Amending Immaterial Science

[austintorn@aol.com]

Amending Immaterial Science

Science itself has gone off into some mystical and phantasmagorical areas such as “spooky action at a distance”, the ending of reality at quantum levels and also within black holes, statistical/random probability basis of events, Bell’s nonlocality, aether wind, etc., and so we hope to counter such mystical imaginations herein, for example, such as by showing that matter/fields are not at all distinct but form a continuum, and more, demonstrating that all is real, as well as what is absolute and what isn’t.

[Graybeard]

And just in time buddy .......

cool bananas ... greg

[austintorn@aol.com]

Action at a Distance

Quantum theory has some grotesquely erroneous interpretations of nature, such as its distortion of the field in order to still have discrete particles, which must then exchange virtuals such as virtual photons (Coulomb force) or gravitons (gravity) to accomplish action at a distance (a phenomenon that has puzzled physicists for centuries).

However, the nonphysical agent that controls the emission and absorption of the virtuals would seem to be inscrutable.

An electron and a proton may combine to produce a hydrogen atom, emitting a photon with a few electron volts, which is 13.6 for the ground state. Since energy is always conserved, the only energy going in is what was present in the first place: the rest energy of the electron and the proton. There is nothing else.

Since a hydrogen atom’s mass is slightly less than the sum of the masses of the isolated electron and proton this accounts for the energy given off in the photon. There is no need for any other explanation such as involving electrostatic potential energy.

As for gravitons, they are so elusive that quarks would be easy to isolate by comparison; however, they are inconsistent with Einstein’s profoundly successful depiction of a gravitational field as a space-time distortion, yet, to be fair, Einstein gave no reason for why space is curved near a mass; it just is, so this kind of sacrifices the physicality of gravitational fields by decoupling them from rest energy.

When molecules, atoms, or particles approach an object, especially a massive one, they cannot maintain their increasing kinetic energy and so they typically emits radiant energy into space (such as the case of an accretion disk around a black hole). The ultimate source for this radiation must be the rest mass of the incident matter. Like the Coulomb potential in the hydrogen atom, there is no other source.

Matter is not distinct from the field it generates—matter/field is a continuum. The gravitational field an object produces is as physically real as it is.

So it is that electrons and protons are not really point-like particles (or quark points), for this would have all of the rest energy stored in an infinitely small volume, giving it near to infinite energy density that would even make it a gravitational singularity. Plus, if point-like, why would an electron and a proton in proximity incur a change in the energy stored in their infinitely small regions?

Another nonstarter would be the concept of electrons and protons as probability waves propagating through space with their very existence dependent on interaction with other particles or photons.

Well, while not totally ruled out, these explanations are neither compelling nor enlightening, but still fantasies, as they have no real explanation, plus why circumvent the simplest explanation for action at a distance: The energy of a particle’s rest mass is distributed through space. When two particles interact at a distance it is because bits of the the energy density of their respective rest masses coexist there.

The source of any radiating energy, such as in the making of a hydrogen atom, is the interacting particles’ fields, its magnitude dependent on the spacial separation between the particles.

The wave functions of atomic energy levels in quantum physics are a glimpse of energy’s distributed composition, for Nature is a continuum, as we will hope to show more of.

Compartmentalizing properties of particles by reducing them to points by some (old) physicists only causes them to later try to recombine the pieces in the search for a unified field theory.

A particle is a certain amount of energy with a single distributed substructure that generates all of its properties. Matter and its fields are inseparable.

There can really be no enigmatic processes accounting for action at a distance, for these cannot escape the conservation of energy, as all forms have the same level of realness.

Field/matter duality dictates that a system’s maximum negative field potential is equal to its available rest energy. This will be called the Maxfield constraint.

In this thread, not everything we suggest will be exactly right, but any good explanation will easily surpass the none or the nebulous, such as magical and virtual force carriers arising from who knows where.

[austintorn@aol.com]

THE FOREVER FIELDS

Michael Faraday introduced
One of the most radical ideas in science.

They thought that he had,
For once, gone too far.

Particles became rather irrelevant,
Being mere spigots through which forces flowed.
The real stuff of reality was the forces flowing,
The particles being only the source.

The burden of reality had shifted,
For the space between particles became primary.
Particles were only the intersection
Of the forces that wove the universe.

Forces create stresses in space,
A superhighway
Of how to get from here to there.

An electron wiggles in the sun,
Tweaking the E/M field;
The ripples travel for 8 minutes
Then tickle an electron in your eye.

You see the light;
Light is a tweak.

Physics has never been the same since.
The field concept became real,
The idea being the same as the thing,
Fudging forever the difference
Between something and nothing;

Yet, fields are made of something real,
For they have energy.

Einstein called the field that be
“A change in the concept of reality…
The most profound and fruitful one
That has come to physics since Newton.”

Matter, then, is simply a place where
Some of the field happens to be concentrated.

Matter travels like a wave in a rope,
But, the rope itself does not travel.

The field is not so much
Something in space,
But more like of space.

This is why all particles of a type are identical;
For they are each manifestations
Of their fields everywhere the same.

The field takes on a life of its own,
Even when the object that created it is gone.
The traveling kinks continue;
They propagate endlessly.

Where the vacuum is free of matter
It is not free of field, but filled with it.
Energy and mass are the same stuff,
But it takes a whole lot
Of energy to make mass.

Field is thus the bridge
Between matter and empty space.

Fields can’t go away,
As they’re part of the
Structure of the vacuum;
When in their quietest possible state
They are the vacuum.

This is about as close to nothing
As anything ever gets.

Forces act on things,
While matter is acted upon;
You can walk through a field,
But you cannot walk through a wall.

Kinks in fields can pile atop one another;
Kinks in matter hold each other at arm’s length.

Yet, somehow, beneath it all,
They are kindred spirits.

[analog]

Austin,

Have you been copying and pasting from the Internet again....lmao. For much of what you said on a quick run through, just replace 'energy field' with an FS motion field with varying degrees of motion distribution thus spatial density surrounding a structred mass system and you are basically addressing what Lloyd and I are discussing per the interactions of unstructured field with structured massive portions of the same field. Whether field or structure it's all the many forms that fundamental substance takes and whether gravity, electromagnetism, weak or strong it's all the many forms that absolute motion takes. Sorry to disrupt if such theories were those you were addressing as needing help. Lol

Continue on. I think you're making some valid points.

[austintorn@aol.com]

(Yes, analog, energy field and FS motion distribution would be the same)

The Aether Wind

Michelson and Morley looked for a subtle effect of the aether wind, but its consequences would be anything but mild:

Terrestrial telescopic images would vary over time. A light source only 10 km distant would be blown several meters off course during a few hours of the Earth’s rotation, causing the images of fixed object to rise and fall. This does not happen. Nor would GPS work.

So, where is the aether wind?

The aether is absolute space. From the WMAP CMB dipole anisotropy the Earth’s motion through the CMB has been calculated to be 370 km/s.

Since the net momentum of the CMB rest frame is so close to zero (isotropic), it constitutes a superbly accurate measurement of absolute space.

Matter and energy inhabit space.

Absolute space means absolute motion, which in turn means an absolute value for the speed of light, which is a theoretical limit, since it requires the absence of all fields, so it will always be slightly faster than a photon can move.

A moving reference frame preserves the speed of light relative to absolute space because the superposition of motion and distance is a fourth-dimensional vector field scaled by the speed of light.

[austintorn@aol.com]

Gravitational Potential Field

The Shwarzchild radius, 2GM/cc, is the limit where the magnitude of gravitational potential is negative unity, corresponding to an energy loss equal to the rest mass of a black hole’s captured object. This confirms that a system’s negative field potential is equal to its available rest energy (Maxfield constraint).

So, there’s no gravitational force/potential and energy density going to infinity within the Shwarzchild radius or becoming an imaginary complex number, for the ultimate source of the energy is the captured object’s own rest mass, which it cannot exceed. (Not total energy(relativistic mass), which includes kinetic energy, for gravitational potential is not related to the total energy(relativistic mass), as we will see much later on.)

[austintorn@aol.com]

The Consequences of An Eternal Universe Upon a Black Hole

A requirement of our eternal universe is the renewability of all matter and energy, which means that a black hole’s material capture is a reversible process.

But first, let us not that any material whose kinetic energy exceeds its rest mass can escape from a black hole. A proton with a kinetic energy of 2.99mcc at a gravitational potential of -0.99 has, upon reaching its freedom from capture, a remaining kinetic energy of 2.0mcc, for it has lost only one rest mass.

For a matter particle whose kinetic energy equals it rest energy, its total energy is 2m, giving an escape velocity of 86.6% of the speed of light. (for photons, it is ‘c’)

Unlike matter(such as a proton), light (a photon) cannot carry kinetic energy, so it loses all or nearly all of its intrinsic energy to a black hole’s surface potential—so, black holes separate matter from light, either trapping the light or redshifting it to negligible energy.

The Shwarzchild radius is not a place where reality ends, but is simply a region specifying a negative unity gravitational potential energy. Gravitational potential dilates the rate of internal change of a system but this has nothing to do with its progress through space; thus object are not frozen forever at the threshold of a black hole’s event horizon.

Maximal gravitational potential only exists near a black hole’s surface (its veneer), which is relatively thin. Potential is zero at a black hole’s center.

Black holes are not dead-ends form which Hawking radiation is the only escape. They will serve, as we will see much later, as a component of an eternal steady state universe.

There is no place for mysticism in the universe (but in dark caves), for the universe is real, infinite, perfect, eternal, and deterministic.

[Bogie]

This is a great idea for a thread, especially considering that man's imagination has lead us to where we are and will lead us out of it .

I have a few examples of immaterial science when we amend the current batch.

[austintorn@aol.com]

You could put them now, Bogie.

There's the questions of whether electrons are probability clouds or if they just really do zip around the nucleus really fast like Rutherford thought.

Or how the two-slit interference pattern really works when one photon at a time goes through.

Or more mundane as to how refraction really works.

Or anything that now has some crazy, magical kind of answer.