Philosophysics of a fundamental substance

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Here's another perspective perhaps....Consider what dynamics your infinite field would have on your universal finite volume if it were to be found with varying degrees of linear motion velocity through the infinite field.

Have you considered the fact that if this were true, then Va = Vu + Vr would be false...? Linear c velocity can not vary in vacuum, unless it encounters a more dense state of field to slow it from c...

This is the same as considering the dynamics of the Vr transverse universal field upon the structured system of the photon as it varies its linear velocity relative to c throughout its cycle. Near c velocity would mean that the photon was in sync with the gravitational transverse waves of the massive bodies motions through the unstructured field which establish solar and planetary orbits, etc., thus relative time would appear to have stopped for the photon per Relativity at the high velocity end of its cycle (contracted volume) due to all information of change being relayed by the transverse waves traveling at c due to structured mass moving through unstructured field. At the lower velocity end of its cycle (expanded volume) it would experience the interference of many gravitational waves and such rather than being transfered by just one as when near c velocity.

Now, here's a place I'm not following you. You seem to be implying a lower linear velocity at its expanded volume, and I only see linear c at all universal levels of the entire universal continuum. Yes, the frequency charges become lower as all scalar waves expand, due to transferring energy to a wider circle of waves and particles, but c is always c conserved in vacuum... I used to advocate a possibly lower velocity, and there still may be at limit, especially since Lene Hau's experiment has shown us light stopped, at a nearest possible absolute zero k, so maybe the super-symmetry would slow c at the recycle point state, which I really hadn't given much thought to, but I guess that's in the ball-park of the models also, even as I thought it so, years ago... What's your thoughts on that...?

The photon actually cycles through the field experiencing its dynamic interactions all the way from near c velocity to the lower limit velocities found within atomic structures and such. It witnesses the field through all stages of acceleration to c rather than just that implied by relativity as with its implication of relative time standing still, the same as the universal volume experiences the dynamics of the infinite cosmic field per its velocity realitive to c within it.

I don't know, but it seems like you may be getting steered a bit away from Va = Vu + Vr, as I see this as the entire Universe's constant variable state of true c velocity__c is always traveling at c, either in its Vu linear state, its Vr angular state, its Vr frequency state, or its Vu spin state, as the entire c system transfers motion from one source to another__and that's my understanding of how Dave has always interpreted it... Do you think maybe, you got a little mixed up here...? Also, it's a bit hard to follow the number of transverse and gravity wave analogies, where I think just waves of either high or low Vr will suffice... Just my opinion...

Not much different here, just trying to clarify our different systems' veiws... I also think it'd be best to stay away from relativity, and use absolute motions, until we reach more clarity of model views...

Getting there,
Lloyd

[analog]

Hmmm....where to start?

Here's how I see the conservation of c from angular momentum to linear motion. If you and I were jogging and I ran in a strait line while you ran in circles around me (as seen in some military films due to punishment) you would have to be going faster than me to keep up. Thus, you're linear value plus your angular value is equal to c if conserving c. Due to this, you will lose your ability to run around me sooner than I will lose my ability to run in a strait line, because I'm covering less linear distance per time. If we apply this to my thoughts, then the angular momentum has a value which sums to c through its velocity around the autonomous volume along with its forward linear velocity. Its angular frequency drops as its linear wavelength gets longer. The internal volume is in more of a linear state, whereby it is always at a higher frequency thus shorter wavelength than the angular momentum value which contains it. The frequency times the wavelength is always equal to c, which is how I conserve c. Thus, at c we would theoretically only have a pulse with no frequency or wavelength, which isn't possible. The frequency times the wavelength of the angular momentum equals c, along with the frequency times the wavelength of the internal FS contained by the angular momentum which is in a different state of motion more of a vibration, which means that due to the angular momentum traveling a greater linear distance per time as the volume nears c it will reach near pulse state of linear c faster, which means it can no longer encompass the internal volume, whereby if this whole process was condensing the volume all along to ever longer wavelength shorter frequency linear motion as with being the mechanics for physical Lorentz contraction due to linear motion, then a failure to contain the volume by angular momentum would cause a catastrophic release whereby all linear near c motion resonating against the domain of angular momentum was a potential energy state converted to kinetic outward expansion of the internal FS as the volume lost its linear velocity, whereby the volumes internal FS has no frequency and wavelength aspect relative to linear motion until it begins to linearly accelerate once again. C to me is an absolute distance measurement of motion with one degree of freedom or absolute linear velocity, any variance from this linear distance is conserved in other uniform Vu or random Vr linear distances per absolute time per varying states of motion , but the same absolute distance will be covered per unit of time, which establishes the conservation dynamics of Vu+Vr within a volume containing aspects of both.

I've been in contact with Dave the last couple of days by email, and per his offer I submitted my cycle model to him by way of email attachment. I'll let you know if he can decipher my ramblings....lol. As far as the light experiment. Light always travels through the same quantity of substance per unit of absolute time, thus if you condense a large volume of substance within a relatively short distance, light will have effectively slowed its linear propagation relative to us outside the condensate. If my theorizing is correct, then this would imply that the high density wave motions which linearly transfer the photons within the Bose Einstein Condensate are at such high frequency and short wavelength that the photons are linearly slowed by such a great degree. This gets into the refractive index of substances and such as the physical properties which allow for density of the FS within different substances linearly transfer photons at varying rates, as seen by the photon linearly accelerating when it hits the atmospheric density on the other side.

later,

Tim

[analog]

The angular momentum state can maintain the same frequency and wavelength with an increase in linear velocity but the orbital distance must decrease proportionally as with contraction of the structured volume. My main point is that different states of motion, whether angular, random, vibration, spin, etc. are all conservation forms of linear c, whereby a structure based on varying types will contract and eventually fail if accelerated towards c. I hope this makes sense, and its just my interpretation of the conservation of c through varying forms of motion which establish a system with varying Vu+Vr arrangements.

[analog]

Have you considered the fact that if this were true, then Va = Vu + Vr would be false...? Linear c velocity can not vary in vacuum, unless it encounters a more dense state of field to slow it from c...

Oh yea.....I'm not varying linear c in a vacuum. Linear c as with EM radiation is an aspect of frequency times wavelength whereby the product of the two is the speed of the wave. When dealing with EM radiation the wave speed limit of c is fixed whereby frequency and wavelength have a reciprocal relationship where an increase in one decreases the other proportionally to maintain the fixed speed limit of c. We know varying types of EM radiation by its frequency and wavelength relationship. The cycles of the photon I'm addressing are the physical mechanical aspects of frequency and wavelength of EM radiation, whereby the photon itself can vary its linear rate through the vacuum through phases of the cycle relative to the amplitude by which it expands and contracts, but with a higher frequency of expansion and contraction the process is taking place over shorter linear distances of propagation thus shorter wavelength whereby the product is c. With varying quantities of FS within the photon system, the amplitude by which these cycles take place will vary whereby changing the linear distance of propagation (wavelength) by which they take place thus also the frequency proportionally. Simply stated, the photonic structure can fluctuate its volume from wave to particle to wave a greater or lesser number of times per a fixed distance determining the type of EM radiation acknowledged by such as each type has a steady/consistent cycle process, but the more it does this within a distance the less the amplitude of expansion required to accomplish such whereby maintaining a given wavelength relationship. The less frequent it does this within a distance the more the process takes place over an increased distance, thus a greater amplitude for one cycle and longer wavelength.

later,

Tim

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Yeah Tim, those last few posts clarify some of my concerns, but I'm simply going to mention some of my other concerns I've been carrying since the `80's, about what is possible to describe and what is impossible to describe. It's all about modal quantification logic, which relates to much of what I've written about in 'East Meets West Logic', where epistemology__limits of knowledge__begin to play the larger role over our even possible explanations at the infinitesimal and infinite levels... That's why I mention what is theoretical and conjecture areas of our reasoning, so no one construes the thinking as factual, yet__not in all areas, but where I have stipulated such. It's just that our thinking, especially coming from two different models can be so confusing, since the comprehension between our minds is subject to the deep modal operations of our own brains, within the domain of their own wave fields, and the external finite, infinite and infinitesimal wave actions, we are trying to discuss... Every mathematician and logician has encountered this area of highly tentative thinking, whether mathematical operators' limits, or modal logical operators' limits. Math must be very careful that its lattice and matrix maths are applying to the underlying particle-wave realities, which much of math does not__and logic has to be very careful that it's modal probabilities, possibilities and necessities also apply to a sound particle-wave reality. Where these conditions are not strictly adherred to, we enter the states of mind, where we run into interpretation conflicts... This happens much more easily than one is aware of, due to the fact we are using a particle-wave dependent mind, to discuss the actual particle-wave fields, not only internally, but the greater Universal fields__also... Where infinitesimals of particle-wave motions, and infinities of particle-wave fields are communicated about__The Little Modal Demons Rear Their Ugly Little Heads...

Now, you may be trying to stay within the finite possible and necessary areas of logic explanation more than I am, I can't really tell, as I again see mistakes in both our posts, as we also ran into back last week or so... So, I'm gonna stand back for a while, until I can put the language together better, as I've recently been researching the modern problems with 'Modal Quantifier Logics and Maths...' From my reading, this problem has been with us for almost a hundred years now, and all admit it's not yet resolved. There seem to be only piecemeal attempts to solve for different areas of both math and logic, at the modal operator levels__as it gets so complex at the infinitesimal and infinite levels of variables and constants... Even if you notice right here at TQ, Antonio our best mathematician, is usually talking about 'squares of energy'__Now that may mean something to him, but it seems as though he's working only in pure mathematics to me, and there, to me, seems to be no clear path to practical applied mathematics in his mathematical ideas. I may be wrong about this, but I do know one can not do 'squares of energy' and have that particular math have any path bearing on the practical application, to the real particle-wave mechanics world. Imo, the lattice and matrix maths all just seem to relate to a very small part of our physical reality, such as the physical atoms that do form in geometric shapes, yet at the more fundamental level of base particle-wave mechanics, having only motion path dynamics of smooth transitions, as per cycloid mechanics, they fail miserably... This is just an example explanation of mine, showing where I fail to see the validity of much of the accepted modal maths and logics__which I've carried with me since my first deep investigations, back in the early `80's...

I just think it's a very confusing area to try and talk finities, infinitesimals and infinities__All At Once... The Modal Operators Are In Collision__Wave Collision Over-Load...

And Non-Linear Calculus and Algebra also have their Modal Limits...

Doesn't help much, but I'm taking another Look-See...

Later,
Lloyd

P.s.
For all we know Absolutely__All there is, is galaxy re-cycling of existing Universal matter, mass and its energies of motions of... This is All our instruments and measurements have witnessed__So Far...!!!

[analog]

P.s.
For all we know Absolutely__All there is, is galaxy re-cycling of existing Universal matter, mass and its energies of motions of... This is All our instruments and measurements have witnessed__So Far...!!!

I'm not certain to what extent you meant this, but I see our verification of recycle in many aspects science has observed which I know you're aware of so you must be referring to a certain aspect of re-cycle. In the micro world: a proton transforms into a nuetron through the process of electron capture; A nuetron reverts back to the more stable proton through the radioactive process of beta decay; There's nuclear fission where an atomic structure seperates to form two less massive atoms; nuclear fusion which is the reverse process; QED type interactions of the interactions with EM radiation and matter which shows that even light is subject to re-cycle; etc, etc. To me, these processes are dealing with the more fundamental forms of structured matter, whereby they may be seen as isolated events rather than part of a re-cycle system such as a galaxy, but these micro scaled re-cycle aspects are the micro mechanics by which a galaxy can re-cycle atoms into stellar structures, which create more heavier elements, which creates more complex structures, etc. whereby all perhaps adding to the increased mass value of the central black hole someday. I'm sure you meant this differently than I interpreted which may prove the other part of your post...lol..., but I see re-cycle aspects in many places as I know you're aware of all these things, but just thought I would add them for the less educated readers of the thread.

I'm not gonna be near on par with you in the many areas of logic and such which you study. I'm a practitioner of logic, but not an academic of such. I'll have to study many of the concepts to be able to have an intelligible conversation about it with you. Though I do think I understand many of your deeper implications in respect to a quantifier which could reduce the variables to an absolute ground state, if I'm interpreting correctly. I'll try to study some of the concepts a bit later and perhaps supply my opinions.

later,

Tim

[analog]

BTW Lloyd...If there's any two active members on here that can overcome the modal demons within two alternate routes of interpretation due to the modes by which individuals process information, then I believe you and I have the best chance of seeing within each others absolute logic even if dealing with such seeming complexity which merely needs unification within the most simplistic model which accounts for all observable phenomena. It's how we relate such complexity through simple interactions which is the key to grounding two minds within a common framework at this level, IMHO.

[analog]

Try this Lloyd. This is an excerpt from an email to Dave, which might help explain my position. I'm attempting to look deeply into the mechanics of conservation between systems of varying states of motion, such as is the state of our current universe. All internal varying states of motion within systems must be interconnected to the point of relating conservation throughout the entire volume, whereby such concepts as Lorentz contraction can be a quantized process within a system with varying states of motion. It's all a process to communicate between systems about their current states of motion relative to the conservation of c, whereby volumes or quantities of substance and motion are internally moved from system to system per the overall external process of expansion/contraction or wave/particle aspect taking place per linear velocity relative to c.

I've been trying to think of how to express what I'm seeing, and I think one way to encompass the concept would be to suggest that the entire universal volume goes through Lorentz type contraction and expansion relative to its linear velocity through the cosmic field as it propagates/cycles. This contraction and expansion aspect must be quantized whereby maintaining true c/absolute motion conservation of the whole. Therefore I see the quanta packets of EM radiation within our universe as the go between systems to this conservation aspect as they interact between an outer angular momentum domain of the universal volume, along with the angular momentum domains of internal structured matter per QM. This same process also takes place recursively within the photonic system whereby allowing them to propagate/cycle through its wave/particle or expansion/contraction states relative to its linear velocity through the universal field as conserved by c/absolute motion. I'm exploring the mechanics of conservation of the various systems as quantities/quanta of substance is moved from one state of motion to another, and am also exploring the instability of structures formed with varying types of motion to catastrophic breakdowns when nearing c linear velocities, which is the key to the recycle process of EM radiation and the universal volume, IMHO. We merely make structured systems subject to failure at high end linear velocity limits and make the lower end linear velocity limits the catalyst for the structuring phase of the process, whereby we maintain a perpetual cycle.
I've also implied that all systems containing a quantity of FS thus becoming a Va=Vu+Vr system has no linear motion value of its own other than that imposed by the larger scale gravitational waves of the Vr transverse motions of the universal medium of unstructured space due to the linear/falling motions of massive bodies or larger Va=Vu+Vr systems linear motion through the field as with setting up the mechanics of orbital velocity and rotation upon axis of the smaller mass orbiting the larger per GR. The same gravitational waves which establish planetary orbits also propagate EM radiation through its cycles as its Vu mass phase brings it into contact causing acceleration to c increasing Vu mass of the photon to the point of instability due to the varying forms of motion within the volume i.e. angular momentum domain housing other forms of Vu+Vr motions which are always at a higher linear frequency thus shorter wavelength than the angular momentum value which has to travel more distance in the same time to accomplish containment whereby to maintain the same frequency and wavelength per linear velocity it must contract to a smaller diameter orbit. It's just my attempts at a full conservation model which quantizes the conservation of all internal forms of motion by way of recursive processes whereby the universe gives us the means to compare the FS to itself at recursively lower resolutions.

I hope that helps, but I fear it may not....lol. I'm still counting on Dave to see enough into my ramblings to help me further describe what I'm seeing, or perhaps dismiss it all together due to an inconsistency in the relationship of such current concepts as QM and GR which he might see that I don't. I had to resend my ideas today so he should get back to me soon.

later,

Tim

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Yeah Tim, that P.s. statement was only applying to the macro Universe, as to what we absolutely scientifically know... Just threw it in for fun, but we do have Hubble and other instrument observations of galaxies gobbling whole galaxies... We have no absolute experimental proof of Big-Bang, Inflation, Std. Model, etc., on and on__though we do have many of the proofs to what you mentioned... The neutron back to a proton, I know exists in biology, but I'm not sure if there's any proof of that in the quantum models, as I think that's still just theory... I do know neutrons decay when separated from atoms, in about 11 hours...

I'm not certain to what extent you meant this, but I see our verification of recycle in many aspects science has observed which I know you're aware of so you must be referring to a certain aspect of re-cycle. In the micro world: a proton transforms into a nuetron through the process of electron capture; A nuetron reverts back to the more stable proton through the radioactive process of beta decay; There's nuclear fission where an atomic structure seperates to form two less massive atoms; nuclear fusion which is the reverse process; QED type interactions of the interactions with EM radiation and matter which shows that even light is subject to re-cycle; etc, etc. To me, these processes are dealing with the more fundamental forms of structured matter, whereby they may be seen as isolated events rather than part of a re-cycle system such as a galaxy, but these micro scaled re-cycle aspects are the micro mechanics by which a galaxy can re-cycle atoms into stellar structures, which create more heavier elements, which creates more complex structures, etc. whereby all perhaps adding to the increased mass value of the central black hole someday. I'm sure you meant this differently than I interpreted which may prove the other part of your post...lol..., but I see re-cycle aspects in many places as I know you're aware of all these things, but just thought I would add them for the less educated readers of the thread.

I'm not gonna be near on par with you in the many areas of logic and such which you study. I'm a practitioner of logic, but not an academic of such. I'll have to study many of the concepts to be able to have an intelligible conversation about it with you. Though I do think I understand many of your deeper implications in respect to a quantifier which could reduce the variables to an absolute ground state, if I'm interpreting correctly. I'll try to study some of the concepts a bit later and perhaps supply my opinions.

later,

Tim

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Try this Lloyd. This is an excerpt from an email to Dave, which might help explain my position. I'm attempting to look deeply into the mechanics of conservation between systems of varying states of motion, such as is the state of our current universe. All internal varying states of motion within systems must be interconnected to the point of relating conservation throughout the entire volume, whereby such concepts as Lorentz contraction can be a quantized process within a system with varying states of motion. It's all a process to communicate between systems about their current states of motion relative to the conservation of c, whereby volumes or quantities of substance and motion are internally moved from system to system per the overall external process of expansion/contraction or wave/particle aspect taking place per linear velocity relative to c.

Originally Posted by analog
I've been trying to think of how to express what I'm seeing, and I think one way to encompass the concept would be to suggest that the entire universal volume goes through Lorentz type contraction and expansion relative to its linear velocity through the cosmic field as it propagates/cycles. This contraction and expansion aspect must be quantized whereby maintaining true c/absolute motion conservation of the whole. Therefore I see the quanta packets of EM radiation within our universe as the go between systems to this conservation aspect as they interact between an outer angular momentum domain of the universal volume, along with the angular momentum domains of internal structured matter per QM. This same process also takes place recursively within the photonic system whereby allowing them to propagate/cycle through its wave/particle or expansion/contraction states relative to its linear velocity through the universal field as conserved by c/absolute motion. I'm exploring the mechanics of conservation of the various systems as quantities/quanta of substance is moved from one state of motion to another, and am also exploring the instability of structures formed with varying types of motion to catastrophic breakdowns when nearing c linear velocities, which is the key to the recycle process of EM radiation and the universal volume, IMHO. We merely make structured systems subject to failure at high end linear velocity limits and make the lower end linear velocity limits the catalyst for the structuring phase of the process, whereby we maintain a perpetual cycle.

I've also implied that all systems containing a quantity of FS thus becoming a Va=Vu+Vr system has no linear motion value of its own other than that imposed by the larger scale gravitational waves of the Vr transverse motions of the universal medium of unstructured space due to the linear/falling motions of massive bodies or larger Va=Vu+Vr systems linear motion through the field as with setting up the mechanics of orbital velocity and rotation upon axis of the smaller mass orbiting the larger per GR. The same gravitational waves which establish planetary orbits also propagate EM radiation through its cycles as its Vu mass phase brings it into contact causing acceleration to c increasing Vu mass of the photon to the point of instability due to the varying forms of motion within the volume i.e. angular momentum domain housing other forms of Vu+Vr motions which are always at a higher linear frequency thus shorter wavelength than the angular momentum value which has to travel more distance in the same time to accomplish containment whereby to maintain the same frequency and wavelength per linear velocity it must contract to a smaller diameter orbit. It's just my attempts at a full conservation model which quantizes the conservation of all internal forms of motion by way of recursive processes whereby the universe gives us the means to compare the FS to itself at recursively lower resolutions.

I hope that helps, but I fear it may not....lol. I'm still counting on Dave to see enough into my ramblings to help me further describe what I'm seeing, or perhaps dismiss it all together due to an inconsistency in the relationship of such current concepts as QM and GR which he might see that I don't. I had to resend my ideas today so he should get back to me soon.

later,

Tim

No, no you're not harming any interpretations, as I've followed what you've posted all along, except for a few errors we've both made, in the cross-interpretations... I was only pointing out the lack of prime mover, but you may be accomplishing the same hydrodynamics with the wave dynamics direction you are presently headed, because hydrodynamics is only unified wave dynamics...

Tell me something; Are you viewing your model as a finite sphere of wave mechanics, inside an infinite sphere of wave mechanics__as that's how I see what you are describing, and that is what I'm using...???

90 degree opposition of the two spheres angular/orbital motion may be an interesting idea to contemplate, though it'd still be highly theoretical__say like a plasma ball, inside another plasma ball(as per our sun, except at much thinner densities, and many more angle paths, iff possible?), with almost unlimited real angle paths, yet all at 90 degrees of Universal angular motion/momentum...(how, I have no idea_just a thought) At these high a resolutions of theory, we really and truly have no idea what the state changing conditions are/would be capable of__but, it may look interesting...???