Philosophysics of a fundamental substance

[analog]

I don't necessarily give the cosmic infinite field a shape, but if it had one it would be spherical I guess. The finite universal system I would definately see as spherical with the same dynamics of angular momentum perpendicular to linear velocity through the infinite field with magnetic poles inline with the direction of the linear velocity through the infinite field due to the transverse motions of the infinite field being displaced and distroted around the massive system whereby quantities of fundamental substance from the infinite field (relative to the value of displacement due to the mass of the universal system) are being moved from the front of the propagating volume around to the rear to fill all voids which would otherwise be left behind. This gets into magnetic moments and such and the process by which they align themselves perpendicular to the direction of any otherwise imposed linear travel. Dave suggested the same concept with visible galaxies aligning their poles if plotted to represent the universe still having a degree of linear velocity as a whole. The before mentioned process would theoretically cause transverse gravitational waves to ripple across the Vr unstructured cosmic infinite field perpendicular to the direction of linear propagation the same as we would view the internal mechanics of the system. The key to the gravitational wave concept is to remember that even though a field might consist of high Vr random motion, this aspect allows it to transfer the effects of uniform motion within it as uniform gravitational waves throughout its volume of Vr. Even a high Vr field can maintain a uniform wave motion built upon the more micro Vr random motions within the field. Vr motions become uniform to condense to structured higher ratio Vu systems, which move through the Vr fields which in turn displaces the field causing uniform gravitational waves within the Vr field, which establishes spatial seperation and velocity per mass value of structures, which also carries all ejected quantities/quanta of substance due to excess left over from higher structural interactions back outward towards other systems and the outer angular momentum domain of the entire system at a rate and trajectory relative to its mass value relative to the system, which is miniscule when considering the quantity of substance within photons, whereby light is the quantization of an increase/decrease in overall Vu within the entire system as it goes between all systems and adds/subtracts from their Vu values by way of a loss or gain in quantities/quanta of substance. This is the proper unification of QM to SR and GR I would suppose.

[Bogie]

I don't necessarily give the cosmic infinite field a shape, ...

Analog, I submit that the cosmic infinite field would be referred to as shapeless. However I know that the joining of shapeless and infinite are two concepts that some people have trouble connecting, having discussed that very topic at some length. Sorry for the interruption; carry on with your interesting exchange.

I like your disclaimer .

[Lloyd Gillespie]

I don't necessarily give the cosmic infinite field a shape, but if it had one it would be spherical I guess. The finite universal system I would definately see as spherical with the same dynamics of angular momentum perpendicular to linear velocity through the infinite field with magnetic poles inline with the direction of the linear velocity through the infinite field due to the transverse motions of the infinite field being displaced and distroted around the massive system whereby quantities of fundamental substance from the infinite field (relative to the value of displacement due to the mass of the universal system) are being moved from the front of the propagating volume around to the rear to fill all voids which would otherwise be left behind. This gets into magnetic moments and such and the process by which they align themselves perpendicular to the direction of any otherwise imposed linear travel. Dave suggested the same concept with visible galaxies aligning their poles if plotted to represent the universe still having a degree of linear velocity as a whole. The before mentioned process would theoretically cause transverse gravitational waves to ripple across the Vr unstructured cosmic infinite field perpendicular to the direction of linear propagation the same as we would view the internal mechanics of the system. The key to the gravitational wave concept is to remember that even though a field might consist of high Vr random motion, this aspect allows it to transfer the effects of uniform motion within it as uniform gravitational waves throughout its volume of Vr. Even a high Vr field can maintain a uniform wave motion built upon the more micro Vr random motions within the field. Vr motions become uniform to condense to structured higher ratio Vu systems, which move through the Vr fields which in turn displaces the field causing uniform gravitational waves within the Vr field, which establishes spatial seperation and velocity per mass value of structures, which also carries all ejected quantities/quanta of substance due to excess left over from higher structural interactions back outward towards other systems and the outer angular momentum domain of the entire system at a rate and trajectory relative to its mass value relative to the system, which is miniscule when considering the quantity of substance within photons, whereby light is the quantization of an increase/decrease in overall Vu within the entire system as it goes between all systems and adds/subtracts from their Vu values by way of a loss or gain in quantities/quanta of substance. This is the proper unification of QM to SR and GR I would suppose.

Ok, now I'm reading you... Great explanation of all the motions required to unite QM, SR and GR, as I also see these same motions... That's why I've always written (E = MC^2 == X/X = 1 + IEE)__or the Universe, divided by itself, equals itself, plus all its isomorphic extensions and entanglements...

I'll think on this some, and see if I can rework the prime mover in... I think it's still just a simple matter of seeing the full decay process, to the point of a Universal Necessity of Recycle__Still hydrodynamically__A Universal Wave-Front Hydrodynamics(possibly interpreted same as gravity waves...?), just as all present wave interferences have a wave-front hydrodynamics(The opposing chiralities...)

Or do you see a recycle as a continuous motion process of your Finite Universal Model, Traversing The Infinite Universe...???

Make the Infinite Universe any shape you wish, or shapeless__It's just easier to picture and communicate, as a most huge/infinite sphere...

[Bogie]

...
Make the Infinite Universe any shape you wish, or shapeless__It's just easier to picture and communicate, as a most huge sphere...

I think that expansion such as a high density perfect gas will tend toward spherical shape as it expands into theoretically empty space, but that spherical shape will always be finite even if it is expanding into an infinite cosmos, right?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Correct Bogie............................................. ...

[analog]

Lloyd,

Recycle in my views does occur with the mere implication of the finite universal volume transversing the infinite cosmic field the same as with our finite universal system being the infinite cosmic field to a single photon as it goes through it's cycles. I'm implying that all systems with a mass value or quantity of substance are required to undergo Lorentz contraction per linear motion velocity relative to c. A photon is a miniscule quantity of FS relative to the universal quantity thus it cycles per it's frequency and wavelength because the end state of Lorentz contraction as a system nears c is the collapse of structure wherby the cycle resets with the reformation of structure at a lower limit velocity value relative to c whereby acceleration begins again. This is what Einstein would have seen if he were riding a photon. He would have seen it cycle through structured states and collapse thereof.

[analog]

From our perspective within the universal lightcone, we're seeing the internal mechanics to Lorentz contraction and the conservation of c due to such with the interactions of all internal systems of motion from atoms to photons. We're just watching it at a frequency and wavlength relative to the quantity of substance within our finite universal volume.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

From our perspective within the universal lightcone, we're seeing the internal mechanics to Lorentz contraction and the conservation of c due to such with the interactions of all internal systems of motion from atoms to photons. We're just watching it at a frequency and wavlength relative to the quantity of substance within our finite universal volume.

Now, right here is what I see as Lorentz and Einstein not seeing mass dissipating to smaller increments of radiated mass, i.e., photons etc., thus being the actual contraction/dissipation of mass at true c... All the mass is always present in its lesser changed state conditions... This is why I think that if the boys at CERN's Hadron collider actually do get the voltages and velocities high enough, they'll have trouble detecting any such particles they are looking for, as it will just be the lowest almost zero mass state of photons, or other Bosons traveling at true c, thus not detectable by all their X-Ray cameras__due to the fact c can't see c itself at true c__or in other words all our powerful instrumentation in the entire world, may not be able to detect these finest structures of matter with minimal masses...

This has been my position for years now... Though we may be able to use our entire Universal Models to logically see all the possible Universal mechanics, from the largest applied to the smallest__How would we ever prove such by real physical scientific experiment...???

I do see all you're stating, I just don't see how to prove it, or actually achieve a varifiable quantification logic of it, that must be experimentally verified... Imo, we can achieve the math and logic, yet we lack the experimental proof__and without the third leg of the proof__I feel science won't accept it...

Btw, all my theorizing has always depended on photons, or some other family Boson, as the absolute fundamental particle__having a minimal mass eternally existing in the eternal infinite field__but, in all the years since `82 when I theorized this discovery, I've never been able to think of any possible experiment to prove it__Kinda like Michaelson-Morely trying to prove the aether, which is really the same thing...

Any ideas about a possible physical experimental proof...??? Does Einstein's bending of light experimental proof, offer enough proof, to prove what we are stating...??? Why would a photon be attracted by mass, unless it also had a minimal amount of mass...??? I don't think the bending of spacetime offers what we are looking for... I think we must explore deeper into Einstein's, actually Minkowski's, spacetime mechanics, to uncover its actual dynamics, being within mass to mass ratios itself, as is much of what your model represents__but how to extrapolate the proof, from a faulty spacetime mechanics, seems the direction to go, but how exactly is slipping my mind__at the moment... I do think it's got a lot to do with that older post of yours, about amplitude, frequencies and wave lengths, etc.__as related to mass to mass interactions and orbits... It seems to be the Higgs Mechanism, in the Std. Model is in the right direction, as it postulates a minimal mass for all photons and related Bosons, through the mass to mass interactions of wave-particles and fields...

So, put this one together for us, in your own words, as logically and theoretically mathematically as possible, and see what we have, with that older idea of your's, about the amplitudes, frequencies, wave lengths, and masses interacting with other masses, in conjunction with your falling orbits mechanism... Somewhere in here is the fully connected physical proof from actual fundamental experiments, already performed by others, and possibly even Lorentz and Einstein, backed up by Eddington... Most of my grounding surrounds these three names, then of course we'd have to through in Peter Higgs, as the final mechanism__that must be proven by such unification of all QM's, SR's and GR's experiments__already done, in concert with any new realizations added in...

Have fun,
Lloyd

P.s.
Imo, we have a particle-wave to field mass at c, that is not detectable by all our most sensitive instrumentation, because both fundamental field and the particle-waves, as photons, bosons, etc., are traveling at true c, using all their capacity to broadcast any mass signal due to such signal capacity being used by the true c velocity, yet there is a required mass to mass presence there, or we wouldn't have the space-time phenomenon of the bending of light as it passes the sun... It's the same phenomena Einstein's original 16 year old idea presented__When he rode the photon to true c, and gave the example of what he would see if he looked in a mirror and asked the question__Would he see his own face, and answered__No, as all the light capacity to broadcast its signature was being used up by two true c's__the field and the photon, yet there still had to be a minimal mass transference taking place__for photons and fields to be real__and we absolutely know they are real, by all history's experiments, of never being able to eliminate photons and fields by any possible experiments... So to me, there's the true mystery of the missing photon to field masses__It's just too minimal to measure, at true c...

[analog]

Hi Lloyd,

I was working on a statement to go with this qoute, due to some of my off site conversations with Dave. Can you see where I'm headed with this?

The relativistic momentum of a massive particle would increase with speed in such a way that at the speed of light an object would have infinite momentum.
To accelerate an object of non-zero rest mass to c would require infinite time with any finite acceleration, or infinite acceleration for a finite amount of time.
Either way, such acceleration requires infinite energy. Going beyond the speed of light in a homogeneous space would hence require more than infinite energy, which is not generally considered to be a sensible notion.

Also, mass doesn't exactly attract mass IMHO. Remember that in my views Vr fields transfer motion by way of structred transverse waves and Vu thus mass containing systems are transfered through the field by the transverse motions with acceleration relative to the amplitude of the transverse wave and the mass value of the structured system with an inertial property of the ratio of Vu in relation to maintain acceleration if the wave forces where to stop instantly. Remember that no massive system has any means to attain linear velocity by way of it's internal mechanics as all linear motion through the field is imposed and thus furthers the internal Vu ratio of the structured system. However, the initial cause of the transverse waves are due to the transference of massive structured systems through the unstructured field perpendicular to the force of the transverse waves pushing the structured matter with an amplitude relative to the displacement value of the moving mass. The transference of mass through the field by one wave sets up perpendicular secondary waves. The interactions of these waves between the orbited and the orbiting is how gravity works in both directions by our observation of a barycenter of center of mass with a often slight wabble of the larger mass. The key is in these wave dynamics as light bends around massive objects due to the transverse waves establishing lights path. Basically the transverse gravitational waves carrying a photon from one star has interference with the transverse waves coming from the star of which the photon is bent around. This ties into refractive index and as Dave just made me realize after all this time also attaining the same measure for the velocity of light within various relatively moving frames of reference despite the relative motions of the massive system through the unstructured medium. Thus, if all motion through the medium is innerconnected by way of the transverse waves and it takes the motions of mass to impose motion upon mass then what would it take to accelerate a massive object to the speed of light? This is kind of a play of the immovable object and the unstoppable force teaser.

I'll have to proofread this later. In a hurry right now.

Later,

Tim

P.S. A photon is a mass system also with no internal
mechanism for linear motion. I've pulled away from Dave's mechanics here if this is causing confusion.

[analog]

Take the bending of spacetime model and apply it to density and transverse wave dynamics and their interactions and relativity unfolds naturally as a result within a matter motion model of mass/transverse wave interactions.