An Idea

[G_burnett]

Grand children are soooo much easier. They're actually enjoyable. There is something nice about holding a purely innocent and trusting baby in your arms. It may not be a T.O.E. but it just maybe the meaning to life.

Holding a baby in my obserrvations and experience i think you are close to a toe pat ...

kind regards graham

[Profpat]

Coming back to an Idea, I am submitting for your review and hopeful discussion, the following taken from the internet:

Further along the lines of the Good as the source of truth, Socrates points out that, like the sun, the Good "may be said to be not only the author of knowledge to all things known, but of their being and essence (kai to einai te kai tên ousian)." What is meant is that the Good is the cause of the very existence of the Ideas and all sensible objects that participate in the Ideas. Yet, he cautions that the Good cannot be said to be the same as those things that are caused to be by the Good: "And yet the Good is not essence (ousia), but far exceeds essence in dignity and power" (509b). For Plato, the Good transcends essence, which means that it transcends the Ideas, which are the essences of all visible things. Thus, the Idea of the Good is not like the other Ideas; one can now understand why Socrates is reluctant to talk about the Good: one cannot talk about what is beyond essence.

Best to all,

Pat

[dipayankar]

If I may ask a very trivial and silly question especially through spacetime fabric or aether.

Photons would require to expend energy on their journey. How is that we receive the photons on Earth which is sometimes 13 billion light years away from the source?

I prefer to go with evidence, Pat, so what evidence is there for curved space? So far, I have not seen any, except for theories that only exist at the abstract level, meaning that the information supporting the theory is also only abstracted information.

The only real information we have are the images, such as this one:


In this image you can see that light has travelled from a certain spot to earth via what is not the shortest route. The bands of light indicate at least a warped collective delivery from their sources, and the question is how this was delivered.

How we answer the question may tell more about us than about the actual universe. I am looking forward reading what (and if) you can find about actual evidence for a curvature in/of spacetime.

[Profpat]

If I may ask a very trivial and silly question especially through spacetime fabric or aether.

Photons would require to expend energy on their journey. How is that we receive the photons on Earth which is sometimes 13 billion light years away from the source?

Hi Dipayankar;

This is from the Chandra Xray Observatory, which you may find interesting:

Q&A: Cosmology

Q:
How do photons lose their energy to the universe as they cross it? Do photons shed their energy by emitting it as extremely weak photons or interact with nearby particles or each other so weakly that it only appears continuous? The amount of energy lost by photons emitted at the big bang must be enormous. Similarily with a gravitational field, are photons able to lose energy by exchanging gravitons in undetectable steps until they "evaporate" when their wavelength becomes nearly infinite?

A:
The Universe is expanding in time, as Edwin Hubble discovered in 1929. As the photons travel across the Universe, the space that they travel through expands, thereby stretching the wavelength of the photon. Longer wavelengths mean less energy. This is called the cosmological redshift.

Photons can also change energy by traversing a gravitational potential well, called the gravitational redshift. As far as gravitons and photons are concerned, it is important to realize that they are both force mediators - meaning the photon is a quanta which "transmits" the electromagnetic force. So, when 2 positively charged particles to repel each other, they are exchanging photons. Similarly, when 2 masses attract one another, they exchange gravitons. To our knowledge, gravitons and photon do not interact with each other. If you have read somewhere that the gravitational field of an object, say a black hole, has an effect on the magnetic field around it, this is true but it arises from geometrical effects (the black hole warps space around it and electromagnetic fields can be compressed or diluted depending on their location) alone.

There is a useful website which may help answer your questions, here:
http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/acosmexp.html

I guess the photons expand with space thus giving it lower energy. They do not decay however and there is no half life so they are still there.

Best,

Pat

[Fredrick]

Photons would require to expend energy on their journey. How is that we receive the photons on Earth which is sometimes 13 billion light years away from the source?

Pat provided you a rather good explanation, Dipayan, which I do not want to undermine. But I do want to place the same question in a different light: why does earth while traveling through space not lose its material framework? What I am basically trying to get to is that matter is a created state in our universe (an irreversable result from the overall perspective). Or said differently, energy is never lost. So unless the photon can lose its energy, it will contain its energy forever.

Pat, I did find additional information that supports the theory that the light bands we see from distant stars is indeed affected by the solar winds from in-between stellar objects.



Comet tails are visible when comets enter the solar region. The interesting part for the Photon Path Movement theory (any suggestions for a better name?) is that comet tails move away from the sun, no matter if the comet moves towards or retreats from the sun. The cause is the solar wind that blows the tail away from the sun no matter what the comet's path is.

That means I have postulated a theory that appears complete, and next I provide supporting evidence that solar winds have indeed properties that do just that. The photons nearing a solar object must (and this must is a big word, I understand that) therefore be moved sideways. The light bands we view are those locations where the solar winds lost their grasp on the foreign photons; these phtons were 'collected' at these locations. The solar winds will more than likely lose their grip at more or less the same distance from their sun, and the passing photons from other stars will therefore show a curved feature.

In the two-second film of the comet tail, you can see how the solar wind blows the tail in that outward direction.

From Wiki:

Around the 1930s, scientists had determined that the temperature of the solar corona must be a million degrees Celsius because of the way it stood out into space (as seen during total eclipses). Later spectroscopic work confirmed this extraordinary temperature. In the mid-1950s the British mathematician Sydney Chapman calculated the properties of a gas at such a temperature and determined it was such a superb conductor of heat that it must extend way out into space, beyond the orbit of Earth. Also in the 1950s, a German scientist named Ludwig Biermann became interested in the fact that no matter whether a comet is headed towards or away from the sun, its tail always points away from the Sun. Biermann postulated that this happens because the Sun emits a steady stream of particles that pushes the comet's tail away.[4] Wilfried Schröder claims in his book, Who First Discovered the Solar Wind?, that the German astronomer Paul Ahnert was the first to relate solar wind to comet tail direction based on observations of the comet Whipple-Fedke (1942g).[5]
Eugene Parker realised that the heat flowing from the sun in Chapman's model and the comet tail blowing away from the sun in Biermann's hypothesis had to be the result of the same phenomenon, which he termed the "solar wind".[6][7] Parker showed that even though the sun's corona is strongly attracted by solar gravity, it is such a good conductor of heat that it is still very hot at large distances. Since gravity weakens as distance from the sun increases, the outer coronal atmosphere escapes supersonically into interstellar space. Furthermore, Parker was the first person to notice that the weakening effect of the gravity has the same effect on hydrodynamic flow as a de Laval nozzle: it incites a transition from subsonic to supersonic flow.[8]
Opposition to Parker's hypothesis on the solar wind was strong. The paper he submitted to the Astrophysical Journal in 1958 was rejected by two reviewers. It was saved by the editor Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (who later received the 1983 Nobel Prize in physics).
In January 1959, the first ever direct observations and measurements of strength of the solar wind were made by the Soviet satellite Luna 1.[9] They were detected by hemispherical ion traps. The discovery, made by Konstantin Gringauz was verified by Luna 2, Luna 3 and by the more distant measurements of Venera 1. Three years later its measurement was performed by Americans (Neugebauer and collaborators) using the Mariner 2 spacecraft.[10]

[Profpat]

Hi Fredrick;

I like your logic, but your analogy of solar wind and comet tails is similiar to your diamonds or oxygen. They all are real particles. The solar wind is principally electrons and protons, the comet's tail is composed of ices ( frozen gas ).
While this is on the atomic and molecular level it's still real particles.

Photons are really waves and usually act like that in open space. It's when they interact with particles does it take on a particle characteristic. When waves collide you get interference.

You could be 100% correct Fredrick. My Idea is neutral to curved space or your PPM theory, however, my vote right now would go to curved space.

Best,

Pat

[Fredrick]

Hi Fredrick;

I like your logic, but your analogy of solar wind and comet tails is similiar to your diamonds or oxygen. They all are real particles. The solar wind is principally electrons and protons, the comet's tail is composed of ices ( frozen gas ).
While this is on the atomic and molecular level it's still real particles.

Photons are really waves and usually act like that in open space. It's when they interact with particles does it take on a particle characteristic. When waves collide you get interference.

You could be 100% correct Fredrick. My Idea is neutral to curved space or your PPM theory, however, my vote right now would go to curved space.

Best,

Pat

I like that you bring in counter arguments, Pat. I actually value that more than I can say.

Still, I do not see much information contained in the argument you are providing here. If we have winds on the one hand, and waves on the other hand, we all agree that they interact, no? I see no option to agree with you that this is not the case. From our earthly environment, we know that there is actually a very strong interaction between wind and the formation of waves.

I really hope we agree that photons are not like neutrinos that can pass through ordinary matter almost undisturbed. That is not how photons behave; photons are not at all like phantoms.

And are we not agreeing then on the fact that photons are real and that they must interact with the physical reality in their direct environment? I would say, photon waves behave just like ocean waves, and will interact with their surrounding, for instance, when they reach the shore. The surf is that spot where the movement of the water becomes very visible; it is the location where the waves finds their primary ending and where lesser secondary waves are reflected away from shore.

Similarly, when photons hit the moon, the waves (or at least part of the wave of photons) are reflected from the moon's surface. The photons exist therefore in wave form either until it ends there at the moon or the wave lives on in a secondary path of reflection (in our case towards earth). The wave does not penetrate the moon and comes out on the other side.

Waves can hit the shore, but waves are also swept up in a frenzy when a stormy wind moves over the surface of the ocean. I doubt that anyone would doubt for very long that waves and winds in space would not also follow the same laws as waves and winds do on earth in light of one another. If winds and waves are found in each other vicinity, they interact, with especially the winds the ones affecting the wavy water surface.

If you need more time, or if you have further questions, I have no problems with that and as said I like the sparring of the mind. But a declaration of doubt where there is no space for doubt may be okay in religion, but it is actually not allowed in science, Pat.

Photons interacts with all spatial realities found on their paths, including solar winds. If you have information that photons do not interact with such realities, please share that information with me. Currently, you make a statement that waves do not interact with winds, a statement I am certain is not subscribed by anyone in science (though I would not be surprised if there is a great variety of opinions on this).

[Profpat]

"... Currently, you make a statement that waves do not interact with winds, a statement I am certain is not subscribed by anyone in science (though I would not be surprised if there is a great variety of opinions on this).

..."

Fredrick I never made that statement, and I would love to see the quote where I did.

What I did text was:
"Photons are really waves and usually act like that in open space. It's when they interact with particles does it take on a particle characteristic. When waves collide you get interference."

I know when photons interact with matter ( wind ), there is an interaction. The question I thought was. what happens when photons interact, not with mass ( matter ), but other photons.

Best,

Pat

[dipayankar]

Photon is a packet of energy. However also it is a particle, so even if it expands, can it travel 13 billion light years with the amount of energy it possesses?

It apperas it does, but how?

Hi Dipayankar;

This is from the Chandra Xray Observatory, which you may find interesting:

Q&A: Cosmology

Q:
How do photons lose their energy to the universe as they cross it? Do photons shed their energy by emitting it as extremely weak photons or interact with nearby particles or each other so weakly that it only appears continuous? The amount of energy lost by photons emitted at the big bang must be enormous. Similarily with a gravitational field, are photons able to lose energy by exchanging gravitons in undetectable steps until they "evaporate" when their wavelength becomes nearly infinite?

A:
The Universe is expanding in time, as Edwin Hubble discovered in 1929. As the photons travel across the Universe, the space that they travel through expands, thereby stretching the wavelength of the photon. Longer wavelengths mean less energy. This is called the cosmological redshift.

Photons can also change energy by traversing a gravitational potential well, called the gravitational redshift. As far as gravitons and photons are concerned, it is important to realize that they are both force mediators - meaning the photon is a quanta which "transmits" the electromagnetic force. So, when 2 positively charged particles to repel each other, they are exchanging photons. Similarly, when 2 masses attract one another, they exchange gravitons. To our knowledge, gravitons and photon do not interact with each other. If you have read somewhere that the gravitational field of an object, say a black hole, has an effect on the magnetic field around it, this is true but it arises from geometrical effects (the black hole warps space around it and electromagnetic fields can be compressed or diluted depending on their location) alone.

There is a useful website which may help answer your questions, here:
http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/acosmexp.html

I guess the photons expand with space thus giving it lower energy. They do not decay however and there is no half life so they are still there.

Best,

Pat

[Fredrick]

..."Fredrick I never made that statement, and I would love to see the quote where I did.

What I did text was:
"Photons are really waves and usually act like that in open space. It's when they interact with particles does it take on a particle characteristic. When waves collide you get interference."

I know when photons interact with matter ( wind ), there is an interaction. The question I thought was. what happens when photons interact, not with mass ( matter ), but other photons.

Best,

Pat

Very good reply, Pat. I see you are doing a good job communicating. Indeed, the issue was if photons interact when meeting the same, and I let it shift towards exotic photons being moved by solar winds (or photons moved by exotic solar winds). In some respect, though, this is photon territory (it will be hard to make a distinction between the photons and the solar wind — of same star).

After posting, I realized you had written that I could be correct for 100% and what more is there to ask for?

In general, I am not interested in opinions, not even my own, so thank you for showing where I was being lead by my own opinion a bit too much. After all, here on ToeQuest we want to be informed by information, right?

Thank you, sir, for an excellent reply.


For myself, Dipayan, I thought the reality of energy never being lost was complex at first; it made me ponder about how this could be possible. I now believe this is just part of the puzzle that our universe is not in balance, is not the whole, and what we see is an ongoing result (please note: not the result plus the origin, only the result from an origin). Matter is just that form of energy that is stuck in place, and will be stuck in place eternally unless circumstances change the energetic state when confronted with other matter, also stuck. Basically, photons do not get unstuck on their trip (but there is some wear and tear, visible through red shift). It is difficult, close to impossible to discuss the origin. If our universe states already something about the origin, then it must be that the origin is no longer whole either.