Re: Binding Energy Question

On Feb 28, 10:47 am, srp2...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 27 fév, 20:16, higis <hg...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 28, 7:28 am, srp2...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

How do you know the vacuum is empty.

That's the definition of vacuum.

Funny. In physics, terms don't necessary mean what
it says literally. So try to assimilate the double entendre
meanings.

The model doesn't  require any other meaning.

Gee. So just because it is called vacuum you have
to argue that it is really emptiness because the term
says so. This is a logic belonging to initial stage
of AI developments. Are you an early model? hehe


As I said, what if we are liike bubbles floating in the
great solidiity that is the quantum vacuum. Don't
use logic because nature may use hyper logic beyond
the minds of mere humans.

I prefer logic.

You have problem here buddy.. Don't use newtonian
logic because newtonian is just approximation..

Logic is not newtonian nor any other ian or ist or whatever.
Logic is logic. Cause induces effect.

What I mean to say is. Don't assume newtonian mindset.
Newtonian mindset uses simpler logic that is inbued
with newtonian worldview. For example. When you see
stuff appearing and disappearing in thin air. Using your
newtonian logic. You would say it is impossible because
newtonian implies cause and effect. But in the world
of GR and SR for example... let's mention the case of
Wheeler. He believed that mini blackholes and whiteholes
connected by hyperspatial links populate the vacuum
which he called quantum foam. If you can control
the vacuum and the links, you can teleport objects.
This is not newtonian logic but super quantum logic.
Although logic is logic, it varies how it is expressed.


If even one premise is false, there is no way that an
expected effect can be true. If an effect is true, there
is no way that all the premises will not be true.

This has been logics since prehistory.

don't even use quantum logic because quantum may
just be another approximation. Bottom line is. Don't
make the world conform to your thinking. Instead,
investigate and learn the truth without bias. You are
just full of bias that this blinds you greatly.

I prefer this blindness to the copenhagen disaster.

Why do you say it is disaster. Without QM, you won't
even have computers to surf the internet with.


Well. This is what Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD)
is all about.. QM or speficially QFT applied to quarks...

QCD never could correctly describe nucleons. Dead end.

It does?  Who says it doesn't.

It doesn't. There was an articles some years ago in
Scientific American on this issue. I must have it here
somewhere. I will try to re-locate it.

Pls. relocate it asap. I have complete archives of sci-am
from 1993 to now thanks to Torrent :)

Ok, I have it here.

Issue of July 1999,
Article "The mystery of Nucleon Spin"
By Rith and Schäfer

If you look at the end of the article you will
see that they are totally qualified.

Look at the first paragraph of section "The Trouble with QCD"


ok. I'll find it in my cd archive and read it and comment later...
note you can get the entire 1993-2008 issues of sci-am in one of
the torrent sites.

In fact, I have read similar comments from many other
qualified physicists over time.

SU(3) explains the 8 gluon fields. Pls. explain why you
believe QCD never could correctly describe nucleons.

Because experts in the field said so in this article, and
nobody countered otherwise afterwards.

I'm waiting for it. Maybe it's written in the hmm.. 1950s?

QCD was not yet around in 1950.

I was surprised why you said QCD can't describe nucleons
so thought you had a prehistoric collection of sci-am.
Are you 60+ yrs old like our dear ole Porat?


It is just a thought. I don't know what's behind QM
whether it's Bohmian or Many Worlds or other
more exotic principle which may need Witten level
math to understand.

If de Broglie was right, and I have all reasons to
believe he was,  what is behind QM as you say
is knowledge that will allow powered space flight,
and a new source of energy.

I like this kind of physics as it is more cool.
Morphogenetic field is actually boring physics because
you just deal and treat disorders in the field. A new
source of energy and fuelless space flight has more
action where we can terraform other planets. How does
your model support such possibilities? What's
the new source of energy possible in your model?



So the
statistical outputs may be all there is to it and
Copenhagen may still be right that our reality is
all about measurements using our instruments
for that's the best thing we could do since we can't
hack the computer algorithm run by nature.

Feel free to believe this if you want.

I didn't say I believe it. The Matrix Intrepretation is
not flexible enough to explain reality unless the
world have many infinite dimensions and our 3D
is just a game or simulation. But this is not likely
as you said.

There are means to momentarily shove it aside and
look at what is underneath. De Broglie gave us the
key.

De Broglie pilot wave and consequent development
by Bohm, Hiley, etc.

De Broglie's pilot wave has nothing to do with it.
I was talking about his theory on localized photons.

It's six of one and half a dozen of the others. Remember
it was De Broglie who said since light is particle
and wave, electron is also particle and wave. So it
has everything to do with it.

Well, de Broglie didn't become senile right after his
1924 thesis, you know. He went on working and
eventually came up with this new hypothesis that
allows reconciling Maxwell with localized em quanta.

He was ignored by the Copenhagen bunch simply
because he was a causalist.

Do you believe particle like electron is both wave and
particle? Because it seems you don't even believe it has
wave properties that can do those double slit experiment
tricks.


require omnipresent superluminal
Quantum Potential and this is as weird as anything.
This mechanism has to be conjured up because it
is the only way to make consistent with the data
(which you want to just ignore).

I ignored no verified experimental results.

You don't get it, do you. Using your model alone require
Bohm quantum potential

No it doesn't. No quantum potential required.

Then how do you match the behavior of the waveless
particles to be consistent with quantum theory?


to tally with the interference
experiments such as the double slit, etc.
and the many entanglement experiments.

No. Perfectly explainable with interacting
moving localized electromagnetic events,
electrons as well as photons.

Pls. explain how single molecule at a time
experiment works where it can interfere with
itself.

Gee. Do you think that by ignoring the experimental
results, the world and nature would change conforming
to your thinking. Come on, physics is not like arts
or fashion where you can choose to accept experimental
data and not others.

The results you are talking about are not real results
with individual photons, but statistical estimates transposed
to individual photons.

Shoot individual photons to the double slit one at a time,
how come after hours or days, there is interference pattern?
How does each photon know whether or not to land in
the dark or white areas?


In other words, that's a pile of baloney.

Ignoring it won't change the laws of physics to
conform to your views.

Well. I'm still clueless how to tie up to the Standard
Model. I study Gauge Theories to know what Lie
group the morphogenetic field belong to... whether
U(1), SU(2), SU(3) or even a new SU(4) but so far
no successes. It couldn't be a new force because
they are already occupied. Maybe it's a new
field like the Higgs field that need to be cooked up.
Whatever it is, it would be relevant in the Electroweak
scale so the LHC Terascale experiments would be
important. I guess we sorcerers must handle particle
accelerators too.

I'd bet you could easily match the Copenhagen bunch.

The reason I'm home with the Copenhagen bunch and
the different bizarre explanations (Many world, etc.) is
because they describe the world which is magicial as
I experienced it for decades.

No agenda. Just want to understand it. But unfortunately,
the physics of sorcery is a multidisciplinary science
involving relativistic quantum field theory, solid state
physics,  biochemistry, neuroscience, genetic engineering,
chemistry, medicine, Epigenetics, etc. You need to excel in them
to understand it that's why I said it may take decades for us
sorcerers to introduce the new physics to the world because we
are few in numbers and we have to deal what should be taken by
physicsts and other scientists. If we don't do this. Nobody
will. Such a sad state isn't it. Billions of humans can benefit
from it including your family, relativity and friends. This is
because the morphogenetic field can affect biochemistry
which can affect the DNA via Epigenetics. So you can control
the health of the body by morphogenetic theraphy.
Literally billions can benefit from this making the world a
better place. But numb brain Copenhagens just want to
focus on the maths and have tunnel vision when looking
at reality.

Boy, the laugh you gave me here dude !!!... I got so blurrieyed
I had to straighten up and blink a few times before I could
read the last 3 lines.

Btw.. sorcery is about damaging the morphogenetic field
of another person. I treat the damage and knows exactly
how the damage occurs. But don't know how to tie it up
with physics of the Standard model. But it really boring
physics as it won't give you unlimited energy or more
powerful nukes or faster fighter planes.


LHC not required. Stable matter parameters have all been
experimentally verified already.

Wrong. The Large Hadron Collider can give us more energy
that can conjure up particles of more mass such as the
Higgs or supersymmetric partners or even structures that
only we sorcerers can make out. You feel only stable
matters (such as the electron, neutrino, up and down
quarks, photons) need to be studied.

Not really. I feel that they are sufficient to build the universe
as we know it. All other scatterable particles are excited
states that eventually degrade to these.

Gee. If that is so. Explain why they are 3 generations
of participles.

Easy. In my model, photons (1rst) beget electrons
and positrons (2) and threesomes of electrons and
positrons beget quarks down and up (3)

What the heck. What I mean is why how come the
following is so:

1st generation particles: electron, neutrino, up & down quarks
2nd generation: muon, muon neutrino, charm and strange quarks
3rd generation: tau, tau neutrino, top and bottom quarks

we live only in 1st generation world. How come there is another
2 orders higher? What is its purpose? How come all particles
from experiments done with the limited energies produce those
main ingredients. Explain this throroughly. If you can't explain it.
Your acceptance of the 1st generation particles and ignoring others
as just debris without any consequences or mathematical
purpose is just prejudices of the highest order. The weak bosons
are also the additional bosons produced.

Speaking of which. Without the weak bosons. How does neutron
transmute into proton without the W- that can produce the electron
and neutron for charge and energy conservations?




Also note if you believe in the Schroedinger
Equations, the additional forces are a requirements to
make the equations become say local invariant in
phase and obey isospin invariants, etc. So the forces
have to exist if QM if correct. Ponder on this dude.

Well, the Schrödinger equation is just an equation.
Math. You can have math do anything you wish as
long as you remain self consistent.

But how come the equation automatically describes
the photon, weak bosons, etc. when extended
relativistically?







These are being studied too. No problem with this.
But when the chips are down, only stable particles
make up matter and energy in the universe.

Well. The forces of nature
happens to have higher mass such as the vectorial weak
bosons such as W+, W-, Z and we can only conjure
them up with high power accelerators.

Not required to understand stable matter.

Your problem is you just want to ignore those forces except
electromagnetism.

From my model, there are no forces other than electromagnetic
forces. No need for any others.

It's just blind prejudices. Show why it is so. I think you are
better than the hopeless crackpots here whose minds are
already so biased to think of anything else.

higis

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Binding Energy Question
    ... I like this kind of physics as it is more cool. ... I was talking about his theory on localized photons. ... electron is also particle and wave. ... Waveless particles simply can't exist. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity.
    ... Physics does depends on the choice ... Phases of wave functions of particles are present in my approach. ... >>electron will remain electron no matter what. ... that all observers agree that it's an electron. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Binding Energy Question
    ... In physics, ... so virtual particles of any energy (up to the electroweak ... behind the scene in the one electron at a time ... But numb brain Copenhagens just want to ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: What are relativists?
    ... The content of relativity is invariance. ... >> or what those new particles would mean, ... >> like an electron is an electron as measured by our instruments. ... For good reason, modern Physics has assumed a narrow focus, concerning ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Alien math
    ... So, if aliens do math, would they have: ... Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms? ... Our logic is derived from physics so any creature living on the same ... There are other logics that are inconsistent but if we used them we ...
    (sci.math)