| Introduction
As Hume expressed in his old years, humanity will never be able to [physically] see into the deepest secrets of matter, space and time due to our own limitations, however I believe that we could make a faithful representation of such puzzles with the help of our mind.
BETWEEN THE DEVIL AND THE DEEP BLUE SEA
(Article number five)
“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.” [Albert Einstein]
“I personally like to regard a probability wave as a real thing, certainly as more than a tool for mathematical calculations… How could we rely on probability predictions if we do not refer to something real and objective?” [Max Born on quantum mechanics]
I’m glad to know that a good part of my previous articles have been welcomed with a mix of confronting feelings and emotions… after all, we are just humans. It will take some time before, those who had manifested sincere interest on them, will be able to process in their minds some of the concepts expressed in plain and simple words. It won’t be an easy task to accept the representation of reality in other fashion completely different than a pure “abstract mathematical formalism.”
Today as usual, I will talk more about those alien “propositions” and “universe of discourses” that in just a matter of days have earned the attention of so many people interested in the secrets of our universe and how the last was actually seen through alien eyes.
But before going straight ahead to analyze in detail a couple of physical phenomena that have been the center of countless investigations worldwide, allow me to quote a small paragraph about the dangerous “scattering” of probabilistic conclusions from those who believe themselves to be the rightful ambassadors of the truth:
“To be fair, some recent works deal with the latest results, which would be excellent news were it not for the fact that the authors often embark on wild speculations. This is a dangerous trend, as much for the public at large as for philosophers, who have difficulty finding their way, especially since some reputable physicists are among the writers. They certainly deserve praise for reporting on the current avenues of research, but they mislead the reader by not sufficiently warning* him or her that these avenues may well lead nowhere. It is so easy to dream with the help of some mathematics in the wonderland of general relativity.” [“Quantum Philosophy” Roland Omnes, physics professor].
I guess you will find easier to understand why aliens find themselves “between a rock and a hard place.”
It took millenniums in the history of those worlds before accepting such concepts as “instantaneous action of the entire universe upon violations of its rules,” “Faster than light speed” or “infinitesimally small specks of energy and mass.” On the other hand, humans haven’t had any problem in accepting (without unanimity) an incredibly formal concept of a “wave function.” Due [in part] to the obvious impossibility of explaining a paradoxical limitation in the act of a simultaneous measuring of the position and the momentum of a human-assumed-to-exist “sub-atomic particle,” such “partial compromise” immersed in a background of probabilistic approaches came to the rescue of an old vision of reality.
“Science should never compromise on the strict basis of satisfying merely blind demands imposed by a bunch of happy observers.” “Said to me once an alien colleague not long ago”
Was Einstein wrong when he stated the speed of light as a universal constant? Of course not! The speed of light [and we know that light is made out of photons whose nature was no other than that of bosons] was the fastest one a quantum of energy could propagate across the ether. The speed of propagation of quantized energy throughout space always depends on a necessary feedback mechanism found in the nature of the ether. We have learned recently from alien harmonics that the speed of an electron and that of the photon as well were the same in the vacuum even though we now know that electrons were nothing more than E-M energy re-modulated at both sides of two atomic couplings. Fermions [outside the atom] ultimately were the “manufacture” of energy of two [bonding] fermions made possible through the existence of a bond or “entangled couplings” provided the right supply of external energy. We have said [make no mistake about it] that such phenomenon occurred at every scale in the structure of the atom, inside the nucleus, the molecule, the crystal and so on.
So, we can see that electrons are more complex in their physiognomy than their “primitive cousins” we know as photons. The spin of E-M energy modulated inside an entangled coupling with the capacity of modulation equal to “one-electron mass” is what aliens know as electrons. The same conditions for modulation but inside “quarks bonding” are responsible for the scattering of “protons” and “neutrons” outside the atom once a higher and denser energy was provided by particle collisions inside “atom smashers.”
After this short recapitulation of concepts I believe we could continue with the truth behind the speed of light. So, Einstein was right in his conclusions. He ignored the roll of mass in the propagation of a quantum across the vacuum and that was unfortunate, but hey! No one is perfect! [Not even aliens ok?]
Is then a contradiction here when I spoke of the existence of a speed faster than light [in more than one case] in the realm of physical reality?
|  Contents | | |
Latest 5 articles | | |
Article Tools | | |
Featured Articles | | | |  | |
Linear Mode
