Quantum Wave Cosmology is my TOE :)

[labelwench]

LOL Walter stands corrected and must now bear the brunt of a stern talk from his alter ego.

I see those horizons that stretch before us and they appear to me to be bright and hopeful.

Wayne R

I observe with interest, the various threads and discussions related to the concept of a Theory Of Everything, to gain a better insight into how others perceive the marvelous experience of life.

From children and elders, animals and nature, it pleases me to remark that even without such a theory, the circumstantial evidence would be that acting in the interests of each other results in the greatest personal reward while utilizing the least amount of energy and resources.

Learning to give freely of oneself requires that we first learn the skills and trust that the universe has far more resources to offer than the few that we are presently dependent upon and depleting by our fearful and uncompromising nature towards each other at the global level.

It is a pleasure to note that there are many persons at this forum working toward change, a change which we very much need, IMO.

Delightful to see also, that Bogie now has another to assist him with his work on this topic.

[labelwench]

You can call me Lorrain, or you can call me Walter, but just don’t call me late for dinner .

That was my fall-back position, Bogie, merely to add another a.k.a. to the many which I have seemingly acquired at this forum, lol....

To most I am L.W.
Others call me by my full handle, Labelwench.
Many know me as Lorrina.
To Austin, I am Label.
Graham only ever calls me Anna.
And when my mother calls me Anna Lorrina, she surely means for me to listen up, lol.

It was an observation test, Walter.
You passed.

Of course, I would still converse with you even if you persisted with the Lorrian, as they are all derivatives of similar origin.

http://www.babynamespedia.com/meaning/Lorina

For the record, I was taught to spell my name with two r's though my birth certificate has only one. The family can't quite agree on how this error came about, and it matters naught to me, lol.....

If I answer to them all, it's unlikely I'll miss dinner....

[Penz2nz]

You can call me Lorrain, or you can call me Walter, but just don’t call me late for dinner .

LOL, Thanks "Bob"

[Penz2nz]

That was my fall-back position, Bogie, merely to add another a.k.a. to the many which I have seemingly acquired at this forum, lol....

To most I am L.W.
Others call me by my full handle, Labelwench.
Many know me as Lorrina.
To Austin, I am Label.
Graham only ever calls me Anna.
And when my mother calls me Anna Lorrina, she surely means for me to listen up, lol.

It was an observation test, Walter.
You passed.

Of course, I would still converse with you even if you persisted with the Lorrian, as they are all derivatives of similar origin.

http://www.babynamespedia.com/meaning/Lorina

For the record, I was taught to spell my name with two r's though my birth certificate has only one. The family can't quite agree on how this error came about, and it matters naught to me, lol.....

If I answer to them all, it's unlikely I'll miss dinner....

Maybe I should consider tapping into your Mother's lead and just use the initials to call you AL but then I would have the constant nagging of a Paul Simon tune stuck in my head.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rN7R...eature=related

[Bogie]

...

Delightful to see also, that Bogie now has another to assist him with his work on this topic.

I appreciate that too and let me acknowledge the assists that I have received all along from the forum members. Each of our ToEs are joint efforts. It is nice when new ideas come along like Wayne's that deserve contemplation. And I am giving them a lot of thought.

[Penz2nz]

I appreciate that too and let me acknowledge the assists that I have received all along from the forum members. Each of our ToEs are joint efforts. It is nice when new ideas come along like Wayne's that deserve contemplation. And I am giving them a lot of thought.

Bogie, thank you very much. I must freely admit that my initial thoughts of joining this group included seeing my ideas ignored at best and ridiculed at worst. Although I have taken a minor pot shot or two like Austintorn's reference to my affiliation with "GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER" they are received with good humor. For the record, my affiliation (if you can call it that) is with Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. If I ever get around to posting my ToE it will be titled "The Unified Game Show Theory" which sprang from a real life event while I was trying to come up with a title for a book I have been working on related to this subject.

My thanks again to you, "Al", Austintorn, and all the others who are truly making this a pleasurable experience.

Wayne R

[Bogie]

Bogie, thank you very much. I must freely admit that my initial thoughts of joining this group included seeing my ideas ignored at best and ridiculed at worst. Although I have taken a minor pot shot or two like Austintorn's reference to my affiliation with "GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER" they are received with good humor. For the record, my affiliation (if you can call it that) is with Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. If I ever get around to posting my ToE it will be titled "The Unified Game Show Theory" which sprang from a real life event while I was trying to come up with a title for a book I have been working on related to this subject.

My thanks again to you, "Al", Austintorn, and all the others who are truly making this a pleasurable experience.

Wayne R

I know what you mean about how religious concepts are often ridiculed but not by me. Religion necessarily includes supernatural events and in QWC the supernatural equates to non-algorithmic events. We may not agree on what events are non-algorithmic but we can agree that they can happen so who is to say which ones are real or not.

Up for consideration is the concept that matter travels through the field of light/space that can be mapped in three dimensions and that this field of light is the same thing as the QWC universal medium. Motion of objects through 3D Euclidean space is the accepted QWC perspective and differentiates QWC from General Relativity, but the concept of light being the universal medium presents a conflict.

What unites QWC and General Relativity is the fact that objects travel through space in curved paths under both perspectives. To distinguish between the curved spacetime of GR and the Curved Path in QWC you only need to consider that the motion of objects is communicated through the universal medium (UM) with a time delay. Objects move relative to other objects based on where those objects were, and the formula for where the objects were includes the Now time of a given object minus the time delay between the objects.

Now when I consider the proposed concept that “light” is a stable condition and when we view an object at a distance we are seeing the surface of the object in real time, then there is a conflict between the observed location of objects in gravitational communication and in visual communication.

That conflict is not tenable in QWC. The time delay that affects the motion of objects moving through space causes objects to move in curved paths as if space itself was curved, and therefore the time delay of gravity in Euclidean space and the curvature of spacetime in General Relativity are two perspectives on the same phenomenon. But the instantaneous observation of the surfaces of objects due to the concept that “light” and the universal medium are the same things is not compatible with QWC gravity and not consistent with the QWC concept of observation of objects across the universal medium.

[Penz2nz]

I know what you mean about how religious concepts are often ridiculed but not by me. Religion necessarily includes supernatural events and in QWC the supernatural equates to non-algorithmic events. We may not agree on what events are non-algorithmic but we can agree that they can happen so who is to say which ones are real or not.

Up for consideration is the concept that matter travels through the field of light/space that can be mapped in three dimensions and that this field of light is the same thing as the QWC universal medium. Motion of objects through 3D Euclidean space is the accepted QWC perspective and differentiates QWC from General Relativity, but the concept of light being the universal medium presents a conflict.

What unites QWC and General Relativity is the fact that objects travel through space in curved paths under both perspectives. To distinguish between the curved spacetime of GR and the Curved Path in QWC you only need to consider that the motion of objects is communicated through the universal medium (UM) with a time delay. Objects move relative to other objects based on where those objects were, and the formula for where the objects were includes the Now time of a given object minus the time delay between the objects.

Now when I consider the proposed concept that “light” is a stable condition and when we view an object at a distance we are seeing the surface of the object in real time, then there is a conflict between the observed location of objects in gravitational communication and in visual communication.

That conflict is not tenable in QWC. The time delay that affects the motion of objects moving through space causes objects to move in curved paths as if space itself was curved, and therefore the time delay of gravity in Euclidean space and the curvature of spacetime in General Relativity are two perspectives on the same phenomenon. But the instantaneous observation of the surfaces of objects due to the concept that “light” and the universal medium are the same things is not compatible with QWC gravity and not consistent with the QWC concept of observation of objects across the universal medium.

Bogie,

Thanks for the feedback, and I apologize for not taking time to edit your quote but I will try to respond as best I can under the current time constraints.

My ToE requires an understanding that the "space-time" model is useless. In a "space-light" universe we return to Newtonian absolute time and space. Gravity and Newton's law's of motion and gravitation return to a condition where such things as time warps, and singularities cannot exist. This was a problem for Einstein because he never bought into the idea that the laws of physics could fail and they most certainly do in a singularity. That is why he spent the rest of his life trying to solve this problem with his theory.

The idea that we can seriously consider everything in our universe being gravitationally compressed into a single point of zero mass is ludicrous. With all of our engineering savvy and industrial might; I would like to see someone compress one gallon of water into a single drop, let alone out of existence. You can change its form from liquid to gas but you will never crush it out of existence.

Now let's consider gravity for a moment. A singularity supposedly increases in gravitational strength (as is true for all objects of mass) the closer you get. Until you reach the center where you are a goner. With that in mind it seems logical that if you could travel to the center of the earth you would find the force of gravitation at its greatest.

Not so fast! You are now being attracted gravitationally outward in all directions, toward the surface. In other words; at earth's center you would be just as weightless as you would be in a shuttle orbiting the earth. Only this time your space craft is the earth orbiting the sun.

Common sense is so much more interesting.

Wayne R

[Bogie]

Bogie,

Thanks for the feedback, and I apologize for not taking time to edit your quote but I will try to respond as best I can under the current time constraints.

My ToE requires an understanding that the "space-time" model is useless. In a "space-light" universe we return to Newtonian absolute time and space. Gravity and Newton's law's of motion and gravitation return to a condition where such things as time warps, and singularities cannot exist. This was a problem for Einstein because he never bought into the idea that the laws of physics could fail and they most certainly do in a singularity. That is why he spent the rest of his life trying to solve this problem with his theory.

The idea that we can seriously consider everything in our universe being gravitationally compressed into a single point of zero mass is ludicrous. With all of our engineering savvy and industrial might; I would like to see someone compress one gallon of water into a single drop, let alone out of existence. You can change its form from liquid to gas but you will never crush it out of existence.

Thanks Wayne,

I think we agree that Einstein’s equations describe the effect of gravity pretty well though there are observed anomalies, i.e. they don’t precisely correspond to reality. In spite of that we are probably both willing to acknowledge that the mathematical solutions and the spacetime coordinate system that describes curved spacetime in the presence of mass and energy remains the benchmark. Therefore an alternative ToE like mine and presumably yours will have to address gravity.

I address it by speculating that objects move through space in curved paths due to the time delay of gravity being transmitted across the universal medium (UM) at the speed of light. Clearly the speed of (what the mainstream calls) light can be measured and gravity presumably traverses the same medium and logically does so at the speed of light.

We agree that there are no time warps or singularities in reality, and the math that arrives at them is incomplete and incompatible across various popular theories. There is no infinite density in QWC and the math that leads to infinite density is replaced by the speculations about preconditions to big bang type events.

Now let's consider gravity for a moment. A singularity supposedly increases in gravitational strength (as is true for all objects of mass) the closer you get. Until you reach the center where you are a goner. With that in mind it seems logical that if you could travel to the center of the earth you would find the force of gravitation at its greatest.

Not so fast! You are now being attracted gravitationally outward in all directions, toward the surface. In other words; at earth's center you would be just as weightless as you would be in a shuttle orbiting the earth. Only this time your space craft is the earth orbiting the sun.

Common sense is so much more interesting.

Agreed and common sense is often the stimulus for discovery. As you point out with your “center of the earth” scenario there is more to the cause of gravity than math and a coordinate system; maybe it is best said that all mass has gravity. Change the locations of objects relative to each other and the net gravitational effect between them changes as you explained.

I call it conservation of low density universal medium in space relative to the presence of mass. On that basis, objects in QWC move toward the path of lowest density in the universal medium. Likewise, in QWC the low density medium surrounds mass right from the initial particle formation that occurs within each new arena as explained in previous posts (blue shifting of photon waves as they encounter the superluminal expansion of dense UM emerging from big crunches).

Please remember that in QWC particles are not solid in any way, they are only wave intersections, wave crests and wave troughs characterized by density fluctuations in the UM which is in perpetual density change at any point. A wave crest in the UM is an expanding spherical density fluctuation. A particle is group of fluctuations in a specific space. An object is a dense group of particles. A big crunch is the ultimate concentration of UM wave density because the individual quantum waves of matter captured are forced into huge arena waves that cannot be contained by gravity. The break out of the arena wave occurs before infinite density of the UM is achieved, i.e. no infinite density is possible in QWC.

As quantum particles clump they become concentrated groups of wave intersections and overlaps. Configurations of those groups become synchronized and stable, atoms form, and electromagnetism and thus radiation begins. Throughout the clumping process and right up to the stage of galaxy formation the low density medium surrounding each quantum particle, each grouping, each object is conserved because it is continually refreshed each instant by the formation of new wave crests at each quantum wave intersection/overlap. A greater accumulation of mass results in a greater accumulation of low density surrounding the mass and that results in a greater gravitational attraction of that mass relative to other objects.

As to how the gravitational wave is transmitted across space, it is simply that the object maintains its surrounding low density UM. As an object moves through space its continually refreshing mass leaves a trail of low density through the UM in proportion to the amount of the mass contained in the object.

The UM is continually equalizing its density across contiguous space and so low density trails left in the medium by moving masses are spread between objects by the process of UM density equalization. The objects are all in motion and that motion always leaves a path of low density in the medium behind and the motion is always occurring toward the forward path of lowest density in the medium. Therefore objects move in curved paths as they follow the path of lowest density in front of them left behind by objects that themselves where moving in curved paths. The path in front of an object is always the net of all of the low density trails left by other objects and so each possible forward vector has a different density; only one possible path has the lowest density. The density of the UM becomes the perpetual record of the movement of mass. Simple, right ?

[Penz2nz]

Thanks Wayne,

I think we agree that Einstein’s equations describe the effect of gravity pretty well though there are observed anomalies, i.e. they don’t precisely correspond to reality. In spite of that we are probably both willing to acknowledge that the mathematical solutions and the spacetime coordinate system that describes curved spacetime in the presence of mass and energy remains the benchmark. Therefore an alternative ToE like mine and presumably yours will have to address gravity.

I address it by speculating that objects move through space in curved paths due to the time delay of gravity being transmitted across the universal medium (UM) at the speed of light. Clearly the speed of (what the mainstream calls) light can be measured and gravity presumably traverses the same medium and logically does so at the speed of light.

We agree that there are no time warps or singularities in reality, and the math that arrives at them is incomplete and incompatible across various popular theories. There is no infinite density in QWC and the math that leads to infinite density is replaced by the speculations about preconditions to big bang type events.

Agreed and common sense is often the stimulus for discovery. As you point out with your “center of the earth” scenario there is more to the cause of gravity than math and a coordinate system; maybe it is best said that all mass has gravity. Change the locations of objects relative to each other and the net gravitational effect between them changes as you explained.

I call it conservation of low density universal medium in space relative to the presence of mass. On that basis, objects in QWC move toward the path of lowest density in the universal medium. Likewise, in QWC the low density medium surrounds mass right from the initial particle formation that occurs within each new arena as explained in previous posts (blue shifting of photon waves as they encounter the superluminal expansion of dense UM emerging from big crunches).

Please remember that in QWC particles are not solid in any way, they are only wave intersections, wave crests and wave troughs characterized by density fluctuations in the UM which is in perpetual density change at any point. A wave crest in the UM is an expanding spherical density fluctuation. A particle is group of fluctuations in a specific space. An object is a dense group of particles. A big crunch is the ultimate concentration of UM wave density because the individual quantum waves of matter captured are forced into huge arena waves that cannot be contained by gravity. The break out of the arena wave occurs before infinite density of the UM is achieved, i.e. no infinite density is possible in QWC.

As quantum particles clump they become concentrated groups of wave intersections and overlaps. Configurations of those groups become synchronized and stable, atoms form, and electromagnetism and thus radiation begins. Throughout the clumping process and right up to the stage of galaxy formation the low density medium surrounding each quantum particle, each grouping, each object is conserved because it is continually refreshed each instant by the formation of new wave crests at each quantum wave intersection/overlap. A greater accumulation of mass results in a greater accumulation of low density surrounding the mass and that results in a greater gravitational attraction of that mass relative to other objects.

As to how the gravitational wave is transmitted across space, it is simply that the object maintains its surrounding low density UM. As an object moves through space its continually refreshing mass leaves a trail of low density through the UM in proportion to the amount of the mass contained in the object.

The UM is continually equalizing its density across contiguous space and so low density trails left in the medium by moving masses are spread between objects by the process of UM density equalization. The objects are all in motion and that motion always leaves a path of low density in the medium behind and the motion is always occurring toward the forward path of lowest density in the medium. Therefore objects move in curved paths as they follow the path of lowest density in front of them left behind by objects that themselves where moving in curved paths. The path in front of an object is always the net of all of the low density trails left by other objects and so each possible forward vector has a different density; only one possible path has the lowest density. The density of the UM becomes the perpetual record of the movement of mass. Simple, right ?

Bogie,

Sorry but at the moment I am livid with this site!

I have attempted twice now to post a reply only to be caught in a "log in" loop!!! Please fix this TOE.

This is my last stab for a while as I don't have a lot of free time for this.

In a nutshell. Gravity is to my way of thinking either "G" forces caused by a very complex set of motions that we don't fully understand about the earth's orbit, rotation, and tumble through the universe. Or it might be the result of pressure from "space-light" much like atmospheric pressure.

Or maybe Newton had it right except for one little detail. He would have us believe that ALL bodies of mass are attractive to all other bodies. That assumption is flawed. Simple math should have told him that like values cancel out. Bodies of equal mass exert zero attractive force relative to each other. All "G" does is add complexity to the calculations and frustrates the people who continue with Cavendish experiments that fail to pin down the value because they wrongly conclude it must be something other than zero. Quarks on the other hand seem to be an expression of gravitational attractive force at its maximum, due to their inseparable nature.

Penrose is correct. The cosmological constant is zero.

Now; I am about to hit the send key and depart with a smile on my face, or go pull some of my thinning hair out.

Take care my friend

Wayne R