matter. For example, one way to explain why there is no dark matter 27,000 light-years from the center of the Milky Way would be to assume it's all in one tall cigar-shaped lump that sticks through the center of the galaxy. But simulations show that such a shape for the halo is unlikely, Moni Bidin says.
Another possibility is that dark matter is made not of "cold," massive particles moving very slowly, but rather of "warm," lightweight particles moving much faster. In that case, the galactic halo would be larger and more uniform, producing an even and therefore undetectable background, Hessman says. But that inference would fly in the face of standard cosmology, which assumes that galaxies start to form as cold dark matter starts to condense in massive clumps. "Basically," Hessman says, "the cosmologists should say, 'Oh my God!' because you're taking away the one thing that makes everything work and they're going to have to go back to square one."
Or not. The new result may say more about the method than the distribution of dark matter, Navarro says. To get that distribution, at each position in space Moni Bidin and colleagues must subtract one large quantity (the amount of ordinary matter) from another large quantity (the amount of total mass) to get a small quantity. That process is likely to suffer from large uncertainties, Navarro says. "I applaud them for trying," he says. "I just don't think this method will ever give a conclusive answer." Moni Bidin says the method is robust and that larger surveys to come will pin down the dark matter distribution more precisely.
Huge "Structure" of Satellites Found Orbiting Milky Way Grouping of galaxies puts cosmology "basically in a shambles," scientist says. A Hubble picture shows two large galaxies colliding, scattering material.
Image courtesy ESA/NASA and STScI/AURA
Ker Than
for National Geographic News
Published April 30, 2012
A huge "structure" of satellite galaxies and star clusters has been found wheeling around the Milky Way, according to a new study.
The discovery surprised scientists, in part because the structure might spell trouble for theories of dark matter, the mysterious, invisible substance that's thought to make up about 23 percent of the mass in the universe.
The finding is only the latest to question dark matter's existence—last week, for instance, astronomers announced that they'd failed to detect dark matter in the sun's neighborhood, even though the substance should be there, according to accepted theory.
In the new study, led by Marcel Pawlowski of the University of Bonn in Germany, astronomers reconstructed the locations of the Milky Way's known satellites using sources ranging from 20th-century photographic plates to recent images from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.
The team found that the Milky Way's roughly 20 companions—including dwarf galaxies and blobs of stars known as globular clusters—are distributed in a tidy plane that orbits at a right angle to our galactic disk.
(Related: "Dark-Matter Galaxy Detected: Hidden Dwarf Lurks Nearby?")
"This is completely contrary to what we expect from theory," said study co-author Pavel Kroupa, also of the University of Bonn.
"You should be able to look in any direction and still find some satellite galaxies." That's because current models of galaxy formation—which are based on dark matter's existence—predict that the Milky Way's companions originally came from many different directions and so should have settled into a more or less spherical distribution.
"The logical implication of this [discovery] is that there is no dark matter," Kroupa said.
Cosmology in "Shambles"?
According to the standard theory of galaxy formation, dark matter was the gravitational scaffold upon which normal matter coalesced to form galaxies in the early universe.
As larger galaxies such as the Milky Way formed, the theory goes, leftover material amassed into hundreds of smaller satellites spread evenly around their host galaxies.
(Also see "Dark Matter Blob Should Not Exist, But There It Is.")
To explain the odd arrangement of satellites around the Milky Way, the Bonn team proposes that our home galaxy collided with a galactic neighbor about 11 billion years ago, which corresponds with the age of the oldest known satellite dwarf galaxy.
According to this idea, the Milky Way stripped material from the other galaxy, and gravity gathered the debris to form dwarf galaxies and globular clusters, which have remained in a plane around the Milky Way ever since, study leader Pawlowski said.
The team asserts that this model deals a significant blow to dark matter, since it shows that galaxies can form without the theoretical substance.
"It means that we have to completely and utterly rethink cosmology," Kroupa said. "Cosmology is basically in a shambles now."
(Related: "Dark Matter Is an Illusion, New Antigravity Theory Says.")
Dark Matter Still Viable
But other astronomers aren't quite ready to give up on dark matter.
"Although the alignment they find is intriguing, it is very premature to conclude that dark matter is in trouble," said Ken Rines, of Western Washington University in Bellingham.
"Galaxy formation is a very tricky business. We certainly don't understand the details, and these details may ... explain the alignment that they find," Rines said.
"Although dark matter may eventually be proven wrong, the alignment of dwarf galaxies is more likely a puzzle than a fatal flaw."
Sukanya Chakrabarti, an astrophysicist at Florida Atlantic University, is also skeptical that the new study rewrites galaxy formation.
The study team's galaxy-collision scenario can explain the positions of the satellite dwarf galaxies, she concedes.
But that model doesn't explain why the satellites act as if they have more mass than can be explained by their visible matter alone—one of the main reasons scientists think dark matter exists.
Any alternative to dark matter "must not only reproduce where the stuff is but what its mass is as well," Chakrabarti said.
(Related: "Dark Matter Hits the Average Human Once a Minute?")
Study author Kroupa counters that "this is not a problem, because it has already been demonstrated many times with other data that other theories of gravity—such as MOND—describe galaxies excellently, including the satellite galaxies."
Short for Modified Newtonian dynamics, MOND is a tweaked version of Newton's theory of gravity, which proponents say can explain the observed motions of stars and galaxies without resorting to dark matter.
Still, Chakrabarti said, it's also not surprising that current dark matter simulations can't explain the Milky Way satellites' unusual orientation.
While the simulations do a good job of modeling the evolution of large-scale structure in the universe, they're less reliable when it comes to modeling the scale of individual galaxies, which involves interactions between many more variables, she said.
"If you neglect these things and you're trying to do a very detailed analysis—like where all the satellite galaxies are distributed—you're going to come up with some discrepancies," Chakrabarti said.
"The current simulations of galaxy formation are incomplete," she continued, "but that doesn't imply that dark matter isn't a viable notion."
The Milky Way's satellite "structure" will be detailed in an upcoming issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.
Cosmology has gone through an amazing revolution that has raised an enthusiastic interest in the ‘dark Universe’ we live in. If only 4% of the universe is conventional baryonic matter, scientists speculate that 22% is dark matter, and the remaining 74% is non-luminous dark energy. Even the cosmological constant has too low a value to make up the shortfall in total energy density.
Dark energy is one of the darlings of frontier science. We don't know what's making the universe expand faster and faster, but we've named it dark energy. But the cause of the acceleration may or may not be dark energy, which is supposed to be the inherent energy of space-time. But what if the fabric of space-time is the wrong model? What if the speed of light is not universally consistent? Another possibility is that gravity on larger scales doesn't operate the way we think it does.
This expansion rate, the non-zero value of the cosmological constant, and the allocation of mass density determine the age, size, shape, and fate of the universe. The original vacuum was a seething foam, full of virtual particles and antiparticles. Quarks, electrons, neutrinos, and their antiparticles are born from the vacuum. But as soon as they materialize, particles and antiparticles encounter and annihilate one another, turning into radiation. The packets of radiation (or photons), in their turn, disappear, giving birth to particle-antiparticle pairs. There is a constant interaction between matter, antimatter, and radiation.
The most popular alternative to a Cosmological Constant considers dark energy as a dynamical contribution associated to the evolution of a classical scalar field named quintessence which rolls down a suitably chosen potential. Most quintessence models, however, still suffer of the same worrying problems of fine tuning of the initial conditions which affect Λ, especially when trying to reproduce the cosmological conditions observed today, both in the value of the dark energy equation of state and in the amount of the dark energy density component. http://cosmology.unige.ch/topics/de
Many interesting alternatives have been proposed, including large-void models, warm dark matter models, non-Gaussian initial conditions as well as a variety of models in which gravitational attraction itself is modified, via chameleon mechanisms that make the dark energy influence relevant only at large scales and/or through interactions between dark energy and matter fields.
The inflationary model of the universe is giving way to what Stanford scientist Andrei Linde calls “the self-reproducing inflationary universe.” Linde’s model is based on advanced principles of quantum fluctuations in the inflationary universe. Because it is rooted in advanced principles of quantum physics, it defies easy visualization. Quite simplified, it suggests quantum fluctuations in the universe’s inflationary expansion have a wavelike character. Linde theorizes that these waves can “freeze” atop one another, thus magnifying their effects. The stacked-up quantum waves in turn can create such intense disruptions in scalar fields--the underlying fields that determine the behavior of elementary particles--that they exceed a sort of cosmic critical mass and start birthing new inflationary domains.
The vacuum itself is such a scalar field, a massless charge field, electrostatic scalar potential. In ordinary vector analysis, a scalar is a quantity completely characterized by magnitude only. Multiple vectors summing or multiplying to zero are present though virtual. The energy of each infolded dynamic vector component is trapped inside the local vector zero system. Physically a zero vector can be a system having a very distinct real substructure of nonzero vector components. These infolded vector components are highly dynamic. (Bearden, 1988).
Trapped energy constitutes a scalar potential in spacetime. Enormous energy may be enfolded and trapped. This constitutes vacuum polarization. The zero-vector system is thus a vacuum engine and a virtual state engine as well. The scalar field is composed of two time fields: one in positive time and one in negative time that is a phase conjugate replica of the first. Thus, the timeless, lengthless vacuum exists both in positive and negative time, and its potentials are scalar potentials. When the vacuum is uncurved, equal amounts and components of positive and negative time exist. When it is curved at a point, the positive and negative time components are unbalanced at that point.
The multiverse, Linde contends, is like a growing fractal, sprouting inflationary domains that sprout more inflationary domains, with each domain spreading and cooling into a new universe. In this model, our universe is just one of the sprouts. Each particular part of the multiverse, including our part, began from a singularity somewhere in the past, but that singularity was just one of an endless series that was spawned before it and will continue after it. Each universe in the multiverse is a separate closed volume of space and time. The other universes are unavailable to us, just as the interior of a black hole is unavailable.
We cannot even know if the universes are finite or infinite in number. Some details of the fluctuation of ripples in background radiation may help us determine the truth. Till then, the theory hangs on assumptions we must make about the physics of very dense states of matter, (Lemly, 2000). This is the cosmological aspect of the vacuum density energy, but it also has quantum mechanical implications. The non-zero value of the vacuum potential, a virtual or unzipped phase space, underlies quantum processes and influences the random perturbation of subatomic entities.
Sidney Coleman, a Harvard theoretical physicist, has been investigating the nature of the vacuum and its relationship to the cosmological constant. He, and other physicists can’t decide whether the total energy in the vacuum should be positive or negative, but they agree that it is huge.
Coleman asserts, “the cosmological constant is zeroed out by wormholes; invisible, submicroscopic rips in the fabric of spacetime that tunnel out of our universe, linking it to an infinite web of other universes.” The modern vacuum is a seething inferno of fiercly bubbling, fleeting particles. The vacuum has no fixed lengths or rate of time flow per se. The stress of the vacuum is a sort of conglomerate potential “pressure,” where the individual stresses of various types of particles, if integratd by external means, would sum into the overall stress (pressure). Variation of the stress of vacuum between two points in a frame represents a “curved spacetime” or “accelerated frame.”
The stress energy of the vacuum means “fragments” of energy, more subtle than electromagnetic energy, turn against themselves and lock into a “vector zero summation.” This zero-point energy of the vacuum is increasingly being regarded as composed of an incredibly dense structure of virtual electromagnetic energy, even at zero degrees absolute. This quantum foam was dubbed “superspace” by J.A. Wheeler. Superspace consists of pure massless charge flux, pure scalar waves. The actual electrical charge of the vacuum appears to be enormous, if we could only measure it discharging to an uncharged region. Thus it is space (actually spacetime) that is incredibly dense, and matter that is ethereally thin. Spacetime goes through matter, rather than matter through spacetime, (Bearden, 1988).
Bearden has suggested that the vacuum is spacetime. Only changes in (derivatives of) spacetime can be perceived, detected or observed, but not spacetime itself. In negative time, gravity is a repulsion not an attraction. Gravitational potential is revealed as simply infolded electromagnetics, and electromagnetics is simply the outfolding of the internal contents of gravitational potential. The key to engineering the vacuum is to let the EM force fields fight themselves to a cancellation, forming a vector zero. If we do this in a nonlinear medium (modulator), the summing/multiplying EM vector forces are locked together and remain as an infolded EM system inside the EM vector zero. This now is a gravitational system. By merely varying (in phase) the summing EM components, one varies the local energy density of vacuum. Rigorously that is a gravitational wave.
Q: What is dark energy?
Almost 15 years ago, two teams of scientists studied distant supernova explosions to measure how the universe has expanded over its lifetime. They expected to find that the expansion of the universe would be constant or even be slowing – due to galaxies pulling toward each other with their gravity. But to their surprise, the scientists found quite the opposite: The universe is expanding faster and faster. What causes this?
The answer is dark energy, which seems to stretch space. But what exactly dark energy is remains one of the biggest mysteries in astrophysics.
Q: What is dark matter? What is the difference between the two?
We know of galaxies that zoom through space so fast that their own gravity should not be able to hold them together; they should break apart. But this does not happen. Something is holding them together. Dark matter is invisible matter that provides this extra gravity that holds together galaxies. It is called “dark” because astronomers cannot see it in any wavelength of light. Scientists have different theories what dark matter is: It could be normal objects such as cold gas, dark galaxies or MACHOS (massive compact halo objects). Or it could be strange particles such as axions, WIMPS (weakly interacting massive particles) or neutrinos. We also know about the dark matter in the infant universe from the afterglow of the Big Bang.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/08/26/2293469/what-are-dark-energy-and-dark.html#storylink=cpy
Higgs field vs. Dark Energy What is the relationship between the Higgs field and Dark Energy? Would these balance off against each other to reduce the predicted Cosmological constant to its observed value? Hcobb (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Both can be explained with scalar fields, although dark energy doesn't require a particle, just a uniform potential as a physical property of spacetime (which is technically much simpler than a scalar field, but similar to the scalar fields used to explain cosmic inflation and the metric expansion of space.) Which predicted cosmological constant are you referring to? 75.166.207.214 (talk) 08:07, 14 August 2012 (UTC) I'm attempting to explain the Vacuum catastrophe. Universe starts tiny and empty and then zero-point energy causes Inflation (cosmology) until the Electroweak symmetry breaking limit is reached. At that point a uniform field of Higgs bosons almost pushes through to carpet the universe wall to wall, but is just slightly overmatched by the zero-point energy and the result of the cancellation is the very tiny amount of Dark energy that we see today. Hcobb (talk) 15:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC) The Higgs condensate contributes to the zero-point energy, so what you're proposing is really vacuum energy from the Higgs vs. other vacuum energy and cosmological constant. There's an interesting paper from 1980 by Kolb and Wolfram [2] in which they suggest that the vacuum energy of the Higgs condensate could be used to cancel out a cosmological constant; However, the famous factor-of-10^120 discrepancy is dominated by other fields, and the Higgs contribution is much too small to make a big difference. It generally makes things slightly worse. Even if you did manage to balance one large contribution against another to get a very small residual vacuum energy, you've only converted the matter into a terrible fine-tuning problem. The real problem is that we don't know how to calculate the vacuum energy even in a well-studied model like the standard one. --Amble (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Dark Energy (Astronomy) Updated: June 4, 2012, NY Times
Dark energy is a mysterious force in space that, according to scientists, is apparently accelerating the expansion of the universe. Dark energy certainly counts as frontier science. The discovery a decade ago that the universe is speeding up, in defiance of common sense or cosmic gravity, has thrown into doubt notions about the fate of the universe and of life within it, not to mention gravity and even the nature of the laws of physics. If the universe continues accelerating, astronomers say, rather than coasting gently into the night, distant galaxies will eventually move apart so quickly that they will not be able to communicate with one another and all the energy will be sucked out of the universe.
Physicists have one ready-made explanation for this behavior, but it is a cure that many of them think is worse than the disease: a fudge factor invented by Einstein in 1917 called the cosmological constant. Quantum theory predicts that empty space should exert a repulsive force, like dark energy, but one that is 10 to the 120th power times stronger than what the astronomers have measured, leaving some physicists mumbling about multiple universes. Abandoning the Einsteinian dream of a single final theory of nature, they speculate that there are a multitude of universes with different properties. We live in one, the argument goes, that is suitable for life.
VOID OF DARK MATTER
Is Dark Energy Really "Repulsive Gravity"? Antimatter could be behind mysterious force, new theory says.
Ker Than
for National Geographic News
Published February 15, 2012
A powerful repulsion between normal matter and hidden pockets of antimatter could be an alternate explanation for the mysterious force known as dark energy, according to a controversial new theory.
In 1998 scientists discovered that the universe is not only expanding but that its expansion is accelerating.
This totally unexpected behavior has been called the "most profound problem" in physics, because our current understanding of gravity says that attractions between mass in the universe should be causing the expansion to slow down.
The leading theory to explain the accelerating expansion is the existence of a hypothetical repulsive force called dark energy. (Related: "New Galaxy Maps to Help Find Dark Energy Proof?")
But in the new study, Massimo Villata, an astrophysicist at the Observatory of Turin in Italy, suggests the effects attributed to dark energy are actually due to a kind of "antigravity" created when normal matter and antimatter repel one another.
"Usually this repulsion is ascribed to a mysterious dark energy that would uniformly permeate the cosmos, but nobody knows what it is nor why it behaves this way," Villata said in an email.
"We are replacing an unknown force caused by an unknown element with the repulsive gravity of the well-known antimatter."
(Related: "Dark Matter Is an Illusion, New Antigravity Theory Says.")
Antimatter Hiding in "Holes" in the Universe?
According to Villata, the keys to accelerated expansion lie in large-scale voids that are seen scattered throughout the cosmos.
These holes in our map of the universe—which can each be millions of light-years wide—are inexplicably empty of galaxies and galaxy clusters. The nearest hole to us is called the Local Void, bordering the Virgo supercluster of galaxies.
Villata thinks these voids harbor vast quantities of antimatter, which could even be organized into antimatter galaxies, complete with antimatter stars and planets.
(Related: "Antimatter Found Orbiting Earth—A First.")
All this antimatter doesn't emit radiation that can be detected by current sensors, making it effectively invisible, Villata said.
"There can be various reasons why antimatter in voids should be invisible, but we do not know which of them is the right one," Villata said. "Moreover, antimatter in laboratories could have different behavior, since it is 'immersed' in a world of matter."
(See "Antimatter Atoms Trapped for First Time—'A Big Deal.'")
While we can't see antimatter superstructures, we can observe their effects on our visible universe, Villata argues, because antimatter must repel the normal matter in galaxies, pushing them farther from one another.
Villata says his theory, which will appear in an upcoming issue of the journal Astrophysics and Space Science, has the potential to solve other cosmic mysteries, such as the universe's "missing antimatter" problem.
According to standard physics, matter and antimatter particles should have been created in equal amounts during the big bang. Yet the visible universe appears to be dominated by structures made up of normal matter.
To determine how much antimatter might be contained in the Local Void, Villata calculated how much would be needed to create a repulsive force strong enough to explain the so-called Local Sheet. This collection of normal matter, which includes our Milky Way and other nearby galaxies, is all moving at the same speed.
"If each void contains a mass of antimatter similar to that calculated for our Local Void ... then our universe would host an amount of antimatter equivalent to that of matter, and [there] would finally be a matter-antimatter symmetric universe," Villata said.
But Do Matter and Antimatter Repel?
While Villata's theory doesn't require mysterious forces created from nothing, it does rely on the untested assumption that matter and antimatter are mutually repulsive.
There is as yet "no [experimental] evidence that antimatter repels matter," said physicist Frank Close of the University of Oxford in the U.K., although, he added, plans are underway at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Switzerland to test the idea.
In fact, Dragan Hajdukovic, a physicist at CERN, recently proposed a separate antigravity theory that also relies on repulsion between matter and antimatter to explain dark energy and dark matter.
Hajdukovic called Villata's theory "an interesting idea," be he added that he disagrees with the hypothesis of a matter-antimatter symmetric universe.
"The major problem is why [such] big quantities of antimatter in the voids are not observed," Hajdukovic said.
In Hajdukovic's theory, antimatter particles spontaneously pop in and out of existence in the quantum vacuum, which is the name physicists give to seemingly empty space.
"I use the reality of the quantum vacuum. For a physicist, it is more natural and plausible," Hajdukovic said.
"In order to explain the invisibility of antimatter, proponents of a matter-antimatter symmetric universe would be forced to invoke an additional hypothesis"—such as the emission by antimatter of so-called advanced photons, which travel backward in time and so wouldn't be detectable to current instruments.
(Related: "Time Travel Impossible, Mini 'Big Bang' Hints.")
"It is not a good sign for a theory if one hypothesis immediately demands introduction of other hypotheses."
But study author Villata argues that the assumptions in his theory—including matter-antimatter repulsion and advanced photons—are predicted by well-established theories in physics.
In that sense, he said, there is "no introduction of other hypotheses."
Remember a little thing called the space-time continuum? Well what if the time part of the equation was literally running out? New evidence is suggesting that time is slowly disappearing from our universe, and will one day vanish completely. This radical theory may explain a cosmological mystery that has baffled scientists for years.
Scientists previously have measured the light from distant exploding stars to show that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. They assumed that these supernovae are spreading apart faster as the universe ages. Physicists also assumed that a kind of anti-gravitational force must be driving the galaxies apart, and started to call this unidentified force "dark energy".
The idea that time itself could cease to be in billions of years - and everything will grind to a halt - has been proposed by Professor José Senovilla, Marc Mars and Raül Vera of the University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, and University of Salamanca, Spain. The corollary to this radical end to time itself is an alternative explanation for "dark energy" - the mysterious antigravitational force that has been suggested to explain a cosmic phenomenon that has baffled scientists. However, to this day no one actually knows what dark energy is, or where it comes from. Professor Senovilla, and colleagues have proposed a mind-bending alternative. They propose that there is no such thing as dark energy at all, and we’re looking at things backwards.
Senovilla proposes that we have been fooled into thinking the expansion of the universe is accelerating, when in reality, time itself is slowing down. At an everyday level, the change would not be perceptible. However, it would be obvious from cosmic scale measurements tracking the course of the universe over billions of years. The change would be infinitesimally slow from a human perspective, but in terms of the vast perspective of cosmology, the study of ancient light from suns that shone billions of years ago, it could easily be measured.
The team's proposal, published in the journal Physical Review D, dismisses dark energy as fiction. Instead, Senovilla says, the appearance of acceleration is caused by time itself gradually slowing down, like a clock with a run-down battery.* “We do not say that the expansion of the universe itself is an illusion," he explains. "What we say it may be an illusion is the acceleration of this expansion - that is, the possibility that the expansion is, and has been, increasing its rate."
If time gradually slows "but we naively kept using our equations to derive the changes of the expansion with respect of 'a standard flow of time', then the simple models that we have constructed in our paper show that an "effective accelerated rate of the expansion" takes place."*Currently, astronomers are able to discern the expansion speed of the universe using the so-called "red shift" technique. This technique relies on the understanding that stars moving away appear redder in color than ones moving towards us. Scientists look for supernovae of certain types that provide a sort of benchmark.
However, the accuracy of these measurements depends on time remaining invariable throughout the universe. If time is slowing down, according to this new theory, our solitary time dimension is slowly turning into a new space dimension. Therefore the far-distant, ancient stars seen by cosmologists would from our perspective, look as though they were accelerating.
"Our calculations show that we would think that the expansion of the universe is accelerating," says Prof Senovilla. The theory bases it’s idea on one particular variant of superstring theory, in which our universe is confined to the surface of a membrane, or brane, floating in a higher-dimensional space, known as the "bulk". In billions of years, time would cease to be time altogether.
"Then everything will be frozen, like a snapshot of one instant, forever," Senovilla told New Scientist magazine. "Our planet will be long gone by then."
Though radical and in many way unprecedented, these ideas are not without support. Gary Gibbons, a cosmologist at Cambridge University, says the concept has merit. "We believe that time emerged during the Big Bang, and if time can emerge, it can also disappear - that's just the reverse effect."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120418111923.htm
Dark matter detected?
By: Clara Moskowitz
Published: 08/17/2012 07:14 AM EDT on SPACE.com
Energetic light seen radiating from the center of the Milky Way may be the best evidence yet of dark matter, the invisible stuff thought to be hiding throughout the universe.
A new study has found a strong signal of gamma-rays — light of a very short wavelength — coming from the middle of our galaxy, which may be the result of exploding dark matter.
Scientists think dark matter, which seemingly makes up the majority of matter in the universe, is made of particles called WIMPs ("weakly interacting massive particles"). And WIMPs, when they get very close to other WIMPs, should annihilate each other, because these particles are thought to be their own antiparticles. (When particles of matter and their antimatter counterparts meet, they destroy each other.)
In the dense center of the Milky Way, enough WIMPs should exist that many bump into each other, exploding into pure energy that gives rise to other particles and, eventually, gamma-rays.
An abundance of gamma-rays is exactly what scientists see when looking toward the center of our galaxy with the Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope. In the new study, researchers found a definitive signal of gamma-rays that couldn't be traced to any known object in this region. [No WIMPS in Space? - NASA Scans For Dark Matter | Video]
'Something new'
"It's definitely something new and shining in the gamma-ray there, and it's not attributable to the existing sources in the catalog," said University of California, Irvine astrophysicist Kevork Abazajian, co-author of a paper reporting the findings submitted to the journal Physical Review D.
Abazajian, with his UC Irvine colleague Manoj Kaplinghat, searched for this light using Fermi data taken between 2008 and 2012. Previous studies by Dan Hooper, a scientist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) and the University of Chicago, also found evidence for this gamma-ray radiation, but other follow-up searches came up empty.
Abazajian said his study used the most complete data set yet and analyzed it with a comprehensive analysis specially tuned for investigating gamma-ray light in a crowded region.
"Definitely, definitely, there is a source," Abazajian told SPACE.com. "This is definitely not just a fluctuation."
However, whether this source was created by annihilating dark matter particles is somewhat less certain. It's also possible, Abazajian said, that a large group of dense, spinning stars called pulsars could be releasing the light.
However, he said, three characteristics of the detected gamma-ray radiation — its rate of emission, the variety of particular wavelengths of the light (its spectrum), and the overall shape of the emission — are all consistent with predictions for dark matter annihilation.
"I think it could be a very big finding," Abazajian said. "When I came across this, I was like, 'Holy cow, this is so consistent with the dark matter interpretation in many ways.' But until you can rule out the astrophysical potential sources for something similar, it's not going to be a smoking gun."
Ruling out alternatives
Fermilab's Hooper, for his part, is even more confident that scientists finally are seeing the elusive signature of dark matter.
"If you make a comparison to what they found and what we've been talking about — we're looking at the same source," Hooper said. "I still think dark mater annihilation is the easiest way to explain the signal. I think the signal is too spatially concentrated to be coming from pulsars."
Hooper acknowledged that many astrophysicists are skeptical. "There's vigorous debate going on about the astrophysical alternatives to explain this signal," he said. "I'm of the opinion that those are difficult to make work."
Many experts are waiting for scientists in the official Fermi telescope collaboration to weigh in with their own analysis of the radiation at the center of the galaxy.
"We will have results to report of this soon," said UC Irvine astrophysicist Simona Murgia, a member of the Fermi collaboration galactic center analysis team.
Murgia praised the study by Abazajian and Kaplinghat. "This is good work and the authors have considered a number of plausible interpretations" for the data, she wrote in an email.
"I can only emphasize that it is very difficult to disentangle all the different contributions to the observed data in this region of the sky, and I think more work needs to be done to make a definitive statement," she added.
Dwarf galaxies
For confirmation that dark matter has really been found at the center of the Milky Way, scientists may have to look outside the galaxy to the small dwarf galaxies orbiting it.
Theory predicts that WIMPs, if they exist, should be annihilating each other in the centers of those satellites, too. If the same type of gamma-ray emission can be observed in these galaxies, dark matter would be strongly implicated, Abazajian said. However, studies of such dwarf galaxies have so far turned up essentially no gamma-rays.
"The real smoking gun to show if this is dark matter annihilation or not is to look deeply at these low background sources and see if you see this signal or not," he said. "If you were able to see the same rate, spectrum or morphology in several sources, that would be a real abundance of evidence."
A new study has found no trace of the mysterious substance known as dark matter around the sun, adding a twist to current theories, researchers say.
Dark matter is one of the greatest cosmic mysteries of our time — an invisible, intangible material thought to make up five-sixths of all matter in the universe. Scientists currently think it is composed of a new type of particle, one that interacts normally with gravity but only very weakly with all the other known forces of the universe. As such, dark matter is detectable only via the gravitational pull it generates.
Astronomers first proposed the existence of dark matter to explain why stars moved the way they did in the Milky Way. It was as if extra matter was present, exerting a gravitational pull that influenced the motions of the stars.
http://www.space.com/15333-dark-matter-missing-sun.html
According to widely accepted theories, the neighborhood around the sun should be filled with dark matter, with billions of these particles rushing through us every second. However, the most accurate study yet of motions of stars in the Milky Way now has found no evidence for dark matter in a large volume around the sun. [Dark Matter Missing from Milky Way (Video)]
"Our results contradict the currently accepted models — the mystery of dark matter has just become even more mysterious," said study lead author Christian Moni Bidin, an astronomer at the University of Concepción in Chile.
Dark matter's elusiveness explained?
The findings could explain why all attempts to detect dark matter in laboratories on Earth have failed so far — there is much less of it in the sun's neighborhood than expected.
"Strictly speaking, the results do not say that dark matter does not exist — they only say it is not here," Moni Bidin told SPACE.com. "We have not proven that dark matter does not exist, and even if we do, at this point we cannot explain many other phenomena that today are explained only by dark matter."
One alternative to dark matter is known as Modified Newtonian Dynamics, or MOND, which tweaks how gravity works at large scales to help explain the motions of stars and galaxies that researchers observe. However, "to my knowledge, MOND also would have expected a massive 'phantom disk' to appear in our study, so our results should contradict its expectations, too," Moni Bidin said.
Future astronomical surveys, such as the European Space Agency's Gaia mission, could help shed further light on dark matter, Moni Bidin said. Gaia will collect data to reconstruct the movement of millions of stars. "Thus, we will be able to test the presence of dark matter in a wide region of the galaxy," he explained.
The scientists will detail their findings in a future issue of the Astrophysical Journal.
Follow SPACE.com for the latest in space science and exploration news on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook.
by Mitch Battros - Earth Changes Media
Gamma-ray photons seen emanating from the center of the Milky Way galaxy are consistent with the intriguing possibility that dark-matter particles are annihilating each other in space, according to research submitted by UC Irvine astrophysicists to the American Physical Society journal 'Physical Review'.
The research team found more gamma-ray photons coming from the Milky Way galactic center than they had expected, based on previous scientific models. Gamma-rays are electromagnetic radiation emitted during radioactive decay or other high-energy particle processes.
Kevork Abazajian, assistant professor, and Manoj Kaplinghat, associate professor, of the Department of Physics & Astronomy at University of California - analyzed data collected between August 2008 and June 2012 from NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope orbiting Earth.
"This is the first time this new source has been observed with such high statistical significance, and the most striking part is how the shape, spectrum and rate of the observed gamma rays are very consistent with the leading theories for dark matter," Abazajian said. "Future observations of regions with less astrophysical emission, such as dwarf galaxies, we will be able to conclusively determine if this is actually from dark matter."
Non-luminous and not directly detectable, dark matter is thought to account for 85 percent of the universe's mass. Its existence can only be inferred from its gravitational effects on other 'visible matter'. The UCI researchers' findings could support its presumed presence at the center of galaxies.
The prevailing hypothesis is that dark matter is composed of weak interacting massive particles. When two interacting massive particles meet, they annihilate each other to produce more familiar particles - including gamma rays.
What appears to be a new unknown source of charged particles - is also consistent with the spectrum signal of pulsars and other high energy particles interacting with gas in the galactic center. More studies are needed to determine what the source is and what are its possible outcomes.
A research group from University of Chile led by Moni Bidin looked carefully at the historical motions of some 400 nearby stars (up to 13,000 light years away) and found zero evidence that their motions are influenced in any way that could be attributed to the idea called Dark Matter.
Meanwhile a Russian researcher, Igor Karachentsev, looked at eleven thousand nearby galaxies to see where Dark Matter might be found around our galaxy (“Missing Dark Matter in the Local Universe“) – again finding nothing.
So if the Dark Matter conjecture is headed for the showers, then what’s going on with galaxy rotation curves?
Though the mainstream science media never reported it, in 2008, two researchers (James Feng and Charles Gallo) recalculated the galaxy mass distribution vs spin and found – Gasp! that there was no problem explaining galaxy rotation curves with with ordinary Newtonian gravity and dynamics using only known visible matter.
Charles Gallo said — “We have shown that Galactic Rotation data can be described with Newtonian Gravity and Newtonian Dynamics without ‘Massive Peripheral Spherical Halos of Mysterious Dark Matter around Rotating Disk Galaxies’ and without MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics).”
“Our studies only obviate the need for the standard unjustified concept of ‘Massive Peripheral Spherical Halos of Mysterious Dark Matter around Rotating Disk Galaxies’.”
So Dark Matter is simply not needed to explain galaxy rotations. Plain-vanilla ordinary gravity is all that is going on.
References:
Nearby dark-matter-free zone poses cosmic conundrum, by Lisa Grossman, 20 April 2012 (It includes a video of where the dark matter would appear if it were visible (and if it existed).)
“Kinematical and chemical vertical structure of the Galactic thick disk II. A lack of dark matter in the solar neighborhood” Moni Bidin et al: arxiv.org/abs/1204.3924 (Astrophysical Journal, in press);
“Missing Dark Matter in the Local Universe” I. Karachentsev, Astrophysical Bulletin, in press, arxiv.org/abs/1204.3377
“The dark matter crisis: falsification of the current standard model of cosmology” Pavel Kroupa, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia (in press) arxiv.org/abs/1204.2546
List of other Dark Matter Problems: “Problems Created by the Dark Matter Hypothesis”
Normal Newtonian Gravity and Dyanmics are Adequate (“No Dark Matter Needed”) Papers –
“Modeling the Newtonian Dynamics for Rotation Curve Analysis of Thin-Disk Galaxies, Feng and Gallo, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics 11 (2011) 1429-1448, www.raa-journal.org, http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.3236
“A Thin-Disk Gravitational Model for Galactic Rotation” By Gallo and Feng, Astronomical Society of Pacific Conference Proceedings, vol 413, p 289-303, Dec 2009, CCC2 Conference in Port Angeles, Sept 2008.
“Galactic Rotation Described by a Thin-Disk Gravitational Model Without Dark Matter” C. F. Gallo and James Q. Feng, Superconix Inc, MN. USA., Journal of Cosmology, April 2010, Vol 6, 1373-1380. http://journalofcosmology.com/Contents6.html (Paper #4)
Has Dark Matter Gone Missing? by Adrian Cho on 19 April 2012, 5:41 PM | 0 Comments Share on email Email Share on print Print | Share on facebook Share on google_plusone Share on reddit Share on stumbleupon More Sharing Services More Previous Article Next Article Enlarge Image Home sweet home. In the vicinity of the sun, our Milky Way galaxy seems to contain no dark matter, one team of astronomers claims. Credit: Serge Brunier/NASA If a new study is true, then the search for dark matter just got a lot weirder. Our little corner of the Milky Way contains no observable concentration of the mysterious stuff whose gravity binds the galaxy, claims one team of astronomers. That finding would present a major problem for models of how galaxies form and may undermine the whole notion of dark matter, the researchers claim. But some scientists doubt the reliability of the team's method for measuring the elusive substance.
"This is not just some piddling little detail," says Frederic Hessman, an astronomer at the University of Göttingen in Germany who was not involved in the work. "If this is right, it turns everything totally upside-down." But that's a big if, says Julio Navarro, an astrophysicist at the University of Victoria in Canada: "The argument is provocative, but it remains inconclusive, in my opinion."
According to standard cosmology, we should be swimming in dark matter. Measurements of the afterglow of the big bang—the so-called cosmic microwave background—and of the distribution of the galaxies suggest that 85% of all matter in the universe is dark matter. What's more, decades of astronomical observations show that the stars within galaxies swirl about faster than they could if only the gravity of the others stars were holding them in. In fact, the speed with which the sun goes around the center of our galaxy suggests that dark matter ought to be about as abundant as ordinary matter at our distance from the galactic center, about 27,000 light-years.
But that's not what Christian Moni Bidin, an astronomer at the University of Concepción in Chile, and colleagues find. Using data gathered with several telescopes, they studied old stars called red giants in a cylindrical region a couple of light-years wide and extending 13,000 light-years above the plane of the galaxy. Treating the stars a bit like atoms in a gas, researchers assumed that they were trapped in the gravitational "well" of the galaxy. So by studying distributions of the stars' speeds in three dimensions, they could deduce the well's shape and hence the total distribution of mass from both dark and ordinary matter along the cylinder. Subtracting the distribution of ordinary matter as determined from star counts would then reveal the distribution of dark matter.
A Weekly Chat on the Hottest Topics in Science Thursdays 3 p.m. EDT When Moni Bidin and colleagues did the analysis, however, they found that no dark matter was needed to explain the stars' speeds. The researchers had expected to detect a complicated mass distribution with a contribution from the galaxy's disk of stars and gas and the presumably spherical "halo" of dark matter surrounding the disk. Instead, they found that the disk alone neatly explained their data, as they report in a paper in press at The Astrophysical Journal.
The data don't disprove the existence of dark matter, Moni Bidin is quick to say. Astrophysicists still need the stuff to explain the speed of the stars in the galaxy. However, the data do suggest that there isn't any dark matter in our neck of the woods. "We're not saying that there isn't any dark matter," Moni Bidin says. "We're just saying that there isn't any dark matter here."
But that could lead to a major problem with the whole idea of dark matter. For example, one way to explain why there is no dark matter 27,000 light-years from the center of the Milky Way would be to assume it's all in one tall cigar-shaped lump that sticks through the center of the galaxy. But simulations show that such a shape for the halo is unlikely, Moni Bidin says.
Another possibility is that dark matter is made not of "cold," massive particles moving very slowly, but rather of "warm," lightweight particles moving much faster. In that case, the galactic halo would be larger and more uniform, producing an even and therefore undetectable background, Hessman says. But that inference would fly in the face of standard cosmology, which assumes that galaxies start to form as cold dark matter starts to condense in massive clumps. "Basically," Hessman says, "the cosmologists should say, 'Oh my God!' because you're taking away the one thing that makes everything work and they're going to have to go back to square one."
Or not. The new result may say more about the method than the distribution of dark matter, Navarro says. To get that distribution, at each position in space Moni Bidin and colleagues must subtract one large quantity (the amount of ordinary matter) from another large quantity (the amount of total mass) to get a small quantity. That process is likely to suffer from large uncertainties, Navarro says. "I applaud them for trying," he says. "I just don't think this method will ever give a conclusive answer." Moni Bidin says the method is robust and that larger surveys to come will pin down the dark matter distribution more precisely.
Huge "Structure" of Satellites Found Orbiting Milky Way Grouping of galaxies puts cosmology "basically in a shambles," scientist says. A Hubble picture shows two large galaxies colliding, scattering material.
Image courtesy ESA/NASA and STScI/AURA
Ker Than
for National Geographic News
Published April 30, 2012
A huge "structure" of satellite galaxies and star clusters has been found wheeling around the Milky Way, according to a new study.
The discovery surprised scientists, in part because the structure might spell trouble for theories of dark matter, the mysterious, invisible substance that's thought to make up about 23 percent of the mass in the universe.
The finding is only the latest to question dark matter's existence—last week, for instance, astronomers announced that they'd failed to detect dark matter in the sun's neighborhood, even though the substance should be there, according to accepted theory.
In the new study, led by Marcel Pawlowski of the University of Bonn in Germany, astronomers reconstructed the locations of the Milky Way's known satellites using sources ranging from 20th-century photographic plates to recent images from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.
The team found that the Milky Way's roughly 20 companions—including dwarf galaxies and blobs of stars known as globular clusters—are distributed in a tidy plane that orbits at a right angle to our galactic disk.
(Related: "Dark-Matter Galaxy Detected: Hidden Dwarf Lurks Nearby?")
"This is completely contrary to what we expect from theory," said study co-author Pavel Kroupa, also of the University of Bonn.
"You should be able to look in any direction and still find some satellite galaxies." That's because current models of galaxy formation—which are based on dark matter's existence—predict that the Milky Way's companions originally came from many different directions and so should have settled into a more or less spherical distribution.
"The logical implication of this [discovery] is that there is no dark matter," Kroupa said.
Cosmology in "Shambles"?
According to the standard theory of galaxy formation, dark matter was the gravitational scaffold upon which normal matter coalesced to form galaxies in the early universe.
As larger galaxies such as the Milky Way formed, the theory goes, leftover material amassed into hundreds of smaller satellites spread evenly around their host galaxies.
(Also see "Dark Matter Blob Should Not Exist, But There It Is.")
To explain the odd arrangement of satellites around the Milky Way, the Bonn team proposes that our home galaxy collided with a galactic neighbor about 11 billion years ago, which corresponds with the age of the oldest known satellite dwarf galaxy.
According to this idea, the Milky Way stripped material from the other galaxy, and gravity gathered the debris to form dwarf galaxies and globular clusters, which have remained in a plane around the Milky Way ever since, study leader Pawlowski said.
The team asserts that this model deals a significant blow to dark matter, since it shows that galaxies can form without the theoretical substance.
"It means that we have to completely and utterly rethink cosmology," Kroupa said. "Cosmology is basically in a shambles now."
(Related: "Dark Matter Is an Illusion, New Antigravity Theory Says.")
Dark Matter Still Viable
But other astronomers aren't quite ready to give up on dark matter.
"Although the alignment they find is intriguing, it is very premature to conclude that dark matter is in trouble," said Ken Rines, of Western Washington University in Bellingham.
"Galaxy formation is a very tricky business. We certainly don't understand the details, and these details may ... explain the alignment that they find," Rines said.
"Although dark matter may eventually be proven wrong, the alignment of dwarf galaxies is more likely a puzzle than a fatal flaw."
Sukanya Chakrabarti, an astrophysicist at Florida Atlantic University, is also skeptical that the new study rewrites galaxy formation.
The study team's galaxy-collision scenario can explain the positions of the satellite dwarf galaxies, she concedes.
But that model doesn't explain why the satellites act as if they have more mass than can be explained by their visible matter alone—one of the main reasons scientists think dark matter exists.
Any alternative to dark matter "must not only reproduce where the stuff is but what its mass is as well," Chakrabarti said.
(Related: "Dark Matter Hits the Average Human Once a Minute?")
Study author Kroupa counters that "this is not a problem, because it has already been demonstrated many times with other data that other theories of gravity—such as MOND—describe galaxies excellently, including the satellite galaxies."
Short for Modified Newtonian dynamics, MOND is a tweaked version of Newton's theory of gravity, which proponents say can explain the observed motions of stars and galaxies without resorting to dark matter.
Still, Chakrabarti said, it's also not surprising that current dark matter simulations can't explain the Milky Way satellites' unusual orientation.
While the simulations do a good job of modeling the evolution of large-scale structure in the universe, they're less reliable when it comes to modeling the scale of individual galaxies, which involves interactions between many more variables, she said.
"If you neglect these things and you're trying to do a very detailed analysis—like where all the satellite galaxies are distributed—you're going to come up with some discrepancies," Chakrabarti said.
"The current simulations of galaxy formation are incomplete," she continued, "but that doesn't imply that dark matter isn't a viable notion."
The Milky Way's satellite "structure" will be detailed in an upcoming issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.
DISCUSSION
The stability of matter itself is mediated by zero-point fluctuations (ZPF) of the quantized electromagnetic field. Nature is random by nature, as Chaos Theory demonstrates. The chaotic virtual particle sea (spatio-temporal chaos) interacts through field operators with physical matter through antimatter and light. The threshold between matter and the vacuum is becoming blurrier. Gravity may be a probe of the vacuum rather than identical with it.
Empty space and matter are a seamless whole. Spontaneous emission is not something atoms do all alone but are the result of an interaction between the atom and the vacuum. The vacuum literally pulls radiation out of the atom. The observed effect of sonoluminescence is extraction of virtual photons from the electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations. Photons and gravitons are usually considered as massless fields.
According to Virtual Physics, self-renewing energy comes from ceaseless emission and absorption of virtual photons and also creation and annihilation of electron/positron pair. Bosonic vacuum fluctuations are created as particle-antiparticle pairs.
The dense energy potential of the vacuum plays a key role in structuring the Universe. Energy moves from a free to a bound state via the dynamic structure of the vacuum. The vacuum not only contains but also is randomly fluctuating electromagnetic (EM) fields with an infinite zero-point energy. That potential, an unseen sea of negative energy particles, can be chaotic and amorphous or coherent. Although it comes from chaos, each temporary virtual particle is totally ordered while it exists.
Time energy is transduced into dynamic spatial energy as cosmic jitter (ZPE; zitterbewegung), cosmic acceleration, and mass. The engine of the universe runs by consuming the negentropy of highly compressed spacetime. So do we. We don’t feed on energy, but on negentropy.
Thomas's current analysis (9/2012) shows 119gev event due to fused gluon pairs.
http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/1202.1488v1.pdf
The 125gev is now being accepted as possible Higgs and not just fragment.
A gluon pair splits Higgs into the W+W and releases one gluon;
in other words, THE HIGGS PARTICLE AND GLUON PAIR SPLIT EACH OTHER!
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.6987v1.pdf
The stability of matter itself is mediated by zero-point fluctuations (ZPF) of the quantized electromagnetic field. Nature is random by nature, as Chaos Theory demonstrates. The chaotic virtual particle sea (spatio-temporal chaos) interacts through field operators with physical matter through antimatter and light. The threshold between matter and the vacuum is becoming blurrier. Gravity may be a probe of the vacuum rather than identical with it.
Empty space and matter are a seamless whole. Spontaneous emission is not something atoms do all alone but are the result of an interaction between the atom and the vacuum. The vacuum literally pulls radiation out of the atom. The observed effect of sonoluminescence is extraction of virtual photons from the electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations. Photons and gravitons are usually considered as massless fields.
According to Virtual Physics, self-renewing energy comes from ceaseless emission and absorption of virtual photons and also creation and annihilation of electron/positron pair. Bosonic vacuum fluctuations are created as particle-antiparticle pairs.
The dense energy potential of the vacuum plays a key role in structuring the Universe. Energy moves from a free to a bound state via the dynamic structure of the vacuum. The vacuum not only contains but also is randomly fluctuating electromagnetic (EM) fields with an infinite zero-point energy. That potential, an unseen sea of negative energy particles, can be chaotic and amorphous or coherent. Although it comes from chaos, each temporary virtual particle is totally ordered while it exists.
Time energy is transduced into dynamic spatial energy as cosmic jitter (ZPE; zitterbewegung), cosmic acceleration, and mass. The engine of the universe runs by consuming the negentropy of highly compressed spacetime. So do we. We don’t feed on energy, but on negentropy.
Thomas's current analysis (9/2012) shows 119gev event due to fused gluon pairs.
http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/1202.1488v1.pdf
The 125gev is now being accepted as possible Higgs and not just fragment.
A gluon pair splits Higgs into the W+W and releases one gluon;
in other words, THE HIGGS PARTICLE AND GLUON PAIR SPLIT EACH OTHER!
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.6987v1.pdf
Conclusions
"The bottom line is we live in a photon universe with many wave lengths and antimatter. The antimatter is "dark energy" along with other higher energy light fields exceeding our wave lines/fields. Gravity is nothing more than a collection of atoms/photons surrounding a mass in space. The photon density type determines the gravity levels. This is no mystery other than what some one's rhetorical observations created. Einsteins theories created issues in the world that led to misconceptions in science. There's no speed of light...only connection speed to photons." (Marriott)
atmospherics do produce antimatter, by producing electron- positron pairs directly from the vacuum, IN THE FORM OF POSITRONIUM , which could be called the lightest element. if the annihilating pairs are born from a strong vortical (vortex producing) breech, they orbit each othrt , briefly, before mutual gravity causes annihilation. this is exactly the sort of thing QM is totally blind to by their laziness in writing off gravity on the microscale
"The bottom line is we live in a photon universe with many wave lengths and antimatter. The antimatter is "dark energy" along with other higher energy light fields exceeding our wave lines/fields. Gravity is nothing more than a collection of atoms/photons surrounding a mass in space. The photon density type determines the gravity levels. This is no mystery other than what some one's rhetorical observations created. Einsteins theories created issues in the world that led to misconceptions in science. There's no speed of light...only connection speed to photons." (Marriott)
atmospherics do produce antimatter, by producing electron- positron pairs directly from the vacuum, IN THE FORM OF POSITRONIUM , which could be called the lightest element. if the annihilating pairs are born from a strong vortical (vortex producing) breech, they orbit each othrt , briefly, before mutual gravity causes annihilation. this is exactly the sort of thing QM is totally blind to by their laziness in writing off gravity on the microscale
REFERENCES
Rees, Martin (2001); Our Cosmic Habitat; Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Rees, Martin (2001); Our Cosmic Habitat; Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.