[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Graybeard Well give it back Michael, as neither Dave nor Rascal appear to be able to find it. cool bananas ... greg

Oh,all right then! Cheers my Aussie hoppo.




regards michael

[dleviwing]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff (Einstein wasn't the only one who acquired headaches from 'particles'.)

My aces from particle theorist are a little further down but I don’t believe the answers are totally in the wave concepts of waveicles.

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by dleviwing My aces from particle theorist are a little further down but I don’t believe the answers are totally in the wave concepts of waveicles.

What we may be orbiting here, Dave, is an issue of vocabulary.

- RP

[Lloyd Gillespie]

You better dig a little deeper Rascal, particles are absolutely real. It's all about figuring out where and how they're formed...

Lloyd

Originally Posted by RascalPuff A'particle' has traditionally presumed to have a discontinuous surface and to be the constituent building block of the entire physical universe. A particle is anticipated as being contained by a distinct 'surface', separating it from surrounding space. It doesn't look like there are any particles - but rather, surfaceless wave and field systems - 'standing before us'... Regards. - RP

[RascalPuff]

Lloyd:
Are you referring to 'standing field particles'?

- RP

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Lloyd: Are you referring to 'standing field particles'? - RP

No, I'm referring to the particles, particle smashers have found, but that doesn't rule out the possibility of discovering particles in fields, also, as all is matter in a void... To me, a photon is also a particle... It's too bad they had such a severe setback at CERN, on the LHC. Now, it won't be until next year, before deeper particle physics tests can be done...

Lloyd

[dleviwing]

I would think that the key to knowing what a particle is would be to understand the stuff it is made of. The substance of the universe is divided between two fundamental actions: Some of it is expanding and some of it is condensing. We tend to call the stuff that is expanding; space, aether, quantum foam, space-time, and even fields of Higgs Bosons. The stuff that is condensing tends to form autonomous units we tend to call particles. Understanding the properties of motion and bonding of this stuff will allow one to understand the intermediate states of this stuff resulting from these properties.

Waves are not autonomous; they are the stuff in a state of vibrating motions. When the vibrations are confined into localized volumes with angular momentum they form particles that influence the ajoining environment or Aether to produce harmonics of the particles primary wave and thus producing fields that are mistakenly considered as part of the particle. On their own in an absolute void, particles have neither charge nor fields.

If you view space as a chaotic collection of wave interference domains, you realize that they are always a wave interference domain of maximum and a domain of minimum spatial density; these are the Higgs particles even though they are in a constant state of chaotic change and can also be considered a field just like the photon concepts.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

If all is matter in a void Dave, then a wave would be required to be particle matter motion, also. It's just our language differences, that's between our different understandings... Either a wave is real matter in motion, or it's not, and something else is in the void___I think not... The foundation of this theory works too well, as is, without cluttering additions... I see the wave as just the abstract idea, of our real knowledge of matter in motion. IMO, it's all just different varrying densities of matter motion___Waves is just our psychological abstract descriptor, just as looking at the ocean's waves. The waves are no more than our phschological abstract descriptor of water and air molecules in motion___The wave is truly abstract, as to fundamental reality... There's no problem using the term, as long as we understand its true fundamental. It's the same as distance motion substituting for time, to make fundamental theory clearer...

Lloyd

[dleviwing]

In a sense Lloyd, waves conduct across or through matter. Just like in air and water, the spatial density of the interference domains (Higgs Bosons) change physical size and density to produce a wave through space yet they remain in a relatively localize volume of space; no traveling photons. The physical characteristics of these domains are what we interpret as different photon wavelengths and fields. The only matter that moves linearly through space is the matter that condenses to form particle wave symmetry. The only true particle only occurs when a volume of matter has all its motion in a state of linear velocity; possibly the state of matter before the event of the big bang.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by dleviwing In a sense Lloyd, waves conduct across or through matter. Just like in air and water, the spatial density of the interference domains (Higgs Bosons) change physical size and density to produce a wave through space yet they remain in a relatively localize volume of space; no traveling photons.

Yes, true enough, but a Higgs Boson, never yet found, may travel as a photon packet wave, just as does gamma rays, and other cosmic rays... I don't yet accept the part of quantum mechanics you do, as to photon travel. I still see them as traveling... There is plenty of evidence for both views, still... If you could convince me, be my guest... I'm familiar with the localized volume of space model of Higgs Bosons, but do not yet accept the dynamics of the model. As a matter of fact, my physicist friend from Maine, Jerry Merrill, gave me the very drawing just last week, but I'm still hard pressed to make it work as he or you have yet explained...

Originally Posted by David The physical characteristics of these domains are what we interpret as different photon wavelengths and fields. The only matter that moves linearly through space is the matter that condenses to form particle wave symmetry.

I probably expressed myself wrong here again, as to what I'm calling a particle. All I really mean is it's matter waves, as photonic matter waves, or Higgs Bosonic matter waves. I agree the only true particles are condensed matter waves, but where they condense and exactly how is still an open issue... Do they condense in one black hole/star/galaxie, or many black holes/stars/galaxies? My reading is this is still an open issue.

Originally Posted by David The only true particle only occurs when a volume of matter has all its motion in a state of linear velocity; possibly the state of matter before the event of the big bang.

Now, this may be quantum mechanics view, as well as yours, but IMO, linear velocity, through chirality, must develop angular momentum, to create containment of the linear forces, to form any type of matter particle genesis. Chirality simply means handedness, as you may well know, and is of yet, only being studied in chemistry and biology, and the chemistry of liquid crystals, as far as I can determine. IMO, we need to investigate this handedness issue quite vigorously. Here are a few sites:
http://books.google.com/books?id=MMz...AbDvo#PPA68,M1
http://depth-first.com/articles/2007...rality-problem
As it appears in chemistry and biology, it also must be a quantum property... Chirality would create the containment pressures of wave matter necessary to form real particles, and all we need our models to form first is hydrogen and helium plasmas___The rest is universal evolution, from black holes, first stars, whatever...

Lloyd