Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)

[austintorn@aol.com]

Why 1/137 for the Fine-Structure Constant and not 1/2

The size of the one and only universe, this being its only boundary condition, is that of a 4D finite hypercube of quadric space made of infinite 3D spaces sitting atop one another, governs the quantization of energy forms, taking the form of Planck’s constant for light, and being the reason for elementary particles having the same magnitude of unit charge.

Charge (q) is responsible for the Coulomb force:

Fq = q^2 / 4*pi*e0*r^2

where e0 is a constant know as the permitivity of free space.

The ratio of the Coulomb strength to Planck’s constant (hc) is called the fine structure constant, 1/137.

One might think that it should be 1/2 since photons are complete, having an inherent positive and negative that sums to neutrality, the polarity only showing forth when an electron and a positron are produced, whereas a matter particle is always an incomplete form having either a positive or a negative charge.

The reason this is not the case is because unlike Plank’s constant, the Coulomb’s force strength is not a direct assessment of unit polarity volume, for it is but a byproduct of unit polar volume just as electrostatic potential energy is a byproduct of rest energy.

A photon’s hypervolume is geometrically closed, while a matter particle’s unit polar volume is open; so, a matter particle’s net polarity prevents the spacial encapsulation of its 4th dimensional elevation of deflection, it thus being a distributional boundary condition, a family of relationships, time = unit polar volume of charge / volume.

Photons are the encapsulation of time by space, while matter particle fields are the encapsulation of space by time; thus t heir radically different properties.

Space is continuous and causal. The reason why a matter particle’s central deflection of elevation in time diminishes with distance is because external deflection is governed by a dimensional relationship between time and space in 4D space-time and this relationship is a constant. Spacial deflection attenuates due to increasing volume because spatial volume causes this attenuation.

Herein lies the meaning of charge. The Coulomb's force increases with the amount of external deflection, but it is not simply a case of a maximum deflection somewhere in space, but is a combination of deflection and volume, and this determines the deflection at any given range.

A matter particle distribution consists of an infinite number of concentric spherical surfaces with 4th-dimensional elevation scaled by their volume and unit polar volume.

Matter particles are radically symmetrical, so the volume element of their field distribution is a sphere.

t = 3*(unit polar volume of charge) / 4*pi*r^3

External deflection decreases as the cube of the distance from a particle’s center. Whereas 3-dimensional deflections decrease as the square of distance, attenuated by increasing area, 4th-dimensional deflections decrease as the cube of distance, attenuated by increasing volume.

Unit polar volume is hc/4pi, so substituting, not shown, we can get a matter particle’s field’s actual displacement,

9.4(10^-1 / r^3, in meters, and so, since a proton’s electrostatic field is active at a radius as close as 1 Fermi (10^-15) from its energy center, yields an external deflection of a trillion light years (9.4(10^27) m).

Deflections of this magnitude are possible because although ‘c’ is energy’s speed limit through space, there is no limit to space’s speed through time.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Better add in a wee bit o' magnetohydrodynamics, just to get the complexity mix right...

Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) (magnetofluiddynamics or hydromagnetics) is the academic discipline which studies the dynamics of electrically conductingfluids. Examples of such fluids include plasmas, liquid metals, and salt water. The word magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) is derived from magneto- meaning magnetic field, and hydro- meaning liquid, and -dynamics meaning movement. The field of MHD was initiated by Hannes Alfvén, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1970.

The idea of MHD is that magnetic fields can induce currents in a moving conductive fluid, which create forces on the fluid, and also change the magnetic field itself. The set of equations which describe MHD are a combination of the Navier-Stokes equations of fluid dynamics and Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism. These differential equations have to be solved simultaneously, either analytically or numerically. MHD is a continuum theory and as such it cannot treat kinetic phenomena, i.e. those in which the existence of discrete particles or of a non-thermal velocities distribution are important.

And a wee bit o' hydrodynamic sound wave mechanics __ Acoustic Levitation __ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94KzmB2bI7s

Continuum mechanics is a branch of mechanics that deals with the analysis of the kinematics and the mechanical behavior of materials modeled as a continuous mass rather than as discrete particles. The French mathematician Augustin Louis Cauchy was the first to formulate such models in the 19th century, but research in the area continues today.

Modeling an object as a continuum assumes that the substance of the object completely fills the space it occupies. Modeling objects in this way ignores the fact that matter is made of atoms, and so is not continuous; however, on length scales much greater than that of inter-atomic distances, such models are highly accurate. Fundamental physical laws such as the conservation of mass, the conservation of momentum, and the conservation of energy may be applied to such models to derive differential equations describing the behavior of such objects, and some information about the particular material studied is added through a constitutive relation.

Continuum mechanics deals with physical properties of solids and fluids which are independent of any particular coordinate system in which they are observed. These physical properties are then represented by tensors, which are mathematical objects that have the required property of being independent of coordinate system. These tensors can be expressed in coordinate systems for computational convenience.

And for when we all get real ambitious __ http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-toe-theory/5464-the-toe-the-logical-science-all-thought-possible-12.html#post132118

[austintorn@aol.com]

Relaxing Black Hole music

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Thanks Austin, I needed that... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIY6O3B6b6o

Relax into a black-hole__oh, only if I could...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW7BvabYnn8&feature=fvwk

[analog]

The FS sure is a bugger to explain, and from what I gather I can't decipher what the mass actually is. Though I follow the newtonian/einsteinian equations of field densities and absolute time, they seem to imply an undefined FS in greater/lesser density spatially-expanding over time (decay) and spatially-contracting over time (fusion).

I don't follow the consensus of absolute motion, but rather absolute staticity. Yet I refrain from delving into the “matter” so to speak depending upon who I converse with. I keep an eye open for someone willing to travel the depths with an open mind, but you may not be such a person. If you admitted to a spatial matter proportional to velocity I would have further explained my position, but being unsure at this point I'll keep my third eye open. It's not everybody's cup of empty tea, so I don't force it.

That said, we're presently working on the cause for rotation and its relation to magnetism, or at least I am, and as Austin noted above also the defining of matter. You seem pretty wise, and have already given a hint of the two prevailing topics, but feel free to elaborate on such urgent matters as you wish.

I'm willing to discuss and explore anything you like with an open mind. If I were to be a truly wise person as you have suggested, then I would surely realize that the more I've learned, the less I realize I know due to the simple mechanics of every answer gained will always lead to twice as many further questions.

Now, as for staticity, I'd love to delve into your logic on this a bit, but I'm not sure if I'll see it as you. It may take some work. The only staticity that I can concieve as a motion materialist is a block universe from a scientific perspective or eternalism from a philosophical perspective, whereby the universe is a 4D extension. From a materialist perspective this is easy to imagine due to only having to deal with the temporal extension of matter itself in terms of density changes. These changes would take place in quantum steps or quantities of substance conserving mass in the temporal direction by relative changes of the other three spatially extended dimensions, and due to my belief of precision, each temporal progression would exhibit an homogenous and isotropic motion mechanics throughout the whole in all four dimensions. If such a block universe had an infinite temporal extension which exhibited the precision expansion and contraction cycling dynamics of the whole as discussed by Lloyd and myself, then we honestly couldn't distinguish whether we are part of such a system or not, due to any measurement we take in any direction and at any location displaying nothing more than the conserved symmetry of motion throughout time and space.

As for rotation and magnetism, we must also keep in mind that there is also another axis of motion, which is linear. If we acknowledge the FS as merely density mechanics, then to delve into such topics at the absolute scale, simply requires us to merely imagine the dynamics of substance moving through substance. Imagine a spherical piece of ice moving through a swimming pool as it rotated and linearly propagated perpendicular to the axis of this rotation. now imagine that every motion undergone is either caused by the motions of the pool or is an intrinsic property internal to the ice whereby the pool must react to these motions. Either way, the surrounding water must interact in relation to these motions whereby having density changes in areas along with a flow of substance around the ice to fill all voids. There's also an aspect of water flowing into the structure of the ice and outward back to the collective value of the pool, depending upon the imposed conditions and such. Now imagine that this is all taking place at extreme velocities within the very substance whose motions and density changes are the origin of charge, gravity and such, due to the fact that there's nothing else to constitute such cause matter and motion is all that we have to work with. The motions of the FS with and within itself present all the dynamics required to explain any and all observed phenomenon IMHO, if we merely take into account the effects of all these ice spheres interacting with each other within this universal swimming pool, and these interactions effecting density changes and such which allow for seperation itself between the ice spheres. We live in a very dynamic universe, and within the model we often discuss here, if we could explain all the observed phenomena such as the four 'forces' without taking into consideration all of the dynamics of such a unique substance, then we would either be using the wrong paradigm, or we have more 'forces' to acknowledge. All the pieces should fit in the end.

I would actually be more concerned and confused if we ever find a bunch of cube shape planets orbiting a cube shaped star with no rotation in various orbital planes. If you really think about it, geometry itself is an indication of the direction of energy in terms of motion entropy at the absolute scale. Spherical planets and stars with disc shaped orbits says alot about the flow of substance into and outward from structured matter and the balance of motions forces relative to all structured matter interacting at distances if you really consider it, IMHO, but this is merely my personal conjecture.

later,

Tim

[Graybeard]

[CENTER]Relaxing Black Hole music

I love enigma .... plays endlessly in my car when I am traveling ... The cd is so worn, scratched and dirty. I always promise myself to clean it. But ...I never do, and so, as I'm driving I have to take it out and lick it and polish it on my jeans to get it to kick off ... must look crazy to others ... rotflmao

cool bananas ... greg

[analog]

As for mass and a crude representation of the mechanics of the FS, perhaps I can offer an example of such dynamics. Not to be taken literally, because I see the FS as fluidic in nature, but often particle representations are the easiest to picture in terms of merely capturing the dynamics at play. Imagine that we were to have a hollow sphere which had an elastic aspect of always trying to contract towards its center, and within this sphere it was filled with numerous BB's. Now these BB's all travel at the same velocity with absolute motion and are all bouncing off the walls of the hollow sphere in all directions causing the sphere to maintain a set diameter and countering the property of the sphere to contract any further. Now if we imagine that the larger sphere was linearly propagating in a single direction at a set velocity much less than the absolute motion velocity, then the remaining motion energy of the BB's in terms of distance covered per time or frequency, would set an established diameter of the sphere in relation to their frequency in various other random directions when not advancing forward. Speed the sphere up and the BB's lose their available motion energy to counter the spheres contraction aspect and the sphere shrinks its diameter further. In doing so, the combined motion energy of the BB's in the forward direction at a higher frequency would impose more force on another sphere of equal internal BB's which was traveling at a lesser velocity thus greater diameter in the opposing direction and came into contact with the sphere. It's merely natures quantum calculations to maintain order and motion symmetry throughout the whole. Motion is intrinsically linked to matter or FS, and this relationship is throughout the fabric of the FS to the point that each region can maintain itself locally in the same manner as the whole, whereby allowing the consistency of existence in terms of seperated regions of great distances displaying the same physics. This is just my opinion anyways.

later,

Tim

[austintorn@aol.com]

I love enigma .... plays endlessly in my car when I am traveling ... The cd is so worn, scratched and dirty. I always promise myself to clean it. But ...I never do, and so, as I'm driving I have to take it out and lick it and polish it on my jeans to get it to kick off ... must look crazy to others ... rotflmao

cool bananas ... greg

Lesiem, ERA, Magna Carta, and some of e nomine are great, too, being in that same vein.

[Nobody Nowhere]

I'm willing to discuss and explore anything you like with an open mind. If I were to be a truly wise person as you have suggested, then I would surely realize that the more I've learned, the less I realize I know due to the simple mechanics of every answer gained will always lead to twice as many further questions.

Now, as for staticity, I'd love to delve into your logic on this a bit, but I'm not sure if I'll see it as you. It may take some work. The only staticity that I can concieve as a motion materialist is a block universe from a scientific perspective or eternalism from a philosophical perspective, whereby the universe is a 4D extension. From a materialist perspective this is easy to imagine due to only having to deal with the temporal extension of matter itself in terms of density changes. These changes would take place in quantum steps or quantities of substance conserving mass in the temporal direction by relative changes of the other three spatially extended dimensions, and due to my belief of precision, each temporal progression would exhibit an homogenous and isotropic motion mechanics throughout the whole in all four dimensions. If such a block universe had an infinite temporal extension which exhibited the precision expansion and contraction cycling dynamics of the whole as discussed by Lloyd and myself, then we honestly couldn't distinguish whether we are part of such a system or not, due to any measurement we take in any direction and at any location displaying nothing more than the conserved symmetry of motion throughout time and space.

As for rotation and magnetism, we must also keep in mind that there is also another axis of motion, which is linear. If we acknowledge the FS as merely density mechanics, then to delve into such topics at the absolute scale, simply requires us to merely imagine the dynamics of substance moving through substance. Imagine a spherical piece of ice moving through a swimming pool as it rotated and linearly propagated perpendicular to the axis of this rotation. now imagine that every motion undergone is either caused by the motions of the pool or is an intrinsic property internal to the ice whereby the pool must react to these motions. Either way, the surrounding water must interact in relation to these motions whereby having density changes in areas along with a flow of substance around the ice to fill all voids. There's also an aspect of water flowing into the structure of the ice and outward back to the collective value of the pool, depending upon the imposed conditions and such. Now imagine that this is all taking place at extreme velocities within the very substance whose motions and density changes are the origin of charge, gravity and such, due to the fact that there's nothing else to constitute such cause matter and motion is all that we have to work with. The motions of the FS with and within itself present all the dynamics required to explain any and all observed phenomenon IMHO, if we merely take into account the effects of all these ice spheres interacting with each other within this universal swimming pool, and these interactions effecting density changes and such which allow for seperation itself between the ice spheres. We live in a very dynamic universe, and within the model we often discuss here, if we could explain all the observed phenomena such as the four 'forces' without taking into consideration all of the dynamics of such a unique substance, then we would either be using the wrong paradigm, or we have more 'forces' to acknowledge. All the pieces should fit in the end.

I would actually be more concerned and confused if we ever find a bunch of cube shape planets orbiting a cube shaped star with no rotation in various orbital planes. If you really think about it, geometry itself is an indication of the direction of energy in terms of motion entropy at the absolute scale. Spherical planets and stars with disc shaped orbits says alot about the flow of substance into and outward from structured matter and the balance of motions forces relative to all structured matter interacting at distances if you really consider it, IMHO, but this is merely my personal conjecture.

later,

Tim

I would like to respond in contrast to Austin's response, if that was really Austin, that there is no time at the absolute limit.

The constants put forth here, which govern modern physics, are based on planck. But my interest in the cause of rotation is based on h-bar (radians), which can serve as the basis for gravitational effects on matter at the very small scale from planck to absolute zero (the singularity). Just as electron pairs cancel each others' magnetic moments, gravity cancels the em force at planck. The force therein is synonymous the em force toward the singularity – we can call it the anticonstant of the constant. And the result would not be likened to a field as is the case for particle annihilation, but the axial staticity of the universe at any given point (space and time are unified).

The zero point, any center of the universe, remains at zero kelvin adhering to the zeroth-law of thermodynamics, while allowing illusory (get to that in a moment) motion adhering to the third law of motion: Any outward positive charge from the center is negate by an equal and opposite inward negative charge toward the center. The absolute equilibrium of the universe that is maintained is synonymous to instantaneous action from any point of the universe to any other point of the universe because all points are the center of the universe; this is what is meant by absolute speed (as opposed to directional velocity). The absolute rod at both ends move instantaneous one another.

The illusory motion (held at the relativistic standard “c”) is based upon a reduction in the above absolute speed, whereby effects from point A to B to Z can be differentiated. This all-important keyword 'differentiation' is the basis for conscious observation and interpretation of all phenomenal limits at the planck horizon, without which we would be blinded by the light/darkness as the universal waves would cancel each other out.

The absolute “FS” has a dual perspective of one and zero (like binary machine language) representing the least (zero, absolute vacuity) and the most (one whole universe, absolute solidity) which are rendered identical to maintain the above equilibrium which can never change. A useful analogy might be the impossibility of entering an absolutely full room; or a room that isn't there. The states are one and the same.

Enter the HIG (Hydrodynamic Infinite Gravity) governed by the subconsciousness which acts as a supercomputer calculating at an infinite rate the proportional configurations that make sense to our sensory consciousness. It divides the FS by default – 0/0=n – and governs the continual subatomic process of annihilation and creation of virtual particle pairs, which are merely inward (negative) and outward (positive) time-dependent (as per the above-noted illusory reductions) aether jolts.

I have to say that your thought and effort are astounding, Analog, with regards to the corpuscular ice and BB's, but that you may have discounted the intrinsic momenta internal the ice and BB's which in effect further discount their essential one-pointed nature; wherein the ice and BB's and universal pool can be differentiated, the FS cannot. The exact point of the BB's rebound is the point in question.

Maybe we can think forward in terms of the FS not merely being an undifferentiated substance, but of the same exact time, which from a universal perspective would be no time at all.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Nobody, let me point out the real and true inconsistencies in your thought, and where it comes from, from not taking charge, mass and motion fundamental enough to realize there are no cancelations of charges, motions or masses__what-so-ever... It's all FS-Changing Masses, Charges and Motion States, to all infinity, even if described finitely, all the way to the center of all, what you are referring to as, singularities__or the central, charge, mass and motion actions of all atomic centers__and that this is where almost everyone makes the fundamental mistakes, by not realizing what the absololute fundamentals of charge, mass and motions__truly are__and why it's all limited by classical c-mechanics__yet can be described in QM and RM... Absolute observation is still the superior view, as it's the only one taking in all three...

I would like to respond in contrast to Austin's response, if that was really Austin, that there is no time at the absolute limit.

And this would be against the CM reality of direct observation, and also against the absolute view. To make such a foolish mistake, would require a needless 'Creation Myth' to restart the Universal Motion__Thus is discredited by all scientific and logical necessities... Nobody, you can't go where you can't go__Science offers no vehicle for this ride__Na Da...!!! Time/distance is eternally in motion... Austin and you are contradicting your own given logics__and science allows no contradictions of the logics involved...

The constants put forth here, which govern modern physics, are based on planck. But my interest in the cause of rotation is based on h-bar (radians), which can serve as the basis for gravitational effects on matter at the very small scale from planck to absolute zero (the singularity).

You make the mistake here of assuming an absolute zero, just after stating Planck, which never offers an absolute zero state, in any of its constants, niether does h-bar radians... Your singularity at any absolute zero measurement is your personal exaggeration of physical states. Even if we were to take all infinitesimal charges, masses and motions__they must always sum to the total of their added infinity__if you choose to keep these additions finite__then they still must sum to the total and added absolute finite. Everyone in science, and personally, are trying to do physics by stating such false premises as postives cancel negatives, or negatives cancel positives__They forget these are real and absolute fundamental charges of real FS-MASS flows__always real flows of FS-Masses, whether figured as charges or masses__to sum__they always are absolutely required to be ADDED__NOT and NEVER CANCELED...!!! Science needs to learn to ADD...!!!

All Charges Have Absolute Mass…

The Addition of All Infinitesimal Masses and Charges Sum To The Total Mass of Infinity__Or Finity, Iff That Be Your Choice…

Charge Is The Infinitesimal Masses of Absolute Particle-Waves In Motion…

Charge Is Nothing But The Direction of FS-Flow…

Both Positive And Negative Charges Are Real Absolute Masses…

All Waves Have Infinitesimal Masses Moving The Waves…

No Thing or Entity Can or Does Exist, Without Carrying Absolute Mass__Either Infinitesimal or Larger…

Just as electron pairs cancel each others' magnetic moments, gravity cancels the em force at planck.

This is absolutely false as per above. Any set of magnets proves this false. Negatives repel negatives with real forces, just as do the positives... And no forces are ever canceled__They may be equalized, but never canceled__You can never cancel an Absolute FS-Force, Mass or Charge__As They Be Absolute Flows of FS...

The force therein is synonymous the em force toward the singularity – we can call it the anticonstant of the constant.

You're just making up pseudo-physics here, Nobody__So, back to classical reality views of QM and RM, with AM(absolute mechanics...)

And the result would not be likened to a field as is the case for particle annihilation, but the axial staticity of the universe at any given point (space and time are unified).

Sorry, No-Go__You're just exaggerating your own imagination here__Physics must deal with the real charges, masses and motions__Always... FS don't go away__It's permanent...

The zero point, any center of the universe, remains at zero kelvin adhering to the zeroth-law of thermodynamics, while allowing illusory (get to that in a moment) motion adhering to the third law of motion: Any outward positive charge from the center is negate by an equal and opposite inward negative charge toward the center.

Sorry, just more of your impossible imagination, breaking the laws of charge conservation, mass conservation and motion conservation... Imagination can never break the laws of physics, and be real or respected...

The absolute equilibrium of the universe that is maintained is synonymous to instantaneous action from any point of the universe to any other point of the universe because all points are the center of the universe; this is what is meant by absolute speed (as opposed to directional velocity). The absolute rod at both ends move instantaneous one another.

Sorry, just more of your impossible imagination, breaking the laws of charge conservation, mass conservation and motion conservation... Imagination can never break the laws of physics, and be real or respected...

The illusory motion (held at the relativistic standard “c”) is based upon a reduction in the above absolute speed, whereby effects from point A to B to Z can be differentiated. This all-important keyword 'differentiation' is the basis for conscious observation and interpretation of all phenomenal limits at the planck horizon, without which we would be blinded by the light/darkness as the universal waves would cancel each other out.

Nobody, this is where you make your greatest mistake, by adherring to RM to try and describe CM__It can only be done with AM, because RM is far too subjective to see the whole, from the outside__fully objectively... Step outside the Universe, to see how the real FS-Universe mechanically functions, not viewed possible, from the inside RM... See, here's your contradiction__You keep bouncing back and forth between Planck being valid, then invalidating Planck with your all imaginary absolute zero time, mass and point illusions__That's the problem with the subjective delusion__Noumena Don't Work...!!!

The absolute “FS” has a dual perspective of one and zero (like binary machine language) representing the least (zero, absolute vacuity) and the most (one whole universe, absolute solidity) which are rendered identical to maintain the above equilibrium which can never change. A useful analogy might be the impossibility of entering an absolutely full room; or a room that isn't there. The states are one and the same.

Nobody, again you must learn to add positives and negatives__not subtract or cancel. The Universe no matter how figured ADDS up to its initial and eternal total__Always...!!! All charges, masses and motions of the FS are eternally conserved... Then you must learn to distinguish between high and low densities__Solids and Gasses, etc...

Enter the HIG (Hydrodynamic Infinite Gravity) governed by the subconsciousness which acts as a supercomputer calculating at an infinite rate the proportional configurations that make sense to our sensory consciousness. It divides the FS by default – 0/0=n – and governs the continual subatomic process of annihilation and creation of virtual particle pairs, which are merely inward (negative) and outward (positive) time-dependent (as per the above-noted illusory reductions) aether jolts.

Again, you are mixing and matching falsely__Take the RM out of you CM and AM, so's you can see the reality of the FS that Tim and I are describing. As per above, there are ABSOLUTELY NO annihilations or creations of virtual particle pairs__They are absolute charges and masses of FS in motion__And must be ADDED to fully understand__Whether from the infinitesimals up, or the Infinite Finite down... QM is asleep at the wheel__here...!!!

I have to say that your thought and effort are astounding, Analog, with regards to the corpuscular ice and BB's, but that you may have discounted the intrinsic momenta internal the ice and BB's which in effect further discount their essential one-pointed nature; wherein the ice and BB's and universal pool can be differentiated, the FS cannot. The exact point of the BB's rebound is the point in question.

Sorry Nobody, but I and Tim agree__and we are both fully aware of all internal mechanics from QM's deepest levels, to RM's most vast levels, and always interpretable into the simple CM...

Maybe we can think forward in terms of the FS not merely being an undifferentiated substance, but of the same exact time, which from a universal perspective would be no time at all.

Then you have zero quantization capacity for the Universe__Just a wee bit impossible...