Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?



FrediFizzx wrote:
> "Curious" <anthonyroseuk-curious@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1117244980.556775.11490@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | Fredi, one more quick question:
> |
> | Can you give an extremely concise description of dual space? Is it
> | basically an hypothesized alternate dimension into which the pairs
> | vanish, making them not only completely undetectable in our
> space-time,
> | but not even present? I find the claim that it has been proved to be
> | somewhat incredible... was this proof simply a mathematically coherent
> | model, do you know?
>
> Are you referring to reference [13] Melnikov's concept about the unified
> right-handed Euclidian and left-handed Minkowsky-Riemann hyperbolic
> space-times for the proof? If so, the official version of that paper is
> in Russian. We did a rough English translation of it but some of the
> figures had low resolution that are hard to read and I never did finish
> fixing it up with the higher resolution figures. Hmm... Maybe a good
> project for this holiday weekend. However, we would have to get
> approval for the English translation from Melnikov before we let anyone
> else see it. Can you read Russian? I can give you a link for that
> version. If you want to see the English version, I might be able to get
> permission but will probably take me a few days as I have to go thru a
> person to translate. Melnikov's work might be the most concise
> description using geometry.
>

Read Russian?! I can't even remember what their alphabetic script is
called! But I just wanted to know if the claim of proof was worth
looking into.

> I can give you my naive view of dual space-time that isn't quite so
> concise. The basic premise is a Dirac-like Sea modified. First you
> have to get rid of the negative energy states. Only positive energy
> states are allowed. This is a tough one. But I think you are already
> on to this. IOW, an electron is a positive enery state and so is a
> positron. But they are still opposite energy states of each other and

Ok. Why only -ve or only +ve?

> "cancel out" when brought together. Energy is conserved, so their
> energy goes flying off as photons. Now, assuming that there is somekind

Or could the energy re-appear at the nearest available 're-entry' point
as either the same or another form of particle(s)? (Perhaps by
conduction through the lattice?) Billiard-balls in a row knock-on
effect.

Actually I was thinking of the 'pairs' (or whatever they might be)
being sub-particle. In other words, an electron or photon or whatever
form of light or matter you care to pick is a form of resonance. At the
risk of dragging this entire flight of fancy into the below-decks
watery mess of misunderstanding by association, if you conside a wave
motion it has a peak and a trough, which can cancel each other out. In
a rest state we have a straight line. What if we cannot detect a
'straight line' in this vacuum sea? What if an electron only becomes
existent when the medium is disrupted by energy? But the nature of each
'particle' created depends on the specific set of underlying combined
forms of harmonically stable 'oscillations' (or 'states') of the medium
at its various levels.
Obviously I don't have the physics to iron these wonderings out into
anything remotely useful. Hope I'm not wastng your time reading this!

> of basic entity envolved with the electron and positron, what happens to
> these entities? We believe that they don't really just disappear but
> become part of the other space (sea) of dual space. Second, there isn't
> an infinite spectrum of energies allowed for "less than virtual"
> fermions in the "sea". There are only certain possible "resonances"
> allowed by the geometry of the interactions of the sea fermions. These
> resonances should represent the particles of the Standard Model. In our
> "spin matrix" model, we also have some possible resonances that don't
> represent particles in the SM. We suspect they are Goldstone bosons.
> And work with fermions to become all the extra composite resonances that
> we see in the particle zoo.
>

Fascinating!

Oh by the way - thanks for the direct and clear responses.

> FrediFizzx
>
> http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.pdf
> or postscript
> http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.ps

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
    ... Only positive energy ... If the electron and positron are brought together slowly, ... |> become part of the other space of dual space. ... |> we see in the particle zoo. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
    ... Melnikov's work might be the most concise ... have to get rid of the negative energy states. ... become part of the other space of dual space. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Virtual Particle confusion
    ... > environment will tend to match any other sampling of the environment ... > the nature and direction of each individual particle. ... > be able to catch and use the energy from each individual particle ... and they're using statistics to patch ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: Question about Vacuum Gravity
    ... > energy, expressed as virtual particles, is a non-zero amount, ... I'm really happy with two different kinds of photons. ... >> Particle sizes are discrete. ... virtuals are popping. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Virtual Particle confusion
    ... it means that each particle in the closed environment is ... equally statistically likely to have the same amount of kinetic energy. ... and they're using statistics to patch the ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
Quantcast