Proof that the universe is eternal?

[Profpat]

Hey, one or two more things.
Once upon a time atoms were the smallest thing. Our knowledge of protons is as a baby knows calculus. It is comparative to living in the 1950's era and there is no Watson and Crick, yet. To predict the half life of a proton and not fully understand the mechanism of time is ironic, the birth of a proton is the key to understand how and why it might decay. To claim to accurately guess the half-life of a proton and then to assume the nature of gravity and time and acceleration and the effects of relativity in the quantum world, funny how it sounds to me. I find in my studies that the ones who know the least, boast arrogantly the most. Protons are an area of minimal true knowledge.

You're right joshua. much is to be learned.

I have my own theory regarding the formation of the proton, it's located at:
( http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-t...2803-idea.html ). You'll to to access it through a PDF File or go to post #40 on that thread. I think you might find it interesting. Any comments or questions you may have can be posted at that thread.

Best,

Pat

[michael turner]

Hi Cloud chaser,
I believe that I know, my opinion, what the flaw in your argument is. It is that you are under the impression that it is not possible to age at the the speed of light. You believe that a photon does not decay or use energy. I suggest a unique original thought solution.

Example:
Light can travel through a vaccum and then slow down through a substsance then instanteously pick up speed through a vaccum again.

Discussion:
I believe energy is used in this process of light regaining speed and therefore a photon decays, a little planck bit. This also suggests that proper time goes on at the, speed of light, photon relative to itself. In other words photon's should decay, undetectably to us yet measured by there gain in momentum from one medium to the next.


Devil's Advocate:
You may say that the actual wavelength and frequency don't change that we notice so how could it be that the energy changes? After all the total energy of the photon = the frequency of the photon multiplied by the Planck constant.

Rational:
I would suggest to you that the energy is input back at the source of radiation as an equalization of magnetic field traveling the length of the radiation field. It is a part of the understanding of quantum entanglment that has physists baffled. The source of radiation has the nature to supply a constant magnetic field strength as a stabolization of the structure of a photon's electromagnetic field. This process keeps the photon's frequency and wavelength constant as the overall energy of the source is deminished.

Afterthought:
This concept implies that Red shift of the universe is an increase in acceleration, therefore the universe is expanding at an increase rate, and not a direct photon decay and yet the photon still uses energy. This took me a while to work out so I do not expect too many to catch on because of preconcieved bias, but it also implies a mechanism of instantaneous transmission of information over distance, (independent of distance) which explains spooky action at a distance, quantum entanglment.

Sincerely,
Michael Turner

[Max™]

Here is the theory:
We cant go the speed of light, BUT... photons go the speed of light all the time. Sooooo.... relative to us, time on a photon stands still, and relative to a photon.... speeding around at the speed of light... time on earth and the universe is infinite... which means relative to a photon, the big crunch or heat death have already happened.... BUT, that would mean photons could not exist! If the universe has ended in a big crunch or heat death, that means no more energy, no more light, no more photons. But still they exist! So this must mean that the universe doesn't end in heat death or the big crunch. The universe must be eternal.

Bravo, wonderful thought.

It was something along those lines which got me investigating and led me to find that weird rate of time constant Einstein placed.

With that in place, a photon should experience accurate time (zero mass), yet no time should pass for a photon.

How to resolve that? As was said, it is improper to consider a beam of light's frame of reference. If you tweak that rate of time value the right way, then to a beam of light the past and future are contained within it's "Now", or interacted with period of time.

The beginning of the Universe was like a ball of yarn, and the heat death is the frayed ends as they unravel.

What we call a photon is a narrow slice of what it would claim itself to be.

Time does not exist as we perceive it, we only see a narrow slice of it's breadth.

[michael turner]

Actually joshua, it appears the proton has no observed half life. This upset some physicists and so they proposed a half life to the proton to be AT LEAST: 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years. That is 10 to the 36th power.

Also if you look cross eyed, you can see your nose.

Best ,

Pat

Hey Pat,
Did it occur to you that as the nucleus of a cell decays rapidly once the cell mambrane is stripped away so to might a proton decay more rapidly once it is stripped away from an atom's protection?