[WillieB]

This thread is named “Keep it Simple” for a valid reason. The entire concept developed from the most simplistic reasoning.
When I first posted on this site back in July of ’06 I did so with great trepidation and I attempted to project humility. Frankly, I am still somewhat intimidated by some of you guy’s perspicacity but this time I am carrying a great deal of confidence Yet and still I will do my best not to exhibit an excess of hubris. I am more confident than ever in the validity of the reasoning process that led to the creation of the paper that you will find at www.theincrementaluniverse.com. Thanks to you people, ‘Mkirkpatrick’, ‘Lloyd’, ‘Aireal’, ‘Nobody’, and even ‘dleviwing’ and others I have done a lot of reading and study and my capability of using the net has improved by leaps and bounds. This is a new and improved version of the original submission. The basic concept still stands strong.
What I am really trying to accomplish is to interest someone with a deeper knowledge of basic physics, cosmology and mathematics to further the acceptance of the concept and to advance the applicability of its principles. I would like each and every subscriber or visitor to this forum to offer their criticisms or suggestions and, while I hope that everyone will contribute, I am specifically trying to get Volantis and Fripro involved in this. See the messages I am sending to them below. I also sincerely hope that Joseph will become involved in this. See my response to his far reaching questions posted on his thread “On the Development of Theory of the Universe.”
The criticism and developemen t could be accomplished with or without my participation but I would dearly wish to know that such an effort is in the works. I hope any or all of you will assist in this.

Sincerely,

WillieB (Bill Britton)

[mkirkpatrick]

Thank you Willie B,welcome back,tis good to hear you again.

regards best wishes michael.

[WillieB]

Thanks Michael for your instataneous reply. I am attaching the messages to Fripro and Volantis that I referenced in the original post.

Volantis,

I have studied your book with a great deal of interest. Though some of the mathematics escapes my capability I do follow your general thrust and grasp the importance.

I have recently posted a new thread, “Keep it Simple,” on Toe Quest under the name of WillieB” in which I reference your work. I do feel that it could be mutually beneficial if you would take a look at www.theincrementaluniverse.com and give it some consideration. I would like you to try to put a bonded pair of my increments inside of one of your Aether Units.

Bill Britton (WillieB)


Fripro,

I have been to your site. I can’t say that I have studied it. The sheer volume is daunting. I have read enough to know that I can’t agree with some of your conclusions but I do appreciate your ingenuity and I do have a meaningful question. In calculating the mass of the WIT particle could you possibly actually calculating the mass of one paired bundle as described at www.theincrementaluniverse.com? Your description of the vortex formation of the electron reminds me too much of the route taken by the paired bundles as they enter into the interior portion of their orbits.

Bill Britton (WillieB)

[michellemfry]

Others deep down just want to see growth, explosive exploration of what is inside of you wanting to breathe, wanting to fly, so please accept your humility and please know all that is desired is that someone makes it. I don't know how to say it any different at the moment, and I hope to change that in your guiding shadows.

[dleviwing]

Hi Bill;
Now that you’ve realized ZPE as one of the states that fundamental matter exists in, you may wish to study wave mechanics to understand how it interacts to form the units of structure.

You still have a ways to go to reach the ultimate simplicity, but you are doing quite well so far. Read up on the brane (membrane) concept in M-theory (string theory), it will give you more insight to your ideas and may keep you from reinventing the wheel so often.

BTW: Your changes are a good improvement.

[WillieB]

You still have a ways to go to reach the ultimate simplicity, but you are doing quite well so far. Read up on the brane (membrane) concept in M-theory (string theory), it will give you more insight to your ideas and may keep you from reinventing the wheel so often. David:

Thanks for the kind words. Thanks to Brian Gteene I am somwhat familiar with the Brane concept. Initially I fail to see how it could reinforce the concept of the Increment, however I will follow up on your suggestion. Don't stop absorbing the capabilities of the Increment. Thanks again.

Bill

[WillieB]

Originally Posted by michellemfry3142 Others deep down just want to see growth, explosive exploration of what is inside of you wanting to breathe, wanting to fly, so please accept your humility and please know all that is desired is that someone makes it. I don't know how to say it any different at the moment, and I hope to change that in your guiding shadows.

Michelle,
I am sure that you will agree that philosiphy is the base source of all knowlege.

With all humility,

Bill

[dleviwing]

Bill;
If we ignore the wave functions of your fundamental units, then you can visualize a spinning brane that at some spin velocity will separate at the axes to produce a toroid structure or loop of fundamental substance. This is often referred to as a monopole. Many novices interpret this action as a vortex or spiral when it interacts with the ZPE or aether. Now if we bring back the wave function, this loop has a vibration of an extremely short wavelength. It is the wave function of your units that determine the interactions between each other and between the environmental ZPE to produce the forces of nature.

Even the simplest of ideas can evolve to complexity.

[WillieB]

UNIVERSAL POLARIZATION = QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT?

If we don’t dream we wither, if we don’t think, we die.

During the period in which the characteristics of the incremental universe were being formed in my mind I became involved in a conundrum: given the polarization capabilities of the increments why is it that they all are not perfectly polarized throughout all of space? This question dogged me for some extended period until I convinced myself that, due to the random angles of their encounters, their polarizations would remain randomly dispersed. Recently in contemplating the phenomenon known as quantum entanglement I revisited the question of universal polarization and an alternate possibility has begun to form. I ask the assistance of everyone who participates in this forum to bring it to fruition.

Let’s presume that universal polarization does, in fact exist but it takes on a much different format that that which I originally feared could or should take place due to the polarization characteristics of the increments. Under this presumption, and I freely admit that at this point it is no more than speculation, each and every one of the increments is at the center of an infinite number of imaginary lines or radii that spherically extend from it in every direction. Each and every increment on those lines is perfectly polarized both in their spin vectors and their flow vectors at any given instant. Both the spin vectors and the flow vectors will be perfect compliments of one another dependent upon the direction of extension from that increment. Opposite directions will yield opposite spins and flows. To me, attempting to visualize what these conditions would yield when measured macroscopically actually induces dizziness. Would it result in a uniform variation of polarizations throughout space? Would it compliment the helical or corkscrew path that Joseph envisioned for the transmission of electromagnetic energy as he describes in his thread “On the Development of a Theory of Everything?” Would it add to the validity of Fripro’s vortex and WIT particle? It does seem to conform to the path that the increment follows through space. (See Figure 7 of The Incremental Universe.)

As I understand it, experiments confirming the existence of Quantum Entanglement, in which some type of communication apparently is exchanged at superluminal and possibly infinite velocities between two entangled sub-atomic particles (usually electrons or photons), must be performed in very carefully controlled circumstances. This is accomplished by stimulating an atom or molecule so that two electrons or photons are emitted on precisely opposite paths. When the characteristics of these two entangled particles are measured at remote locations it appears that the two particles have communicated so that these measured characteristics will correspond or be precisely opposite one another. As the two particles are separated by such a distance to prevent signals being exchanged at the speed of light the physics community has concluded that they are mysteriously linked to one another or “entangled.”

I submit that such a scenario as described in the second paragraph above would explain the existence of Quantum Entanglement. What do you think? It’s fun to speculate and, who knows, it may lead to some answers. Let’s hear from you!

[WillieB]

It is the wave function of your units that determine the interactions between each other and between the environmental ZPE to produce the forces of nature.


David,

I have been contemplating an appropriate reply and there are some points I want to make. You must remember that I speak from the reference point of the concepts of The Incremental Universe (let’s call it the IU) and not from the viewpoint of any proven facts of physics

First I firmly reject the capability of the string theories to actually and fully depict any real entity of the “the actual grains” of our universe. They undoubtedly are elegant mathematical accomplishments but, even though they can derive formulae which precisely mathematically incorporate characteristics of sub atomic particles, I simply cannot bring myself to acknowledge the actual existence of more than three dimensions of space and one of time.

Second, I would like to emphasize that, under the concepts of the IU the increments are the entities that compose the constituents of an electromagnetic wave. They themselves do not project a wave of any kind nor do they possess a wave function. They are the wave. An electromagnetic wave is made up of consistently varying polarizations of the flow and spin vectors of the increments passing through any point or plane of empty space. (The flow vector is that portion of the vector of the pb’s orbit that is parallel to the axis of the toral shape that is the increment. The spin vector is that portion of the pb’s orbit which is rotating around the axis.) As the wave passes through a plane which is perpendicular to its direction of travel the polarizations of the passing increments’ flow vectors will consistently vary from being perpendicular to the plane to being at an acute angle with respect to the plane. The orientation of the spin vectors will “wobble” appropriately.

Thanks for your interest. I hope that we can continue our discussion in the future.

Bill Britton