Welcome to the ToeQuest.
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,786
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,474x in 1,194 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    magnetic monopole and helicity

    there is an intimate connection between magnetic helicity and magnetic monopole.

    by understanding the principle behind the structure of helicity, the concepts of monopole, electric charge, weak charge, color charge, and mass can be explained using a principle of directional invariance of spacetime fabric.

    To start the discussion about this connection, we are going to ask the question about the existence for a quantum of mass. Is this mass the Planck mass? Why does the mass of the electron is very tiny compare to the Planck mass?

    Which is more fundamental: electric moment or magnetic moment? Charge or current? Can there be a current of space?
    Last edited by AntonioLao; 02-24-2005 at 12:43 PM. Reason: post a question for quantum of mass

  2. #2
    Blue Belt
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    119
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Rep Power
    25

    Rotation as measurement would make quanta an imprecise concept

    Good starting point, Time Raider! But I feel you are setting out in the wrong direction. No treasure that way, but look, behind you, a green valley of unexplored beauty and maybe, elusive truth.

    In a system of measurement based on rotation, there can be no Cartesian co-ordinate geometry. The unit is rotation itself.

    can we have a theory to replace dimension and Cartesian ideas of quanta. No rulers, only rotation. No weights, only subtended drag, or something like that?

    Yes this is thinking outside the box, without the comfort and warmth of Newton and other giants. But look at the scenery, there must be real treasure herem, taking ROTATION as the new fabric of measurement itself.
    Mike 5

    Time's Square?

    www.speedintelligence.com

  3. #3
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,786
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,474x in 1,194 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Lorentz

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike 5
    In a system of measurement based on rotation
    Rotations are best described using Lorentz groups and their transformations. But I'm describing double rotations using Hadamard matrices.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  4. #4
    Blue Belt
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    119
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Rep Power
    25

    I spoke out of turn

    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao
    Rotations are best described using Lorentz groups and their transformations. But I'm describing double rotations using Hadamard matrices.
    I can see my ideas are not really welcome, and will be careful. This is your thread, Antonio, to be discussed in your terms.

    Hoping we can discuss in harmony soon, meanwhile you have set the limits of what you can find. But what if the secrets of rotation are not best described in the ways you believe? Axioms, by Goedel's theorems, cannot be proven, they are indeed beliefs only. I hope you can read my subversive style with good humour.

    Knowing that beliefs are unavoidable, I choose them like turning over playing cards dealt at random. My current belief is that rotations are not yet explained or we would have resolved more answers by now. Therefore my approach is to chip away at the axioms of mathematics, discarding traditions and accepted ideas because I find overall they have failed us.

    In breaking free, I have only clues and hunches, to find a new form of mathematics to explain everything, and so far the simplicity of a single axiom - all material forms are in motion and that motion is like the ocean (rotational never linear). Antonio if you have any light to guide me, that is easier to understand, I would appreciate that.

    Best wishes, my hunch is that by reconsidering the concept of a magnetic monopole we will link gravity to electromagnetism and all mechanics.


    Mike

    PS: The word "helicity" draws me - where can I research that more in the context of the monopole?
    Mike 5

    Time's Square?

    www.speedintelligence.com

  5. #5
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,786
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,474x in 1,194 Posts
    Rep Power
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike 5
    are not best described in the ways you believe?
    Why stop at just one rotation? In math, we can have two, three, four or as many numbers of rotations. The double rotations that I used can be described by a 2 by 2 square matrices. These matrices can be extended into 3-rotation, 4-rotation, 5-rotation, etc. The effect of multiple rotations is increase in mass (odd-rotation) and increase in energy (even-rotation).
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  6. #6
    Orange Belt
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    26
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    27

    Question

    Hey Al, I see that you have carried on my idea that we were talking about in chat.

    I think that there is electricity everywhere, in every atom. Even in the particles of light. So, anywhere where there is light, there is electricity. Correct me if I am wrong.
    Time is a tricky concept and can boggle an untrained mind...

  7. #7
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,786
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,474x in 1,194 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Qed

    Quote Originally Posted by SimpleKid18
    So, anywhere where there is light, there is electricity.
    When scientists like Richard Feynman developed the quantum field theory of the electromagnetic field (QED), they came to understand the intimate relationship between light and electricity and what they found out by experimentation through the quantum vacuum fluctuations that light is really composed of equal numbers of positive and negative electricity. However, these at present time can only be observed as virtual phenomena and no means of energy utilizations just yet.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

 

 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top