Welcome to the ToeQuest.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    quantum mass revised

    The successful formulation of quantum energy was preceded by a formalism using canonical conjugation. This is accomplished by generalized coordinates of position and velocity differentiable over a Lagrangian function and by generalized position and momentum differentiable over a Hamiltonian function. Before the use of operators, complex numbers, and complex matrices (spinors), these two formulations describe the natural interaction of real potential energy and real kinetic energy. The Lagrangian describes the difference; while the Hamiltonian, the sum. For a 1-particle system, the Hamiltonian is given by H1 = (1/m1)(1/2)(p1) + V1, while the Lagrangian is given by L2 = (m2)(1/2)(v2) - V2. In a 2-particle system, and if V1 = V2 then H1 + L2 = (1/m1)(1/2)(p1) + (m2)(1/2)(v2). Furthermore, if m = m1 = m2 then the result is a quadratic equation for the mass, m - 2m(H1 + L2)/v2 + p1/v2 = 0, whose solution factors are (m - p1/ v2) = 0 iff p1v2 = H1 + L2. These derivations imply that the quantum of mass is equal to the ratio of one particle momentum over the velocity of the other particle in the system. In deriving the differential form, one starts by noting that p2 = ∂L2/∂v2 and v1 = ∂H1/∂p1, equivalently, p2 v2 = ∂L2 and v1p1 = ∂H1. If p1 = p2 and v1 = v2 then ∂(pv) = ∂(H1 + L2) and the spacetime integral is pv = ∫∫∫∫∂(H+ L).
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  2. #2
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,619
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: quantum mass revised

    Well now that it is revised,what do we call it?And does this revision actually change anything? And if so what?


    regards michael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  3. #3
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: quantum mass revised

    Quote Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
    Well now that it is revised,what do we call it?And does this revision actually change anything? And if so what?
    The implication is that measuring mass requires at the least two particles. If there is only one particle, it cannot measure its own mass. mass equals the ratio of one particle's momentum over the other particle's velocity. The momentum of the universe is zero and that is why the mass of the photon is zero. However, the momentum of the photon is its energy divided by its speed.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  4. #4
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,619
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: quantum mass revised

    In calculating the quantum mass,are the calculations allowing for say dark matter?And what about the mass that is "slightly out of phase" with the physical continuum?Are these
    within the measurement parameters?



    regards michael
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  5. #5
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: quantum mass revised

    Quote Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
    are the calculations allowing for say dark matter?And what about the mass that is "slightly out of phase" with the physical continuum?Are these within the measurement parameters?
    When calculating mass and energy, the interest is always centered around their first power. The vacuum second power is completely or perfectly in phase otherwise matter and energy could be realized into the first power. The size of the universe is 99.99% vacuum, even the space between atoms are vacuum phases.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,619
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: quantum mass revised

    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
    When calculating mass and energy, the interest is always centered around their first power. The vacuum second power is completely or perfectly in phase otherwise matter and energy could be realized into the first power. The size of the universe is 99.99% vacuum, even the space between atoms are vacuum phases.
    That might very well be true for the physical universe as we know it? But this 99.99%
    is prehaps not so valid in the etheric universe.


    regardsmichael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  7. #7
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: quantum mass revised

    Quote Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
    But this 99.99% is prehaps not so valid in the etheric universe.
    Astrophysicists are looking and searching for the missing matter in order to fit theories.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,619
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: quantum mass revised

    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
    Astrophysicists are looking and searching for the missing matter in order to fit theories.
    Do you think though Antonio that they are looking in the right place?
    And secondly do astrophysicists accept that there is an etheric universe?


    regards michael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  9. #9
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: quantum mass revised

    Quote Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
    do astrophysicists accept that there is an etheric universe?
    They are using both ends of the electromagnetic spectrum in searching for waves of the ether. These signals seem too weak for state of the art instruments. However, new methods for detection are innovated frequently by some ingenious people.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,619
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: quantum mass revised

    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
    Astrophysicists are looking and searching for the missing matter in order to fit theories.
    That is excellent news Antonio,hope they find what they are looking for!


    regards michael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Quantum Gravity and Braided Particles
    By Tesla in forum Quantum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-24-2006, 12:40 PM
  2. Rearrangement of physic's foundation
    By Duane Ertle in forum Cosmology
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 02-17-2006, 02:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top