Dark energy is in front of your eyes!

[vacuum-mechanics]

If something near it vibrates, could it resonate from a zero frequency/principle, iow,{the motion is not permanent the propery is dual, It is and It is not.}
dead or latent, inactive state "not a permanent property/aspect"... to a state of active vibration? "Life", in its most fundamental form, is vibration, *first attribute. no?

Dear Drifter,

Sorry, I am not so clear about your point; anyway I have to point out that my topic is about contemporary physics, not anything else!

See "Spanda" in Sanskrit
There are "Doctines" (volumes), in ancient Sanskrit for all this, did you know that???
Didn't you look at the links in the last post?

I have take a look, but it is not my interest field, thanks.

Sincerely,
Nimit
-------------------
www.vacuum-mechanics.com .

[Graybeard]

Thank you Nimit.

Matter and anti-matter are two forms of matter. Neither has a 'reality' over the other. Neither is temporary, or both are temporary. We prefer, and are familiar with, matter ... but this is subjective because we are made from it. But anti-matter is just as 'legitimate'.

Regarding matter in its mirror image form (not anti-matter). At first it was believed that they were identical ... that is a 'left-hand-drive' car would behave the same as a 'right-hand-drive' car ...two clocks, one built as a mirror image of the other would both keep the same time. Left cannot (by Physical Laws) be distinguished from right and north cannot be distinguished from south.

In other words by flipping all 3 spatial co-ordinates there is no change under the Laws of Physics. Reflexion Symmetry.

The idea that this may not be true was slowly growing through the first half of the last century and it was suggested that parity may not be conserved. But this was not taken seriously until the Lee-Yang experiment in 1957. Basically the Lee-Yang experiment showed that only the left-handed attributes of particles and the right-handed attributes of anti-particles participate in Weak interactions. it was shown that parity is conserved by the EM force, Gravity, and the Strong Nuclear force ... but not the Weak Nuclear force.

This led Feynman to propose the following hypothesis:

That if we were to build a clock out of matter (wot else ?) that marks time by counting electron flow instead of a spring ... and also to construct another clock (out of matter) as a mirror image of the original then these two clocks would keep different time. It can be easily shown that you must also reverse north-south poles as surely as you reverse all the spatial co-ordinates in a mirror image according to the laws of magnetism and current flow.

The two clocks would record different times. One would count less electrons ejected from the cobalt than the other. This turns out to be true for all matter ? Parity is not respected by the Weak Force. Reflexion symmetry does not hold.



Feynman's hypothesis is that matter comes in all 4 forms .... following diagrams.



If matter <> antimatter (or mirror-image-matter and mirror-image-anti-matter) contact they annihilate, (presumably because they are symmetrical and opposite) [below]



Matter and Mirror-image-matter interact freely and normally (in fact the observable universe is probably made up of both ?) [below]



But Matter and Mirror-image-anti-matter do not interact at all (nor mirror-image-matter and anti-matter) They have the same attributes. [below]




And, in a roundabout way, symmetry is restored by this hypothesis.

These are the components that make up the Universe and the non-interacting parts are candidates for Dark matter/Dark energy. The fact that they do not appear in equal quantities may have its roots in the evolution of the Universe in the first few nano-seconds.

This was proposed by Feynman.

Wot do you think ?

cool bananas ... greg

Hi Nimit ..... further to this post

CLICK

Greg

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear, greg,

- Nice to talk to you again.

- I have taken a look on the CERN report, anyway for my opinion; it seems that people waste too much time to find something which is “temporary” exist and give it the same credit as something with everyday existence!

Nimit

[Graybeard]

Dear, greg,

- Nice to talk to you again.

- I have taken a look on the CERN report, anyway for my opinion; it seems that people waste too much time to find something which is “temporary” exist and give it the same credit as something with everyday existence!

Nimit

Dear Nimit ... The Universe has been thru many epochs. An epoch is not measured by time, so that when a sufficient amount of time has passed an 'epoch' is declared. It is measured by events. An epoch may last a few trillionths of a trillionth of a second and still contain the same number of events as an epoch lasting for billions of years.

The important point is that at the end of an epoch, or the beginning of another, a phase change occurs. Our Universe came about thru phase changes.

So .... when you say .... 'waste too much time to find something which is “temporary” exist and give it the same credit as something with everyday existence!' ..... this is incorrect. Your everyday 'existence' is no different to the 'temporary 'existence'. They are both the results of phase changes and are equally important.

cool bananas ... greg

[vacuum-mechanics]

....
So .... when you say .... 'waste too much time to find something which is “temporary” exist and give it the same credit as something with everyday existence!' ..... this is incorrect. Your everyday 'existence' is no different to the 'temporary 'existence'. They are both the results of phase changes and are equally important.

cool bananas ... greg

Dear, greg,

You are right if you accept the idea of “the universe creation from big bang”. For me I am not happy with this concept that the universe creation via “a big free lunch”!

Nimit

[Graybeard]

Dear, greg,

You are right if you accept the idea of “the universe creation from big bang”. For me I am not happy with this concept that the universe creation via “a big free lunch”!

Nimit

Hi Nimit ......

I have done much research recently on the Big Bang. There is compelling material and empirical evidence ... such as the combination (380,000 years after the BB) -reionisation (4 million years after the BB) -recombination sequence that the universe passed thru that points almost conclusively to a Big-Inflation.

Objects that existed prior to re-ionisation are still visible on the distant edge of the Universe in the faint blue active galaxies (these no longer exist today). The photons from these objects have passed thru gas clouds on their way to us. Absorption lines from these objects show not only spatial distance, but because of red-shift also carry temporal information.

Simpler: It is possible to determine objects that existed prior to re-ionisation and objects subsequent to re-ionisation. The earlier objects passed thru the Lyman-Alpha forest and consequently carry the absorption-spectra data of that passing. Later objects are missing that spectra. They do not show the same absorption spectra.

Ergo: Around 400 million years after the big bang the universe was re-ionised (vaporised) ... The Big Bang (Big Inflation) theory accounts for this absorption spectra ... and therefore must be considered a credible account of the beginning.

Any other theory would also need to account for this absorption spectra as well as much other empirical evidence.

What are you proposing in place of the BB .. ?

cool bananas ... greg

[vacuum-mechanics]

......

What are you proposing in place of the BB .. ?

Dear, greg,

For me, what seems to be a better idea isa new theory “quasi-steady-state model”,in the book named “A Different Approach to Cosmology, From a static universe through the big bang towards reality”, by F. Hoyle, G. Burbidge and J. V. Narlikar.

Combined together with my concept “Vacuum medium space-time” forming to be a new idea about a newconcept of the origin of universe, proposedin my paper “Completed Einstein general theory of relativity” which could be found here

http://www.vacuum-mechanics.com/inde...emid=7&lang=en


In summary according to the new theory “quasi-steady-state model”, the major development is that matter creation occurs with energy conservation. Their thesis that matter is created and ejected in the form of quasi-stellar objects and matter in other forms from the nuclei of galaxies are the observational evidences. In summary the general equation of the theory was derived from the friedmann-Robertson-Walker model by introducing a scalar field C. The role of C - field is to act as a negative energy and negative pressure for the effect of matter creation, and the matter creation is to accelerate the expansion of the universe. So there is no need a hot big bang with inflation scenario!

By the way in this new model, it was explained that the existence of near – black hole in the center of galaxies is an indication of the creation events have taken place. And to visualize such events in physical terms, the suggestion conceptual explanation is from the basic fabric of space-time. They are well-used to thinking that particles creation occur in association with a transition that involves space-time in a physical way, not just as a passive medium in which particles are supposed to exist. In graphic language, particle creation would be associated with an opening-up of space-time!

Now according to Vacuum medium space-time, in which we have mentioned early that it is the fabric structure of space-time created out of vacuum medium energy. Or we could say that vacuum medium is the raw material for constructing the fabric structure of space-time! This means that at the starting moment, the universe is zerosize (no space-time) there is no vacuum medium either. When the universe is expanding its size, vacuum medium must be increased for expanding the fabric structure of space-time. And when the universe is reducing its size, it means that vacuum medium is decreasing. Then we could see thatvacuum medium universe is possible without hot big bang and inflation universe!

Nimit

[vacuum-mechanics]

......

What are you proposing in place of the BB .. ?

Dear, greg,

For me, what seems to be a better idea isa new theory “quasi-steady-state model”,in the book named “A Different Approach to Cosmology, From a static universe through the big bang towards reality”, by F. Hoyle, G. Burbidge and J. V. Narlikar.

Combined together with my concept “Vacuum medium space-time” forming to be a new idea about a newconcept of the origin of universe, proposedin my paper “Completed Einstein general theory of relativity” which could be found here

http://www.vacuum-mechanics.com/inde...emid=7&lang=en


In summary according to the new theory “quasi-steady-state model”, the major development is that matter creation occurs with energy conservation. Their thesis that matter is created and ejected in the form of quasi-stellar objects and matter in other forms from the nuclei of galaxies are the observational evidences. In summary the general equation of the theory was derived from the friedmann-Robertson-Walker model by introducing a scalar field C. The role of C - field is to act as a negative energy and negative pressure for the effect of matter creation, and the matter creation is to accelerate the expansion of the universe. So there is no need a hot big bang with inflation scenario!

By the way in this new model, it was explained that the existence of near – black hole in the center of galaxies is an indication of the creation events have taken place. And to visualize such events in physical terms, the suggestion conceptual explanation is from the basic fabric of space-time. They are well-used to thinking that particles creation occur in association with a transition that involves space-time in a physical way, not just as a passive medium in which particles are supposed to exist. In graphic language, particle creation would be associated with an opening-up of space-time!

Now according to Vacuum medium space-time, in which we have mentioned early that it is the fabric structure of space-time created out of vacuum medium energy. Or we could say that vacuum medium is the raw material for constructing the fabric structure of space-time! This means that at the starting moment, the universe is zerosize (no space-time) there is no vacuum medium either. When the universe is expanding its size, vacuum medium must be increased for expanding the fabric structure of space-time. And when the universe is reducing its size, it means that vacuum medium is decreasing. Then we could see thatvacuum medium universe is possible without hot big bang and inflation universe!

Nimit

[Graybeard]

Dear, greg,

For me, what seems to be a better idea isa new theory “quasi-steady-state model”,in the book named “A Different Approach to Cosmology, From a static universe through the big bang towards reality”, by F. Hoyle, G. Burbidge and J. V. Narlikar.

Now according to Vacuum medium space-time, in which we have mentioned early that it is the fabric structure of space-time created out of vacuum medium energy. Or we could say that vacuum medium is the raw material for constructing the fabric structure of space-time! This means that at the starting moment, the universe is zerosize (no space-time) there is no vacuum medium either. When the universe is expanding its size, vacuum medium must be increased for expanding the fabric structure of space-time. And when the universe is reducing its size, it means that vacuum medium is decreasing. Then we could see thatvacuum medium universe is possible without hot big bang and inflation universe!

Dear Nimit. (please give some thought to meeting me in Bangkok in June ... no excuses)

When the Universe is Zero-Size (no space-time) does not allow us to conclude there is no Vacuum medium either. The Vacuum Medium (plasma field ?) still contains all the energy there is. The vacuum medium only 'thins' with expansion.

I do not see any way out of inflation. If for no other reason, it is required to explain phase transitions.

Inflation only occurs in spacetime .... spacetime is not a property but an effect of inflation. You cannot use the effect to deny the cause .... lol

cool bananas .... greg

[Graybeard]

In summary according to the new theory “quasi-steady-state model”, the major development is that matter creation occurs with energy conservation. Their thesis that matter is created and ejected in the form of quasi-stellar objects and matter in other forms from the nuclei of galaxies are the observational evidences. In summary the general equation of the theory was derived from the friedmann-Robertson-Walker model by introducing a scalar field C. The role of C - field is to act as a negative energy and negative pressure for the effect of matter creation, and the matter creation is to accelerate the expansion of the universe. So there is no need a hot big bang with inflation scenario!

So now the total gravitational force within a region depends on the total mass within that region, total energy within that region as well as the total pressure within that region. Energy adds to the total gravitational field. Pressure adds to the total gravitational field via its energy, as well as via its presence.

Just to re-iterate here:

Pressure gravitates.
Pressure can have a negative value.
Positive Pressure makes a Positive contribution to Gravity.
Negative Pressure makes a Negative contribution to Gravity.

Now just for a moment going back to the compressed spring: This is outward directed pressure and is called Positive Pressure. Positive Pressure makes a Positive contribution to Gravity.

Einstein introduced the Cosmological Constant when he realised that the equations could not 'maintain' a static universe, which he and everyone else wanted. So the A's initial purpose was a balance to oppose 'attractive' gravity and stabilise the universe. (Which no one knew was expanding, or even had expanded.)

Bearing that in mind, Einstein's equations make sense whether the cosmological constant A is positive or negative. He realised this and in order to achieve his ends he gave it a positive value. A negative value yields ordinary attractive gravity. But a Positive value yields a uniform Negative Pressure

It is also a constant uniform pressure and does not directly exert a force which pressure differences do.




The Cosmological Constant, Dark Energy, the Inflaton Field, Repulsive Gravity are all terms for something we don't really know about.

However, the Inflaton field comes with an explanation for how it works, as well as solving many other problems. There are hundreds of theories that reside under the 'Inflation' Umbrella. I'm not going to 'detail' them any further here ... But some of them are so simple, and solve so many problems you just can't help feeling that they have to be right ... lol.

Basically its possible for a negative pressure to arise, in fact the odds are favourable. It does not have to arise everywhere at once. It does not require special conditions

Linde's latest equations show that that the negative field could have emerged from a size smaller than 10^-33 centimetres across (planck length ?) and would only needed to 'weigh' as much as a grain of dust (10^-5 grams ?).

From this grain of dust the equations can build a whole universe, with all the matter and space we currently observe. But to keep this in perspective the 'grain of dust' would have had to have a energy density above 10^94 grams.

To add to this simplicity it needs no special 'designer' energy bowl to release its energy. It can operate from a standard energy bowl ie: the mexican hat version is not required.

The problem with this is that 'negative gravity' is counter intuitive.

cool bananas ... greg