The physical education.

Posted by: socratus

The physical education. - 10/17/08 04:21 PM

The physical education.

The more I study the more I know.
The more I know the more ideas I have.
The more ideas I have the more they abstract.
The more they abstract the less I know the truth.
=====.
Some years ago I told with young physicist (!).
He said:” You cannot be physicist (!) if you cannot
understand the beauty of Minkowski mathematics.(!)
======.
It seems that he is right, because physicists must know
mathematics very well. The problem is that nobody
knows what is real physical meaning of “ 4-D negative
space continuum.” in the Nature. SRT is correct theory
but Minkowski space continuum is abstract. And together
they are paradoxical. More than 100 years we live with
this paradox. Nobody confuses.
==========.
During our conversation I understand that this young physicist
is strong and clever man and he want to reach success. And
I think he will do it. So, in the future he will create new
D/ M-spaces or new symmetries or discover new particles.
And one day he will be a professor and will teach new
generation ( your son or your daughter) in order that they also
have possibility to create new D/ M-spaces or new symmetries
or discover new particles. But if in the beginning the abstract
ideas were put into the fundament of physics then ……..
we can create new and new theories for 1000 years but
the result will be the same - paradoxical.
Our small Orwell’s world.
=============…
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
==========.
http://www.socratus.com
http://www.wbabin.net
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
http://www.wbabin.net/physics/sadovnik.pdf

Posted by: Zephir

Re: The physical education. - 10/17/08 05:52 PM

Did you read for example this one? The AWT explains, why the matter is spreading through space-time along geoedesics by the same way, like the energy through water surface gradient.

Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 10/18/08 04:20 PM

Zephir wrote:
Did you read for example this one? The AWT explains, why the matter is spreading through space-time along geoedesics by the same way, like the energy through water surface gradient.
==================.
1.
Nice picture.
2.
Aether and the definition of time

By AWT everything, what we can observe from reality are just
a "changes", i.e. the Aether density gradients ("gradient driven" reality).
…….................………….
We can see, the phase transition is nothing else,
then the compactification of underlying space-time.
Note that the space dimension compactified becomes a time dimension
in the space-time, which is formed by compactification
of previous generation of "hyperspace" ("false vacuum").
…....................……..
The existence of space-time follows from asymmetry between
spatial and time dimensions,
which was created during Universe inflation.
..................……….
The vacuum foam tends to be formed by spherical bubbles after
introducing of energy or near gravitating objects . The separation
of surfaces forming the Aether foam (mem)branes and the
path splitting of chiral bosons (light cones) at GUT energy scales
(10+14 GeV) manifest itself like so called Faraday/Kerr
and birefringence effect in vacuum.
................…………

===================================================..
Aether, Vacuum, Space-time, Asymmetry,
Spatial/Space/Time dimensions, Bosons…….etc
=========.
What do you read Prince?
Words…. Words……. words. !!!!

Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 10/20/08 05:02 PM

One camment.
==============.
SR is wrong theory. it is deductively inconsistent and so it is
empirically inconsistent.

Prof. Grynmore of CMU wrongly claimed that as Minkowsi metric theory
is consistent, SR is consistent. The truth is that Minkowski's
theory has nothing to do with Einstein's SR. Einstein was correct
when he protested that Minkowski made it impossible to understand
physics. The proper interval theorem of SR which maps Einsteinian SR
inot Minkowski's theory is not one to one mapping. This means, we
cannot translate the prediction of Minkowski's theory to Einstein's
original SR.

The cruel fact is that Einstein's theory is inconsistent and
Minkowski's theory has nothing to do with physics. The latter is a
stupid mathematics too. All mathematicians with decent training knows
that functions and graph of functions are exactly the same. Minkowski
represented functions which formulate motions as graphs. This is what
4D is all about. It is a mathematical trivia and it is amusing to see
that relativists cult takes this as their big pride. Trivial
mathematics for trivial minds. It is totally stupid to assume that
one can get something revolutionary from this equivalent
representation of functions. This stupidity crystalises later when GR
was developed as maniforld of 4D Riemann space. They thought that
they made motion stationary by defining it as geodesic in the
maniforld over 4D Riemann space. These stupid people did not
understand a simple fact that when masses move, the geometric
distribution of masses change and thus geodesic cannot really
represent motion. Motion is dynamic even in the 4D. Then what is the
point of making origianl 3D space 1D time into 4D? it appears all
intellectual masterbation of relativists cult that they took 4D
nonsense so seriously. Never mind, think about economists for
example, they are working on many hundreds dimensional vector spaces.
So do engineers. Mathematics for physics is most simple minded.

Dr. Kanda
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 11/22/08 06:23 AM

About " The third Newton's law ".

One no imagine story about " The third Newton's law ".
=========..
" The action is equal to counteraction." was the great scientific discover.
In a wood it was spoken only about it.
Every animal suddenly became brave and run to the king Lion
Every animal cried to him: "strike me." And as the animals begged
as the king began to beat. Many animals were wounded.
"It is not under the law", the animals were indignant,
"Under the law the king must also be wound "
But Lion beat and he spits on their law.
All animals scientists worried and began to search why the law doesn’t work.
And when one old scientist Badger has found the answer.
He said:
" The law of action is equal to counteraction is true only in static situations .
But there, where the physical force works, the law is inactive ".
==============.
I am sure, you can now apply this Badger’s concept to many physics areas.

===========..
To every action there is NOT an equal and opposite reaction.
Why?
Because in QT " The third Newton's law " must submit to
“ The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle ”.
=======================================
Posted by: Zephir

Re: The physical education. - 11/22/08 08:29 PM

Things often appear reciprocal from reciprocal perspective. The simplest example is Maldacena duality: when you're sitting inside of gravitational lens, the path of light appears straight, the space-time appears curved for you and everything appears OK from relativity perspective.



But whenever we are observing the same phenomena from outside, everything will change: here no signs of time dilatation and curved space - but the path of light appears curved, instead. This leads to the Lorentz symmetry violation, the causality violation (you can see a multiple images/consequences of the same phenomena) and other effects following from quantum mechanics. The Aether foam concept introduces a concept of pluralities here. This doesn't mean, the causality of scientific thinking is violated - it just means, it depends on the observational perspective.

My stance is, you're simply describing a reality from perspective, which is often reciprocal to perspective of Lorentz transform. By AWT every rule violates itself in less or more global scale, the progressive approach of mainstream science becomes brake of the further evolution less or more lately and the roles of intuitive and formal thinking alternates during such evolution, thus forming a nested phases of Aether foam.
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 11/25/08 06:23 AM

To every action there is NOT an equal and opposite reaction.
Why?
Between action and opposite reaction must go time.
The time can go with speed of light quanta c=1.
So " The third Newton's law " in QT in quantum action
doesn’t work. Because if
“ to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
the structure and symmetry of space doesn’t change.
Generally nothing will be change in Universe.
And the creation of Nature and the creation of Life began
only when the symmetry of space and action were changed.

====================..
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 11/26/08 05:09 AM

"The third Newton's law " as right as “The first Newton's law ".
=========.
From an article:
“An old professor of mine used to say
that anyone who can answer that question
what inertia is , would win a Nobel Prize. “
===============.
If we want to understand Physics laws without abstractions
we need new interpretation.
==========================
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 11/30/08 08:40 PM

Einstein : Science and Religion.

/ Book: “ Ideas and opinions by Albert Einstein”
Edited by Carl Seeling. 1996.
Part: About religion. /

Page 46.

“The situation may be expressed by an image:
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Though I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict
between religion and science cannot exist “

Page 47.

“The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres
of religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God.”

Page 48

“ To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God interfering with
natural events could never be refuted, in the real sense, by science,
for this doctrine can always take refuge in those domains in which
scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot.”

Page 48.

“…. , teachers of religion must have the stature to give up
the doctrine of a personal God,… “

“ After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated
they will surely recognize with joy that true religion has been
ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge.”

Page 49.

“ And so it seems to me that science not only purifies the religious
impulse of the dross of its anthropomorphism but also contributes
to a religious spiritualization of our understanding of life.”

/Source: Science, Philosophy and Religion.
A Symposium, published by the Conference on
Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their
Relation to the Democratic Way of Life,
Inc., New York, 1941./
====================….
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 12/21/08 06:31 PM

God and Photon.

Absolute God is doing only One Thing.
God creates virtual particles as Quantum theory says.

And then He gives to these virtual particles spin/ impulse ,
Magic Constant of speed. The speed of these virtual particles
is constant: c=1, no matter how the source or the observer moves.
/ Michelson’s experiment. 1881. SRT. 1905. /
The Magic Constant of speed c =1 the Particles can have
only from God.
We called these virtual particles Light Quanta / Photons.
So, It is right when God said:
Let be Quantum of light and there was Light Quanta.

Only the Quantum of Light has a maximal, constant,
absolute quantity of movement: c=1. No other particle
can travel with the speed c = 1.
It is very strange.
Thinking about Light Quanta we can forget about a " source" .
It means that every Light Quanta is an independent particle.
It is very strange.
When Light Quanta moves with constant speed c=1
its time is frozen, its time stops and its own clock shows zero.
It is very strange.
But the Particle Light Quanta can be a WAVE (simultaneously) .
Can the conception of Dualism be equal to Idealism?
Isn’t it sound unusually?

The Photon no doubt is a Special Particle.
The Quantum of Light is a privileged particle.
That is the reason that a Photon- Light Quanta
is God’s Creation, God’s particle.
=========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.socratus.com
http://www.wbabin.net
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
http://www.wbabin.net/physics/sadovnik.pdf

=========== . .
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 12/22/08 06:07 AM

“ Bored chemist” wrote to me:

"God creates virtual particles as Quantum theory says."
No it doesn't.
============ . .
“ Bored chemist” is right. God doesn't creates virtual particles.
Quantum theory says that virtual particles were created by
Vacuum, Aether, Nothingness, . . . .by . . . the Word.

1.
In the beginning it was One Word.
And the Word was written down
by the formula: T=0K.
This Word was not died, as Quantum Theory says,
but It was Alive One.
2.
In the beginning it was One Word and than became Second.
The Second One was written by another formulas:
C/D = pi , E = Mc^2, R/N = k , h = 0 , i^2 = -1.
3.
And then the First Word said to the Second One:
' Enough to rest. Be Light quanta.’
And It became the Light quanta.
( According to Planck’s spin / impulse h =1.)
This Light quanta had the absolute speed of motion:
c=1. ( Michelson’s experiment.) It flew all over the
Universe amazing its beauty, and having a careless life.
4.
But one day the First Word said to the Second One:
'It is not possible to have a careless life all the time.
You must work'.
5.
And then the Light quanta began to work as an Electron.
( According to Goudsmit - Uhlenbeck's impulse / spin:
( h = h/ 2pi) and Lorentz transformations.)

6.
' Well' , said the First Word, 'now you can create
all The Beings ( stars, planets, atoms, . . .etc) yourself '.
7.
And the long period of Evolution began.
============.

Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 12/24/08 07:05 AM

“ Rebis “ wrote to me:

Following so called "physics" the whole paragraph (God and Photon)
becomes UTTERLY wrong, question of God aside.

c IS NOT CONSTANT. Moreover, c IS NOT SPEED at all.
And THAT IS the MAGIC.

God bless
==================== . .
S.
Many years M. Planck was attracted with the
absolutely black body problem.
If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls
in area of absolutely black body (Kirchhoff’s Vacuum
radiation /Max Laue / ) and does not radiate back,
then “ terminal dead “ comes. In order to save the
quantum of light from death Planck decided that
it is possible that quantum of light will radiate this
quantum of light back with quantum unit h=Et.
Physicists say, that Planck’s unit is one: h=1.
Having this unit h=1 photon flies with speed c=1.
This unit doesn’t come from formulas or equations.
Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling.
Sorry.
I must write: Planck introduced this unit intuitively,
Planck introduced this unit phenomenologically .
========= .
S.

Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 12/27/08 07:32 PM

Physicists and Laws.

Physicists do not dictate to Nature their laws.
Laws of nature are reality, which exists independently
from the researcher. The Nature cannot be arranged so
strange, as the physicists think of it. Their thoughts
are so strange, that they offer paradoxical ideas.
Einstein wrote:
“ In the Science the man has freedom to solve
well made crossword. ”
In this crossword physicists don’t know what Light quanta,
Electron, Energy are.
#
“ It is important to realize that in physics today,
we have no knowledge of what energy is.
We do not have a picture that energy comes in little
blobs of a definite amount. ” / Feynman. 1987/ . . . .
#
"The electron that can be told is not the true electron."
/ David Harrison /
#
Etc.

And instead to understand what Light quanta, Electron,
Energy are, they try to add to the crossword of Universe
new cells (on horizontal and vertical ) and fill them with
new abstract models. This is reason that I wrote:

The more I study the more I know.
The more I know the more ideas I have.
The more ideas I have the more they abstract.
The more they abstract the less I know the truth.

And as a result conclusion from some article:
" One of the best kept secrets of science is
that physicists have lost their grip on reality."
========= .

Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 01/05/09 07:51 AM

The Dark Energy and the Vacuum.

#
"Dark energy, this mysterious stuff in the vacuum of space
which makes the universe want to accelerate, is the basis
for standard cosmology today because it explains much
of what we see,"
/ Research by Dr David Wiltshire, from
New Zealand's University of Canterbury /.
#
Tony Bermanseder <PACIFICAP@.. .> wrote:
‘ May the Dark Energy bathe you in its mysterious
light of darkness and illuminate your skeptical minds.
. . . . . . .
4.
..the Dark Energy is INTRINSIC to the spacetime structure.’
============= . .

‘..the Dark Energy is INTRINSIC to the spacetime structure.’
‘the spacetime structure ‘ is Vacuum.
The Dark Energy is INTRINSIC to the Vacuum.
Vacuum is not a died space, but according to Quantum Theory
Vacuum is some kind of Energetic Structure/ Space.
The Energetic Vacuum itself is ‘ The Dark Energy ‘.
The physicists only invent new word ‘Dark Energy ‘ instead of
simple to say ‘ ENERGETIC VACUUM ’.
========== . .
#
If somebody belief in “ big bang” he must take in calculation
that T=2,7K expands and therefore T=2,7K is temporary
parameter and with time it will go to T=0K.
#
Dark energy may be vacuum
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-01/uoc-dem011607.php
#
Sakharov's induced gravity: a modern perspective
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0204062
Authors: Matt Visser (Washington University in Saint Louis)
(Submitted on 19 Apr 2002)
Abstract: Sakharov's 1967 notion of ``induced gravity'' is currently
enjoying a significant resurgence. The basic idea, originally presented
in a very brief 3-page paper with a total of 4 formulas, is that gravit
is not ``fundamental'' in the sense of particle physics. Instead it was
argued that gravity (general relativity) emerges from quantum field
theory in roughly the same sense that hydrodynamics or continuum
elasticity theory emerges from molecular physics. In this article I will
translate the key ideas into modern language, and explain the various
versions of Sakharov's idea currently on the market.
#
When the next revolution rocks physics,
chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum, that endless
infinite void.
http://discovermagazine.com/topics/space
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-space-theory-of-everything
================ . .
Please, have patience and wait “when the next revolution rocks physics.”
============== . .
#
" The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex? "
/ Paul Dirac ./
==========..
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.socratus.com
http://www.wbabin.net
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
http://www.wbabin.net/physics/sadovnik.pdf
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: The physical education. - 01/05/09 02:09 PM

This discussion should be moved to NQS.
Posted by: Amaranth Rose II

Re: The physical education. - 01/05/09 04:16 PM

Agreed.
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 01/06/09 02:28 PM

My speculation.

Everything began from Infinite Energetic Vacuum: T=0K.
Somehow, the energy is extracted from the Vacuum
(the Energetic Dirac Soup) and turned into particles.
The Materialistic World gets its finite being
from an Infinite Energetic Being – Vacuum: T=0K.

To understand this ‘speculation’ we must know:
1. What is Vacuum: T=0K ?
2. Which virtual particles can exist in Vacuum?
3. How can virtual particles turn into real particles?
======== .
Until now the physicists ignore the Vacuum Energy T=0K
because it is the Zero Point Energy for our measuring devices.
Because the Absolute Zero Point Energy is border for our
measuring devices.
Can this fact be enough reason to stop our investigation?
==========..
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
#
When the next revolution rocks physics,
chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum, that endless
infinite void.
http://discovermagazine.com/topics/space
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-space-theory-of-everything
================ . .
Please, have patience and wait “when the next revolution rocks physics.”
==========..
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 01/09/09 05:29 PM

Photons drive nanomachines.

Photonic circuit in which optical force is harnessed to drive nanomechanics. (c) H. Tang, Yale University
Science fiction writers have long envisioned sailing a spacecraft by the optical force of the sun's light. But, the forces of sunlight are too weak to fill even the oversized sails that have been tried. Now a team led by researchers at the Yale School of Engineering and Applied Science has shown that the force of light indeed can be harnessed to drive machines - when the process is scaled to nano-proportions.
Their work opens the door to a new class of semiconductor devices that are operated by the force of light. They envision a future where this process powers quantum information processing and sensing devices, as well as telecommunications that run at ultra-high speed and consume little power.
The research, appearing in the 27 November issue of Nature, demonstrates a marriage of two emerging fields of research - nanophotonics and nanomechanics. - which makes possible the extreme miniaturisation of optics and mechanics on a silicon chip.
The energy of light has been harnessed and used in many ways. The 'force' of light is different - it is a push or a pull action that causes something to move.
'While the force of light is far too weak for us to feel in everyday life, we have found that it can be harnessed and used at the nanoscale,' said team leader Hong Tang, assistant professor at Yale. 'Our work demonstrates the advantage of using nano-objects as 'targets' for the force of light - using devices that are a billion-billion times smaller than a space sail, and that match the size of today's typical transistors.'
Until now light has only been used to manoeuvre single tiny objects with a focused laser beam - a technique called 'optical tweezers.' Postdoctoral scientist and lead author, Mo Li noted, 'Instead of moving particles with light, now we integrate everything on a chip and move a semiconductor device.'
'When researchers talk about optical forces, they are generally referring to the radiation pressure light applies in the direction of the flow of light,' said Tang. 'The new force we have investigated actually kicks out to the side of that light flow.'
While this new optical force was predicted by several theories, the proof required state-of-the-art nanophotonics to confine light with ultra-high intensity within nanoscale photonic wires. The researchers showed that when the concentrated light was guided through a nanoscale mechanical device, significant light force could be generated - enough, in fact, to operate nanoscale machinery on a silicon chip.
The light force was routed in much the same way electronic wires are laid out on today's large scale integrated circuits. Because light intensity is much higher when it is guided at the nanoscale, they were able to exploit the force. 'We calculate that the illumination we harness is a million times stronger than direct sunlight,' adds Wolfram Pernice, a Humboldt postdoctoral fellow with Tang.
'We create hundreds of devices on a single chip, and all of them work,' says Tang, who attributes this success to a great optical I/O device design provided by their collaborators at the University of Washington.
It took more than 60 years to progress from the first transistors to the speed and power of today's computers. Creating devices that run solely on light rather than electronics will now begin a similar process of development, according to the authors.
'While this development has brought us a new device concept and a giant step forward in speed, the next developments will be in improving the mechanical aspects of the system. But,' says Tang, 'the photon force is with us.'
Tang's team at Yale also included graduate student Chi Xiong. Collaborators at University of Washington were T. Baehr-Jones and M. Hochberg. Funding in support of the project came from the National Science Foundation, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the Alexander von Humboldt post-doctoral fellowship program.

Source: Yale University

Source: http://www.sciencecentric.com/news/article.php?q=08112701-photons-drive-nanomachines
=============== . .
Physics and Consciousness

P.S.
But,' says Tang, 'the photon force is with us.'
http://www.sciencecentric.com/news/article.php?q=08112701-photons-drive-nanomachines

#
Our brain works like a nanomachine- computer.
#
The secret of words 'God', 'soul ', 'religion', ‘ Existence’,
'dualism of consciousness', 'human being' is hiding
in the “Theory of Light quanta”.
============ . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
============= . .

Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 04/12/09 04:35 AM

What did Planck do?
Planck studied a ‘ black body’ and saw.
If Michelson/ Morley quantum of light, which moves
with constant speed c=1, fells into ‘ black body’ and
doesn’t come back when the radiations/ thermodynamics’
death of Universe must come.
Therefore, in order to save the Universe from death,
Planck decided that the Michelson/ Morley quantum
of light must radiate from ‘ the black body’ by quantum of
light. This quantum of light is an energy quanta.
Why?
Because the quantum of light come from ‘ black body’.
Max Laue called it as ‘ The Kirchhoff 's vacuum’.
On my opinion the thermal equilibrium of ‘ black body’,
‘ The Kirchhoff 's vacuum’ is a real model of Vacuum: T=0K.
And Vacuum itself, as QT says, is the Homogeneous Space
of the lowest ( the background ) level of Energy.
Therefore, quantum of light must be an energy quanta.
#
Our education.
I n the school’s books is written that black coal or soot
is good example of a ‘black body’. But astrophysicists
use the laws of ‘black body’ to understand the Universe.
And the Universe doesn’t covered with black coal or soot.
Our Universe as whole is Vacuum.
================== . .
P.S.
In physics, a black body is an idealized object that absorbs all
electromagnetic radiation that falls on it. No electromagnetic
radiation passes through it and none is reflected. Because no light
(visible electromagnetic radiation) is reflected or transmitted,
the object appears black when it is cold. However, a black body
emits a temperature-dependent spectrum of light. This thermal radiation
from a black body is termed black-body radiation
#
In astronomy, objects such as stars are frequently regarded as
Black bodies, though this is often a poor approximation.
An almost perfect black-body spectrum is exhibited by the
cosmic microwave background radiation. Hawking radiation
is the hypothetical black-body radiation emitted by black holes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_radiation


================= . .
Posted by: Zephir

Re: The physical education. - 04/12/09 08:14 AM

What is "Michelson/ Morley quantum of light" supposed to mean? The physics is full of nonsense - why to introduce another one?
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 04/16/09 05:09 PM

Originally Posted By: Zephir
What is "Michelson/ Morley quantum of light" supposed to mean? The physics is full of nonsense - why to introduce another one?

=============================
Sorry.
Michelson and Morley had studied moving quantum of light.
They found that this quantum of light has constant speed : c=1.
Nobody knew this fact before. All physicists were surprised.
This is there desert.
Therefore I wrote: "Michelson/ Morley quantum of light"

Best wishes.
===========================
Posted by: Zephir

Re: The physical education. - 04/17/09 01:11 AM

Originally Posted By: socratus
Michelson and Morley had studied moving quantum of light.
These guys studied the interference of light waves in dependence to direction. The photon conceptually differs from light wave, for example by its speed.
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 04/17/09 01:35 PM

Originally Posted By: Zephir
Originally Posted By: socratus
Michelson and Morley had studied moving quantum of light.
These guys studied the interference of light waves in dependence to direction. The photon conceptually differs from light wave, for example by its speed.


=========================
As a result that quantum of light / photon interacts with
interferometer ‘the interference of light waves’ can be seen.

Posted by: Zephir

Re: The physical education. - 04/18/09 12:46 AM

Originally Posted By: socratus
...quantum of light / photon interacts with
interferometer ‘the interference of light waves’ can be seen...
Photon and light wave are different concepts. Which is why, we are calling them differently, by the way. If you would mix different terms, you can never reach their mutual understanding.
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 04/19/09 12:45 PM

Originally Posted By: Zephir
Originally Posted By: socratus
...quantum of light / photon interacts with
interferometer ‘the interference of light waves’ can be seen...
Photon and light wave are different concepts. Which is why, we are calling them differently, by the way. If you would mix different terms, you can never reach their mutual understanding.

========================================================
By AWT the problem of rest mass of photon
must be separated from luminal speed of light wave,
as expected by special relativity.
/ If you would mix different terms, you can never reach
their mutual understanding. /
================== . .
What is about wave–particle duality ?
How wave and particle can be united?
How wave and photon can be united?
============== . .
===============================
Your opinion . . .my opinion . .. his / her opinion . . .
The opinion of opinion . . . . .
The meaning of meaning . . . . .
Why?

Because photon, light wave and other particles must act
in some Absolute frame the origin of the Universe,
the origin of the Cosmic Microwave Background
frame, . . . . .the origin of everything.

All debates are nonsense without an Absolute Frame.

====================================================
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 05/01/09 04:37 AM

#
God has to be a real fool to think
that the >99% Hidden Universe
has no control of his <1% Visible Universe. And if he
knew this then he would not be a god but a physicist.

And if he was a smart physicist he would be laughing
at just how much less than 1% a universe really needs
to appear really real.
/ O'no /
=========================
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 05/01/09 08:26 AM


If there’s nothing wrong with me, then
maybe there’s something wrong with the Universe.
/ One physicist ./
===================================
Posted by: Zephir

Re: The physical education. - 05/01/09 09:02 PM

Originally Posted By: socratus
How wave and particle can be united?
Inside of particle system formed by nested density fluctuations every wave behaves as another density fluctuation, i.e. like particle. The dense system of fluctuations is similar to foam and it gets more dense under introducing of energy, by the similar way , like soap foam, when shaken.

You can play with this concept on Perlin's applet by mouse.

Posted by: Amaranth Rose II

Re: The physical education. - 05/01/09 11:50 PM

Zephir, I got an error when I tried to run your applet. Can you find another link or fix it?
Posted by: Zephir

Re: The physical education. - 05/02/09 03:55 PM

Originally Posted By: Amaranth Rose II
I got an error when I tried to run your applet
Can you post the error message here?

Sometimes the applet get stuck under heavy stirring by mouse, but such problem can be solved by reloading of the web page by pressing of F5 key in browser.
Posted by: Amaranth Rose II

Re: The physical education. - 05/02/09 07:34 PM

It just says, "Error. Click for details" and when I click for details it opens a window with a bunch of code.
Posted by: socratus

Re: The physical education. - 05/23/09 10:59 AM

Physicists spooked by faster-than-light information transfer.

#
Everybody seems to agree that "objective" science explicitly based on
supernatural mysteries is something utterly strange: it's a much stranger
doctrine than any most esoteric religion, which doesn't pretend at least
to any objectivity and logic...
And nevertheless it is precisely that kind of "objective" knowledge that
continues to be UNIQUELY (and very generously!) supported in ALL
science institutions (private initiatives including). How indeed can one
have a consistent understanding of quantum particle behaviour if that huge,
multi-billion enterprise cannot even say what the real, even simplest
elementary particle (e.g. photon or electron) actually is, in its physical
structure and dynamics, while replacing it with an abstract symbol obeying
abstract, postulated (and completely "magic"!) rules? So they end up now
with an explicit sectarian religion called "mathematical universe" and
supported by the dominating establishment priests from all the great faculties...

Realistic alternatives to that continuing math-physical delirium certainly
exist but they are rejected without discussion by the dominating, effectively
totalitarian regime (Peer Review and Co.).
So when Gisin allegedly "hopes that the work will stimulate theorists to come up
with new ways of explaining the spooky effect", he is "slightly diverging from
the truth" (or intentionally lying, to be exact!). As if he, or Geoff Blumfiel,
or anyone else may ignore the fact that those "spooky effects" and related open
trickery exist in the official science framework already for a century and nothing
ever changes, despite innumerable theoretical efforts (starting already from the
"great Einstein" with his unlimited staff) but always artificially reduced to a very
special, now rigorously specified approach of unitary science
http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.4562
See e.g.
http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0211071

http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0401164

for a review of fundamental physics without supernatural mysteries, a theory that
is there for a decade already, quite accessible on the web and directly developing
the ideas of the great Louis de Broglie who had clearly shown a way out of the
spooky science impasse many years ago (see http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9911107 ),
but this clearly designated "new way" (now successfully completed) remains
officially ignored, for decades, despite the formally "encouraged" search for it.
It is that kind of real science operation that "doesn’t make any sense, honestly"
and while it senselessly persists on the background of ‘ officially accepted ‘ lies,
no positive, fruitful and problem-solving knowledge development can restart,
irrespective of explicitly proposed problem solutions and realistic, consistent
and experimentally confirmed quantum-physics framework.
14 Aug, 2008
Posted by: Andrei Kirilyuk
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/full/news.2008.1038.html
===============