C squared

[neutralino]

The scalar product of absolute acceleration (a) and the space-time metric (r) is the square of lightspeed (c): a∙r=c. However, since absolute acceleration is not detectable, c seems to lack physical meaning.

Can you define what you mean by "absolute acceleration" in this sense?

[AntonioLao]

"absolute acceleration"

it is the ratio of primary repulsive forces and unit mass not zero mass. If the latter is defined then the primary force could be infinity. If mass is described by Hadamard matrices then it could never be zero. On the other hand, Hadamard matrices could also described the zero of electric and color charges.

[spacedout]

It's easy to understand the C^2 in energy if our world is made of steps in 3 dimension x,y,z.
A long cycled path of these steps would make a universe and a step added or subtracted from the cycle will cause the shape of the path to change (vibrate). A wave passing through the 3-dimensional alignment would be composed of compacted or rarefied crossed chain propagations. The crossing chains results in thre number of points in a row = to the number of rows in a ccwp. The longer the row the slower the travel of the chains due to in-line identity transfers of steps. The velocity is = to the inverse of the number of points/chain. Lets look at a 3-4-5 right triange = 9 points/row + 16 points/row = 25 points/row. Sense a step in time is also a step in distance and also energy then the 25 point diagonal is made by an object by moving 9x points in 9t and then moves on to 16x points in 16t to make the 5 units distance of the diagonal -- if the 25 steps occured on the x or y axis it still would take 5 units of distance to travel in 25 units of time. In this way a stepped system can simulate the same speed in any direction. Sense the object has a given number of steps in it must travel along the y direction as y stepped units that are smaller and faster also for the x steps.

From the above it can be seen that E = NC^2 in which C^2 has a size has the speed of light of which the chain length is c. N is the number os C^2 crossed chain wave particles that correspond to the number of C^2 Planck quantum of light in the mass of an object. This is the reason for E = MC^2









a

[spacedout]

If a basic Planck volume has millions of small ccwp's in its composition and if the average of all the x^2 component ccwp's, y^2 component ccwp's and all z^2 component wave particles average a speed of light then a photon of light would propagate through this at the speed C. However, C is also the energy energy steps along a chain while a ccwp has energy steps equal to rows times steps/row -- this means the energy E = C^2 in a Planck volume of space even though it is random movement -- a photon which is a Planck volume wavefront will have C^2 linear steps in the propagated wave. this is why E = mC^2, as m is the number of C^2 energy packets in a mass. Mass is the inverse of kinetic energy converted to random wave movement.

[spacedout]

A wave traveling through x,y,z stepps in a loop and a wave is composed of crossed chain waves the energy is spread between rows = steps/row then the energy in quantum steps is p^2 where each row has p number of active points on the time-line segments. The longer the chains the slower the wave -- in other words S = 1/p, but p^2 is the energy in the crossed chain wave particle. Squaring S which is also the size of a ccwp that travels at C, the speed of light. From this how can E = mC^2 when E is inverted 1/p^2? Of course the energy is still p^2 no matter what, so C^2 is energy in a stepped system of basic C^2 crossed chain wave particles in matter. The number of ccwp's in matter give it quantum energy and mass. In this way E = MC^2 Where M is the number of C^2 basic quantum crossed chain wave particles in the object. Note that mass and energy in the equation are the same the number of steps in a ccwp. Even to me this is confusing.

[SteveA]

If energy is an additive entropy, it would seem likely to be proportional to the logarithm of a length of a loop, but this would be closer to the macroscopic and statistical version of energy and not the quantized spectra version corresponding to discrete phenomenon.

For example, knowing the position of an object within a set of 3 properties gives us the equivalent of log(3)/log(2)~=1.585 binary digits of information. Knowing a second property of this object that can be in one of 4 states gives us another log(4)/log(2)=2 binary digits of information and these are additive: 1.585+2=3.585=log(3*4)/log(2). In this manner we can construct a property similar to classical energies, though it removes the direct representation of discreteness and the influences that prime relationships between quantities can have. Retaining a lower level view could be helpful.

As a sidenote, in that specific example above, I tend to assume that these two properties cannot truly be determined entirely orthogonal and independent of each other, otherwise we should be able to treat them as existing as two separate objects with orthogonal properties. If we see these as possessed by a single object, then some asymmetry should be involved and for example, likely 1 or more the 3*4=12 possible combinations of these pairs of properties is denied, so I'd assume fewer than 12 states (and likely it would be a prime number, like 11, though removing only a single state also leaves some problems with symmetry and it may be that this specific example I gave may not be possible to observe as a fundamental particle and might appear as continually entangled with, or a force that influences, other objects).

I assume there exists a non-directly observable process similar to universal expansion that is simply the construction of the largest quantity as a void - or volume without form. It's basically just a growing natural number line, though we could likely consider it looped back to an observational point. Perceptions would then appear similar to mapping other trajectories along a number line that intersect it at various points and can make it appear to be folded into other volumes (such as the chaotic properties of vacuum energy for space).

A consideration here, if we learn properties of space over time, the immediate physical perceptions of the body appear 1 or 2 dimensional. From there we learn about depth or the 3rd dimension an could recognize stationary objects in a (learned) 3 dimensional space. From there we could learn to predict properties regarding periodic motions in a 3 dimensional environment (so that would be similar to the conventional 4th dimensional view, though with motions of objects in 3 dimensions forming closed loops or orbitals and cycles in time), and similarly we could witnesses these also change over time with properties similar to a 5th dimension etc.

A close correlation here is with various orders or derivatives of motion as position, velocity, acceleration, jerk etc. and we could see intelligence similar to an integration that performs an inverse process to differentiation as changes in time, and then we could see dimensions similar to the degrees of polynomials required to describe a motion.

... I'm just tossing out some ideas. Thanks for your posts, "Spacedout"

[spacedout]

Steve -- I'm pleased that someone like you has gotten involved in this way of thinking about time, distance and energy as a x,y,z stepped loop system -- most people wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole. As I said before I'm confused about my theory and the formula E = MC^2. The speed of light is C and is the inverse of the number of active steps in a row of crossed chains of a crossed chain wave particle (rows = steps/row). This means the number of steps in a crossed chain wave particle would be C^2 which is also the energy in a crossed chain wave particle. Stepped theory states that a diagonal must be (x^2 + y^2 +z^2) = D.

However, we know that the energy is not directly related to the speed of light but is the inverse of the speed of light, as said in the theory. If the speed of light is known then we know that the energy, in say a photon, is 1/c^2 and to get this the speed of light has to be squared. I don't see this in Einsteins E = MC^2 but because there is only one sized ccwp that gives the speed of light (an average sized ccwp) a direct correlation between C^2 could be made without having to know the existance of the inverse function of the speed of light C = 1/p where p in the number of points in a chain of a crossed chain wave particle.

If E is quantum steps and what I have said is right then E = MC^2 is also to quantum mechanics.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

QM is equal to E = MC^2 is equal to QM...

Physics just has their guage metrics confused and conflated...

Study the Planck metrics in relation to all physics' theories, and you'll find the discrepancies...

You'll also need to know which probability math system they are using__Ergodicity or least squares, i.e., Boltzmann(wrong) or Gauss(right)...

[spacedout]

Thanks Lloyd -- I'm sure it would be -- however, my stepped theory in which energy, distance, and time are the same thing -- using this to find energy for a quantum ccwp composing light seems to be flawd. For the value C = 1/p where p is the number of steps on a chain of a ccwp
The energy is p the number of step/row. Then C^2 = 1/P^2.... P^2 is the total number of steps in a ccwp that makes all matter and radiation. What the formula says is that C^2 is not energy but represents the reciprocal 1/p^2 of energy. C^2 p^2 = 1 -- the greater the value of C^2 the lower the value of p^2. Of course C is constant and the energy in a basic ccwp is the reciprocal of C^2 is also a constant. So if C is known it will have a constant value for energy -- would this still fit in to the equation E = MC^2. Does this fit uantum mechanics Lloyd or is it faulse? You know more about quantum mechanics than I do.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Thanks Lloyd -- I'm sure it would be -- however, my stepped theory in which energy, distance, and time are the same thing -- using this to find energy for a quantum ccwp composing light seems to be flawd. For the value C = 1/p where p is the number of steps on a chain of a ccwp
The energy is p the number of step/row. Then C^2 = 1/P^2.... P^2 is the total number of steps in a ccwp that makes all matter and radiation. What the formula says is that C^2 is not energy but represents the reciprocal 1/p^2 of energy. C^2 p^2 = 1 -- the greater the value of C^2 the lower the value of p^2. Of course C is constant and the energy in a basic ccwp is the reciprocal of C^2 is also a constant. So if C is known it will have a constant value for energy -- would this still fit in to the equation E = MC^2. Does this fit uantum mechanics Lloyd or is it faulse? You know more about quantum mechanics than I do.

You'd have to describe your physical model better, so I can more accurately follow what you are really saying...

Are you assuming a physical fundamental substance model...?
Are you assuming absolute c, and shared group velocities of, in all directions...?
Are you assuming wave centers of oscillations, represented by your chain analogy model...?
Are you assuming quantization of space...?

There's a lot of questions that I would need you to answer, to answer your question, but generally imo, all phenomena fit well within both QM and RM__without conflict, if its within Planck and Einstein 4D realities... And I don't mean exaggerations, but I just can't follow precisely enough, what you've thus far posted...

Dave, Tim and I use Va = Vu + Vr to represent the three velocity configurations of c...