Attached Images

System-3.jpg (43.9 KB, 79 views)

H. D. Thoreau said of castles in the sky: If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them.

Einstein as well as all others need only the foundation of equality or truth to support their dreams of nature itself.

MJA

I have enormous respect for Einstein's intellectual integrity. At the time when he introduced his special and general theories of relativity it must have seemed ludicrous to consider a discontinuous universe possible. Planck called his universal quantum of action an act of desperation and no one today claims to fully understand quantum mechanics. It created a formal rift between mathematical physics and the philosophy of physics that deeply disturbed Einstein and other major pioneers of modern physics. Quantum physics had taken a turn towards statistical methods and as it did Einstein refused to work on it further. The Bohr-Einstein debates are legend. He refused to believe that God plays at dice and was sidelined from the mainstream as a result.

It is a measure of his intellectual integrity that at the end of his life he would draw into question his own life's work. By suggesting that physics could not be based on continuous structures, he was pulling the rug out from under General Relativty but also from under the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics as well as other interpretations. This infers that he glimsed a possible route to an acceptable solution to the many dichotomous interpretations of physics.

This alternative route is a discontinuous universe that is nevertheless holistically integrated in the way it works. It is a new approach to an accurate understanding of the Cosmic Order that is not fully reducible to mathematics or language. It is a method of facilitating intuitive insight into the roots of meaning that underly language. I just want to dispell any suggestion that I am in any way critical of Einstein's enormous contributions.

Best regards
Bob Campbell

"So do quantum jumps in position from one electron orbit to another orbit via the void without traversing the inner space between orbits. Space and time must be generated in discrete amounts that place a minimum limit on the increment of the differential in the calculus."

I wonder if the neglected connection between the absorption and emission of photons and the energy states of electrons don't have something to do with the assumption that spacetime is discrete. Why would electrons lose or gain energy if there were no transitory orbital state?

Also, when you say holistically integrated, are you inferring that there is an existence between particles that would render the whole greater than the sum of the individual parts? It seems that would imply there is a definite continuity subsuming discontinuous particles and effects.

Dear Nobody,

I must say your comments are very pertinent for a nobody :)).

As you must know, in 1912 Neils Bohr was working with Rutherford who had shown that an atom consists of a small dense positive nucleus surrounded by the required number of electrons. In trying to reconcile this evidence with Rydberg’s empirical formula for spectral lines Bohr made a number of assumptions without any reason for doing so other than to get a fit with the evidence. One of his assumptions was that some of the classical laws of physics do not apply within the atom. This remarkable claim distinguished the inner space of the atom from external space and time. Other assumptions included that electrons could only exist in certain non-radiating orbits that had to be an integral multiple of h/2pi. The Coulomb force held the electron in orbit around the proton and if it radiated energy away the electron would fall into the nucleus, so there could be no radiation. Also the energy associated with the frequency of each spectral line carried with it a discrete amount of energy according to the Planck-Einstein relation E=hf. Electrons lose or gain energy in orbital jumps accordingly.

A decade later when Louis de Broglie came up with particle waves this fitted nicely with the Bohr atom. There had to be an integral number of electron waves around each electron orbit to avoid interference, so this added to the ontological credibility of Bohr’s model along with other refinements. But de Broglie had just pulled a rabbit out of a hat. He saw a moving particle as “a little clock in motion” and he was “greatly smitten” that the Lorentz transformation formula for a clock is the inverse of that for a wave in Special Relativity. According to his own account in deriving his particle wave equation, he was trying to show how the internal frequency of his particle as a little clock could remain in phase with its external frequency as a wave motion. He essentially equated the one transformation formula to the other while adding a displacement to the wave side for the particle wave length. This is a bit oversimplified but that is essentially what he did. (See Wave Mechanics, The First Fifty Years, Butterworths 1973. Also “Atoms & Space-time” on my website.) The whole of quantum mechanics is erected on these foundations.

Turning now to System 3 it illustrates how all atoms are synchronously projected as still particle frames alternating with timeless quantum frames, such that the still particle frames close ranks to present the appearance of spatial and temporal continuity. (Quantum frames are timeless energy equivalents of particle frames. How this works in System 3 is summarized on my website.) Each particle frame is called a space frame associated with each atom and there is no particle motion in a single space frame, only electromagnetic activity. All particle motion occurs as relative quantum jumps in position from one space frame to the next. These jumps are effected via the timeless quantum frame, called the Void. For this reason there can be no energy radiated away between electron and proton because there is no relative motion between them in each space frame. The whole atom is a discontinuous projection that defines space and time. Atoms are oscillating between particle and quantum modes. The internal frequency of the whole atom is like de Broglie’s little clock. This means that de Broglie’s electron waves are quantum jumps in relative position around the nucleus from space frame to space frame as both oscillate back and forth. So according to System 3 the electron can only exist in certain orbits because there must be an integral number of quantum jumps. There is no such a thing as half a jump. Also electrons can only change orbits via a timeless jump through the Void from one space frame to the next and this always involves a discrete amount of energy absorbed or emitted according to E=hf. There is more information on how the System works at www.cosmic-mindreach.com. It is a fascinating approach and will make you wonder deeply.

As for your last comment, the timeless quantum frame associated with each atom is holistically integrated with that of all atoms on the quantum frame side called the Void. The Void is unimaginably awesome. It is a boundless energy field embacing all being. Because it is timeless it spans and integrates the whole of history and because it is spatially indeterminate it can not be described as something discrete. As you suggest you might describe this as continuous in the sense that it is always there and successive space frames are recalled from it. It is a master memory bank. At a physical level it is generated by System 3 as it relates to neutral atoms. The menagerie of short lived sub-atomic particles that are produced in particle accelerators are not fundamental. They exhibit patterns similar to the higher Systems that are elaborations of System 3, in this case extremely short lived. Nevertheless space frame skipping due to relative motions involves relative accumulations of quantized energies in the Void associated with moving particles on the space frame side. These enegies fuel the evolutionary process, both of stellar systems and subsumed biological evolution of Systems 4 and higher that may evolve on planets. It is worth a look at the website. It is an intuitive process of discovery.

Best regards,
Bob

Bob,

First if I say something that might offend you, please don't take it the wrong way. Like I said to RascalPuff, it's just my way of learning, so bear with me if you will. I have been to your site and read alot on your systems, and I love things that explain the most with the least and when things fit together progressively as yours does.

Although, when you mention quantum jumping of particles and the void, eventhough you went into great detail to explain yourself, I am interested to know what the void and particles are made of exactly. My research on Setterfield's zpe work (I don't agree either with all he proposes, but mainly how h influences density and frequency - with the question: density and frequency of what?) and the infamous SLAC experiments where all matter is created from light, seem to indicate jumping may not be discrete. The following seems to comply:

"Each particle frame is called a space frame associated with each atom and there is no particle motion in a single space frame, only electromagnetic activity. All particle motion occurs as relative quantum jumps in position from one space frame to the next. These jumps are effected via the timeless quantum frame, called the Void. For this reason there can be no energy radiated away between electron and proton because there is no relative motion between them in each space frame."

If semi-observed electrons are the result of electromagnetic/photonic interactions at the required energies to form seemingly stable atoms, and electrons gain and lose energy as photons are absorbed and emitted, perhaps the electromagnetic activity in the space frame is the particle if the particle is nothing more than a different form of electromagnetic activity. Eventhough, this might imply electrons fall into the nucleus, the cumulative photonic exchange at the ground state supercedes the electron orbit. In effect, there would be no maintaining of electron orbitals, but a continual annihilation process of electrons and positrons as they fall into the nucleus. Bound quarks require more energy to form than electrons, and the energy could explain gravity at the quantum level. The strong force's increase in strength at greater distances could be the result of electrons falling into the nucleus.

The last comment you made speaks for itself, a very good explanation. It doesn't seem to conflict with the above assessment which doesn't aim to ignore empirical evidence. It only interprets the evidence somewhat differently based on two photons creating particle pairs, asking what happens to the photons exactly if they are not themselves electrons/positrons/quarks? What happens to the particles when they annihilate? The virtual processes within the space frames...resulting in the observable atomic structures.

If you will, let me know where you think I go wrong. I will continue to look into your references.

Dear Nobody,

Thank you for your interesting comments and please don’t take offence at anything that I may say either.

I confess that my stubborn mind has a problem with all theories about origins in time to space and time and the universe. I invariably find implicit assumptions about space and time in the language used that can only be derived a posteriori and raised to a priori status by intellectual bootstrapping. We really do tend to be a slave to words. This used to get pointed out by some philosophers but now seems to go unnoticed. My work is not an intellectual contrivance of mine and I claim no credit for it. It comes from revelatory insights orchestrated by supreme intelligence that I can best describe in this context as a manifestation of System 1 subsuming all. Systems 1 and 2 transcend the Void and the subjective mode of System 2 allows of insights of this nature orchestrated by the Universal Center employing the Void as a medium of communication. I don’t intend this to be accepted as an article of blind belief but point it out just to show that the structural possibility exists consistent with the whole System of delineating the cosmic order.

I should emphasize that the System is not a belief system. It is an intuitive guide to integrating the direct evidence of phenomenal experience more meaningfully into our understanding. I think you appreciate this. The elaboration of the higher systems is also not a progression in time. The whole cosmic order has always been with us. I have reason to believe that we have a cosmic destiny to realize and understand it. That realization is something that itself transcends the whole of space and time, transcending one’s own physically transient birth and death. In other words the cosmic order transcends itself in knowing itself.

According to the System everything comes down to energy transformations. Energy can take many forms but the hard atomic particles that clothe the physical universe derive from the space-frame side of System 3 which must have closed centers if they are to remain mutually independent yet intimately related. Only triadic relationships produce closed elements of objective experience. The quantum-frame side, the Void, has a transparent relationship to the space frame side, but quantum (photonic) energies can and do accumulate and become employed in the creative process in a variety of ways. Light energy is essentially matter in reflux through the creative process. Some of the evidence of the so-called vacuum may be consistent with this, but the “vacuum” is not a clearly defined concept and I avoid it completely.

I do not know what you mean by “ground state.” In System 3 the most primary physical state is neutral hydrogen with the electron in the first orbit. Its angular momentum is zero and the primary interval of time is readily calculated from this as 1.52x10^-16 seconds. The inner space of the atom is defined by photonic (EM) energy acting orthogonal to the linear projection of EM energy from excited atoms.

Particle accelerators all employ charged particles impacting a target in a strong magnetic field to create and identify the menagerie of highly transient so-called particles which may more accurately be described as “resonances.” The determination of their characteristics depends upon relativistic calculations which may be called into serious question by the discrete limitations of the System under such intense conditions. Some scientists have remarked that it is like trying to figure out how a watch works by smashing it to bits.

There are no positrons in a neutral atom. In System 3 antimatter derives from a reverse direction of linking up of the particular centers in each Particular Set by the Universal Set, thus reversing charge. This is the involutionary mode of System 3 and it is degenerate for reasons explained in my books. It is a fundamental tenet of quantum mechanics that the electron can not exist between orbits at all. It MUST be a quantum jump associated with discrete quanta of energy. Spectral lines derive from this necessity. So does the Planck constant. There are secondary and tertiary homologues of System 3 that are active at galactic and solar levels. The strong force derives from the fusion process via a secondary homologue. The weak force is a regenerative mode of System 3 associated with the neutron and thus with the fusion process. There is much more to the System than appears on the website. I have focused on basics which present challenge enough to properly fathom. The more advanced articles on the nervous system especially require a lot of patience to work through. But once you see it many doors begin to open.

I don’t know what you mean by quarks and electrons being formed. According to the System, electrons did not form independently from protons during the Big Bang. Both have always been around and they are intimately linked together with the photon in neutral atoms. There is no need to explain a neutral universe or why there is no antimatter universe. Quarks are said to be confined, and in System 3 there is a correlate apparent in the way the universal set is confined within the three centers of each Particular Set intimately linking them up. If you look at Particular Center 3 (the proton) on the bottom half of the diagram you will see within it three Universal Centers. Two of the Universal Centers are oriented toward Particular Center 1 (the photon). One of them is facing the other way back toward Particular Center 2 (the electron). This happens to agree with two Up quarks and one Down quark confined with the proton according to current Quantum Chromodynamic Theory. It makes no allowance for quarks within electrons but that theory comes from other considerations of transient high energy collisions.

I hope this helps to clarify a few things at least.

Best regards,
Bob.

Hello again, Bob.

Your responses clarify alot, and your website clarifies even more so. The system seems to be time-progressive, although I know what you mean when you say the one system transcends the temporal subsystems, and it explains everything pretty clearly.

I can understand that few people are willing to venture into the unknown preferring to keep things empirical and theoretical, but the basis of my inquiry is more than not what is between the lines of the story you've put together, that's how I function. At another site there was one individual who reminds me of yourself, as he proposed a refinement of matter whereby natural phenomena are superimposed, so to speak.

You mention that the system is all-inclusive, and if I'm not mistaken you implied that all phenomena manifests through light which is supportive of my own ideas that all forms of matter are forms of light. I admit I look for minds on the same track, and when you further stated that electrons don't exist between orbitals, needless to say, it caught my attention. Mainly because I have proposed that light doesn't exist in and of itself until divided, similar to your proclamation that without differentiation no phenomena could exist. Although not entirely accurate, I often use analogies of white canvass containing all pictures, or an analog system containing all digital information.

My contention regarding the orbitals is soley due to the spectral lines being separated by a void instead of a spectrum, to keep "things" whole or true to system one, where the electron clouds are discrete quanta of energy but are phases of the transitional spectrum. If we consider that photons at the required energy level to produce electrons/positrons, produce them perpendicular to the collision, it evidently creates detectible clouds within the spectrum. Based on your depiction of system one, I would propose that the proton is the result of the process above, consisting of approx. 918 electrons and positrons continually attracting each other, annihilating into photons, and recreated at detectable frequencies. I further propose that linear time is absolute, but dilated at Planck by the collisions of photons creating the gravitational mass of electrons and positrons. We know that pinpointing particles, the same particles, is impossible to do, and within the energy clouds observed particles can be related to measurements between annihilation events which emit photons and drop electron orbitals squaring energy across the frames. Essentially there is no point where particles manifest, because the events are instantaneous, and observations are realtive to frequencies which explains why some "particles" are absorbed and others pass through atoms.

I'm certainly not one to argue with non-existence, as a whole in and of itself, but relative to the frames in question I think we could say that they are similar to electron clouds at undetectable frequencies. Eventhough we don't observe the back of something while observing the front, it must exist for the front to exist; and eventhough some frequencies are undetectable, their cumulation is required for detectable frequencies to exist.

Hi Nobody,

Language is a cumbersome tool. We tend not to invest identical meanings in words because our personal experience is not identical. One value of the System is that it imposes a strict discipline of structural insight that is universal. The cosmic order does not and can not be changed. It does not exist in space and time so one can not say that it is time progressive or temporal. Instead it prescribes the process of all change. A seed falls in the ground and a plant grows, and no two plants grow in identical shape or size, but they all grow by the same structural processes that never change. The cosmic order can not be invented by any amount of intellectual prowess, only discovered. We are merely human, not God, and he can not change the cosmic order either. The integrity of all experience depends upon it.

How can there be specific phenomena if there is nothing to distinguish them as mutually distinct or separate? This is a primary dilemma associated with the very concept of Universal Wholeness that anyone should be able to recognize, not a proclamation of mine. All phenomena derive from a fundamental Rift in Universal Wholeness or there could be no phenomena distinct from one another. The whole creative process derives from the need to mend this Rift between Self and Other that we experience everywhere around us. If all things are mutually isolated atoms bouncing around like billiard balls in continuous space and time, then we are left with accident as the only causal agent in a meaningless creation. One can not derive universal values from this alternative view, including Truth, at least not without using “double speak” or self-contradiction.

I use the word Void in a special sense and capitalize it. The Void does not exist in space-time, although it does prescribe an orthogonal discontinuity in space-time. It is not a vacuum. It is not non-existence either. It is real. If you examine the quantum part of the System 3 diagram, the top half, you will see in the Particular Set that the proton (C3) and electron (C2) interfaces are mutually coalesced as ONE WITH the Photon interface (C1). They ARE the mutually balanced photonic energy equivalent of one atom as a timeless quantum of energy. They are synonymous with the Universal Cneter One in the Universal Set that integrates the Void as ONE. There are similar Terms in the higher Systems so the Void encompasses more than the whole physical creation. The pure experience of the Void, embraces ALL BEING in a boundless field of wonder that is completely Void of physical distinctions of any kind, (including one’s own physical body), even though it mirrors the whole of physical reality. As one Taoist poet wrote: “It is a vast and shining sea of mist.”

EM radiation permeates the integrated fabric of space-time and there is no Void in atomic spectra. The distinctive spectrum of hydrogen (or other gas) can be generated by exciting rarefied hydrogen gas in a vacuum tube. All light derives from atoms in some way or their fusion processes in suns. You are free to believe as you wish of course, but I think it inaccurate to invest the System with opinions that are not structurally consistent with the phenomenal evidence.

When I studied quantum mechanics in university over 50 years ago they talked about electron clouds. The language still makes no sense to me. There is much evidence that electrons are specific three dimensional particles that are intimately associated with protons within neutral atoms, and that EM effects derive from electrons becoming sufficiently energetic to escape the ionization limit for an atom. (Positrons are virtually non-existent in the universe apart from their production in particle accelerators.)

The exact position of an electron can only be determined in a single space frame. This precludes particulate motion and thus the mechanics required for measurement. So quantum jumps over a series of space frames intervene. The more accurately momentum can be measured the less accurately position can be measured, and vice-versa. The language of electron clouds just clouds this inherent problem of indeterminacy. It can be shown that there are N cubed electron quantum jumps around any orbit where N is the principle quantum number. One must be careful not to confuse new concepts with previously accepted concepts that are not consistent. This is often hard to do. It takes time and care to weed one's conceptual garden. After 40 yers at this work I appreciate the spirit and openess of your interest in it.

Best regards,
Bob

Of course I'm interested in your work, Bob. Anyone would be foolish not to be because it puts things together very systematically well, but I'm never biased toward one viewpoint in its entirety preferring to extract a few pieces relevant to my own discoveries. There are many who endeavor to know the mind of god, or universal mind, and I think it necessary to know what the mind is first before extending it to universal proportions.

I don't shirk empirical and theoretical science, but there is a fine line between the two in that both can be misleading even when supportive of one another. If it wasn't for Einstein's accurate predictions, I don't think String Theory would have lasted as long as it has. People place alot of importance on math and observations, but over the years I've noticed that few are willing to express themselves as individuals - conform or be cast out, as it were.

The more I read your work, the more I see it running along the same track as my own train - no offence intended. When I pressed that the discrete nature of particles transforms, I noticed you mentioned something similar in your "Quantum Mind" Theory and the pressing is really unnecessary because the particles are no longer particles if converted to radiation. It only seemed misleading to me because when you use the backdrop screen for projections to be placed on, and state that electrons don't exist between jumps, some may conclude that the particles disappear entirely into the screen instead of being a part of the EM-conversion process.

The other premise of keeping things whole is based on my own interpretation of simplifying theoretical and empirical evidence, though sort of the consensual interpretation with a small twist. I have to disagree that EM comes from the interactions of matter, so as to avoid the "matter exists just because it's there." The SLAC experiments are repeatable and serve as a basis for matter creation, and the fact that antimatter isn't observed lasting in the universe but required for matter to exist shows that there is something wrong with preconceived notions of most models.

Based on the empirical evidence of what occurs when two high-energy photons collide, we can form a simple math that transcends theoretical physics. Primarily that 0/0=1; 0*0=0; and 1-1=0. The normal assumptions of wholeness render it 1/1=1; 1*1=1; and 1+0=1. We can see relatively easily that normal assumptions neglects antimatter, and only by equating non-existence with existence can it represent a creatio ex nihilo properly. We can have an a priori basis for universal time via photons, local time via matter, and no time as the substrate medium. I also propose that photons and photon holes (gravitons) are out-of-phase waves that are synonymous to an event horizon, to prevent literal concepts of material creation from entering the picture. The process is soley due to dividing photons/gravitons into differentiable quanta to create in-phase waves, similar I would think to separating light and darkness.

I agree things get fuzzy in the eV clouds, but correlating 3-d electrons to principal numbers is hard for me to swallow too. They can be rendered 3-d, 2-d, 1-d, and even 0-d, and size and energy can correspond to any quantum number, but when wanting to know the incremental effects leading to these associations it becomes extremely hard to accomplish. To revert to the mind, we can only be conscious of or observe particular quanta, similar to the visible-light spectrum within the greater spectrum, and it seems we can often fall prey to forcing nature to conform to our physical observations and mental capacity. Only a mind at zero has the capacity to record all differentiable phenomena like a storage space, extracting pertinent information for phenomena to persist to exist in a particular fashion.

I guess regardless of the nature of exterior forms, it always comes down to our interpretations of the Void. The orthogonal discontinuity of spacetime is where my mind is at, Bob. To get to the heart of the matter, as you said, "to integrate the Void as ONE," we have to conclude that all forms of matter consist of what the Void consists of, and then ultimately have to know what the Void consists of. I have concluded that the Void is non-existent and wave forms are incrementally recreated over abstract non-dimensional points when the Void is divided by itself. Observations, for instance, of a hand moving through space is rendered as particles recreated incrementally according to discrete energies. There is no literal motion involved because we have concluded that all motion must be part of the Void, and the Void can't very well move anywhere because it transcends time and space - spacetime being dependent upon speed, and the Void being so fast that it is already everywhere and nowhere in particular.

My apologies for going there, I know you said you prefer not to get into that, but from my experience First Philosophy always finds a way to sneak in.