Classical Truth and Beyond

October 30, 2023

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

Betting the combinations derive a different value/property,, but the average is what we expect but still doesn't match critical review. And relativity is just that, the real combinations that define reality.

Certain combinations work in one direction, while others work perhaps to a lesser extent. Kind of like spiritual gifts and sin in the same pot....lol. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

No problem Ed. As a religious man your mind "looks" in that direction with related comments, right

As to virtual particles going in and out of existence, these are the words of mainstream quantum physics. As to my own related theory, the background zero point field is also physical, and these physical elements via their interactions produce a lot of observable energy, called zero point energy. Instead I think some of these physical interactions cause these physical elements to swirl like electrons and positron pairs. But in reality they are simply background field particles that do not have consistent spin to them like electrons and positrons do, so after their brief spin they go back to their original state as field particles that can't be observed.

if true, they don't go in and out of existence. They just go back to their hum-drum life of being ordinary field particles again, after their brief "party spin"

October 30, 2023

1 hour ago, pantheory said:

No problem Ed. As a religious man your mind "looks" in that direction with related comments, right

As to virtual particles going in and out of existence, these are the words of mainstream quantum physics. As to my own related theory, the background zero point field is also physical, and these physical elements via their interactions produce a lot of observable energy, called zero point energy. Instead I think some of these physical interactions cause these physical elements to swirl like electrons and positron pairs. But in reality they are simply background field particles that do not have consistent spin to them like electrons and positrons do, so after their brief spin they go back to their original state as field particles that can't be observed.

if true, they don't go in and out of existence. They just go back to their hum-drum life of being ordinary field particles again, after their brief "party spin"

A good many questions arose from reading your statement. Will have to give it a few moments in my head to consider a direction. Lots of questions. thanks!

October 31, 2023

4 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

A good many questions arose from reading your statement. Will have to give it a few moments in my head to consider a direction. Lots of questions. thanks!

I love questions, and as you know, I am gentle and considerate with my answers

October 31, 2023

19 hours ago, pantheory said:

No problem Ed. As a religious man your mind "looks" in that direction with related comments, right

As to virtual particles going in and out of existence, these are the words of mainstream quantum physics. As to my own related theory, the background zero point field is also physical, and these physical elements via their interactions produce a lot of observable energy, called zero point energy. Instead I think some of these physical interactions cause these physical elements to swirl like electrons and positron pairs. But in reality they are simply background field particles that do not have consistent spin to them like electrons and positrons do, so after their brief spin they go back to their original state as field particles that can't be observed.

if true, they don't go in and out of existence. They just go back to their hum-drum life of being ordinary field particles again, after their brief "party spin"

I largely think that's what I was imagining..."working in the same direction", ...."party spin". I believe my thinking differs, the word affinity vs. concerted. Questions like what is zero....how do we know zero....is there a second or more level of zero....does the Zero Point Field have a calculated zero point vs. populated field. Is there joinery within the field on the way to larger joinery, or how do this elementary particles behave/do. I don't know. I tend to believe they have a role rather than periodic inclusion to the process. As always, please pardon the ignorance. Thanks.

October 31, 2023

Here's a thought that I think is novel...or at least to me. The implication is that here we have this universe full of parts. So either the parts are residue or the parts are intentional. If they are residue then there would need to be a force keeping them from rejoining.....if they are intentional, then the parts were made to be those parts. Deep thoughts with Jack Hamby...

Edit: lol, speaking of tension, must have been one hell of a blast if I'm stable here on earth God only know how far from the edge of the blast.....that particles remain in a stable state. I'm sorry but that is pushing the edge of my imagination....

October 31, 2023

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

I largely think that's what I was imagining..."working in the same direction", ...."party spin". I believe my thinking differs, the word affinity vs. concerted. Questions like what is zero....how do we know zero....is there a second or more level of zero....does the Zero Point Field have a calculated zero point vs. populated field. Is there joinery within the field on the way to larger joinery, or how do this elementary particles behave/do. I don't know. I tend to believe they have a role rather than periodic inclusion to the process. As always, please pardon the ignorance. Thanks.

The word zero has many somewhat different meanings in different contexts. Zero was invented in the numerical system to allow for much easier computations in the base 10 numerical system. Long before that the concept of nothingness was discussed by the early Greek philosophers.

As to Zero Point Energy ZPE (the same thing as the zero point field) ZPF, the physicist Max Plank discovered, around 1900, that the best and coldest vacuum he could test still had energy within it. He called it Zero Point Energy. Since then in 10's of thousands of experiments his discovery has been proven. What we call the vacuum and nothingness here on Earth and in outer space, has a minimum of energy within it. Others have gone further and believe energy does not come from nothing so propose that this ZPE energy field is also physical, which refers to the Zero Point Field as being physical in nature. Many famous physicists have theorized such a physical field.

And yes, there is a minimum energy level. In mainstream physics there is no such thing as zero energy anywhere; there always is the same minimum. It is not mainstream physics concerning zero point particles, so that the answers I give that follow, are alternative rather than mainstream.

The nature of these particles is little theorized. In String Theory, these elements are called strings. In my own theory they are spring-like in nature and must unwind, and rewind. Of course their behavior would relate to their physical nature. As an atheist I believe nothing has a purpose or role. They only exist based upon the nature of reality and their adaptation to it.

Hope this gives you a little insight into what is called quantum reality. Cheers

More questions please

October 31, 2023

Thought I would add something else concerning nothingness.

Many have theorized that beyond the physical universe there is just truly empty space. Einstein proposed a closed universe with a physical fourth dimension different from time. Where if one goes in a straight line far enough one would end right back where he started from. Many no longer follow this concept because at the farthest observable parts of the universe it still appears to be Euclidean, which they call a flat universe.

As for me, I believe there is no such thing as empty space. I believe the definition of space should include the idea of the distance between matter, and the volume of the ZPF that encompasses it. In such a definition there would be no such thing as empty space. And if the universe is finite, there also would be no such thing as infinite space based upon the inclusion of the definition words given above.

"Affinity vs. concerted:" affinity meaning a liking or 'gravitation' toward something, and the word "concerted" meaning a great effort, usually toward a goal. Although there is some similarities between the words, a see them as being quite different concerning their usages.

October 31, 2023

Since then in 10's of thousands of experiments his (Planck's) ~~discovery~~ theory has been proven.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to support them, Pantheory

Please support your extraordinary claim with evidence showing that these experiments PROVE what Planck theorized.

Please note that a proof is absolute, final and cannot be overturned or challenged by new evidence.

Please note that a proof can have no human or instrumental error associated with it.

Please note that a proof requires that there is 100% confidence in the result.

Inquiring minds would like to see you support your extraordinary claim.

Thank you,

Walter.

October 31, 2023

This is not my claim, this is simply mainstream physics that has been tested for more than a hundred years now. Read it for yourself. There are almost countless links and related papers.

https://www.britannica.com/science/nuclear-energy

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/follow-up-what-is-the-zer/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy

http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph240/blakemore1/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/04/18/ask-ethan-what-is-the-zero-point-energy-of-space/?sh=6888da7f7ecb

https://www.inverse.com/ahttps://s3.cern.ch/inspire-prod-files-5/5a78e08557c0480929c136a45b7532bbrticle/35077-wtf-is-zero-point-energy

Etc. etc. etc.

October 31, 2023

2 minutes ago, pantheory said:

This is not my claim, this is simply mainstream physics that has been tested for more than a hundred years. Read it for yourself. There are almost countless links and related papers.

https://www.britannica.com/science/nuclear-energy

Your claim is that Planck's theory has been PROVED, Pantheory.

Your link says nothing about proof.

Please supply a link showing that Planck's theory has been proven.

And please remember that a proof is a very particular thing.

Experimental data and results are not proof.

They are evidence.

So, the PROOF of your extraordinary claim, please.

October 31, 2023

15 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Your claim is that Planck's theory has been PROVED, Pantheory.

Your link says nothing about proof.

Please supply a link showing that Planck's theory has been proven.

And please remember that a proof is a very particular thing.

Experimental data and results are not proof.

They are evidence.

So, the PROOF of your extraordinary claim, please.

Like the theory of natural selection, there is almost a mountain of evidence to support this theory, Few if any quantum physicists, or even alternative theorists, could deny the results of all these experiments -- in a similar way that the theory of natural selection has been proven IMO, a huge quantity of incontestable scientific evidence.

October 31, 2023

10 minutes ago, pantheory said:

This is not my claim, this is simply mainstream physics that has been tested for more than a hundred years now. Read it for yourself. There are almost countless links and related papers.

https://www.britannica.com/science/nuclear-energy

Nothing about proof of Planck's theory in this link.

10 minutes ago, pantheory said:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/follow-up-what-is-the-zer/

Nothing about proof of Planck's theory in this link.

10 minutes ago, pantheory said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy