CATEGORY:
FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2017
[back]
TOPIC:
"Fundamental" means the underlying principles, laws, essence, structure, constants and properties of matter by Vladimir N. Fedorov
[refresh]
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 16:21 GMT
Essay AbstractThe conception «fundamental» means basic. Proceeding from this basis, the properties of the investigated object, the laws of its existence, the structure and interaction with other objects are determined. Fundamental science should be based on the fundamental principles of research, without the use of abstract and ideal concepts. The proposed essay uses the single entity - toroidal gravitational waves (real and observable objects, rather than hypothetical strings), on the basis of which all objects are built. The formation of de Broglie waves and fundamental quantum mechanics is based not on probabilistic, but topological principles and laws of quantum parametric resonance in a nonideal medium of a physical vacuum, from micro to macro scales. All matter in the universe is fractal. In the process of existence of matter, there are continuous quantum parametric processes of its transformation. The fundamental laws of formation of the fractal structure of matter determine the strict topology and hierarchy of the elements of a lot, of neutrino for each other, levels of matter. The essay describes the laws of existence of the fractal structure of matter, which are confirmed by a large number of calculations and observations. The property of formation of gravitational potential well of stability of orbital bodies is connected with the law of inertia and is a fundamental property of all interactions. Orbital bodies are in potential pits of stability of toroidal gravitational waves of de Broglie. Therefore, the law of motion of bodies by inertia is also valid for the curvilinear motion of orbital bodies. Therefore, the Newton's law of gravitation cannot be used not only for stars in galaxies, but also for all orbital bodies. The gravitational constant reflects Kepler's third law in the solar system and is not fundamental constant for other planetary systems.
Author BioVladimir Fedorov graduated from the Krasnoyarsk Polytechnic Institute in Russia, the mechanical engineer, the radio engineer, Graduate School Research Institute of Intrascopy in Moscow, devices of non-destructive testing and structural analysis. Vladimir worked in the Siberian Federal University. He has developed the simple and effective device for the detection of gravitational waves and got very interesting results. His current research interests include the foundations of physics, cosmology and the theory of everything. Vladimir lives in Bulgaria and glad to meet with like-minded people for applications.
Download Essay PDF File
Joe Fisher wrote on Jan. 26, 2018 @ 17:27 GMT
Dear Vladimir N. Fedorov,
Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.
Joe Fisher, Realist
post approved
Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Jan. 29, 2018 @ 09:53 GMT
Hello Vladimir! I will allow myself to speak out about your essay. It is a fairly complete, rich with ideas and computations, a work that deserves high praise. He lacks the principle of the identity of space and matter of Descartes. When Copernicus began to assert that the Earth revolves around the Sun, he had, according to Descartes, to add that along with the Earth around the Sun, the entire circumsolar space rotates. Space is matter, and matter is space. The physical vacuum, which you speak of as a fundamental one, is recognized in new Cartesian physics as a state of physical space in which there are no corpuscles. It recognizes corpuscles itself as stable rotations (vortices) of space. In many respects our thoughts coincide, I will develop them further under the brand of new Cartesian physics. Leave a comment about this on my page.
Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Jan. 31, 2018 @ 11:21 GMT
Hi Boris Semyonovich
Thank you for the good evaluation of my work, in which in your opinion «He lacks the principle of the identity of space and matter of Descartes».
I like your work, which «This essay is devoted to the fundamental problem that modern physics is not solved completely», and which, in fact, is fulfilled within the framework of the metaphysics of Descartes. ...
view entire post
Hi Boris Semyonovich
Thank you for the good evaluation of my work, in which in your opinion «He lacks the principle of the identity of space and matter of Descartes».
I like your work, which «This essay is devoted to the fundamental problem that modern physics is not solved completely», and which, in fact, is fulfilled within the framework of the metaphysics of Descartes.
Of great interest are the consequences of the metaphysics of Descartes, which coincide with my ideas about the world: 1) the world is infinitely extended; 2) it is materially uniform; 3) matter can is shared infinitely many times; 4) emptiness or space that does not contain any matter is a contradiction and, consequently, there is no emptiness. «In new Cartesian physics a corpuscle is a stationary vortex».
The same progressive consequences have been obtained in my work with the help of classical ideas of physics. Thus, why use metaphysics, if in classical physics complete determinism is achieved at any level of matter?
Commonly accepted, that metaphysics indicates the study of what lies beyond the physical phenomena, at the base of them. Therefore, you has «Physical space is the body of God in which we exist and in which wander on the way to it».
In addition, to consider «identity of space and matter of Descartes» i think fundamentally wrong. It is generally accepted that space is an objective reality, a form of existence of matter characterized by its length and volume, the place where matter is contained. Otherwise, we go to the realm of fantasy.
Descartes did not know much in his time, and he was naturally both a physicist and a metaphysician. I think that it is necessary to develop Descartes' ideas, and not postulate them.
For example, the law of conservation of Descartes' momentum immediately led to the formulation of the fundamental law of conservation of angular momentum, the application of which (combined with other laws) was brought to the absurdity by metaphysical representations of modern science. This is what I try to show in my work.
I think our task in studying the Universe device is to use only causal physical processes and topology in absolute classical space, but not in the use of abstractions, probabilities, ideals and causeless processes.
Vladimir Fedorov
view post as summary
Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 6, 2018 @ 20:20 GMT
Djrasthi Prof Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov
Wonderful words.... "Proceeding from this basis, the properties of the investigated object, the laws of its existence, the structure and interaction with other objects are determined. ...... The proposed essay uses the single entity - toroidal gravitational waves (real and observable objects, rather than hypothetical strings), on the basis of...
view entire post
Djrasthi Prof Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov
Wonderful words.... "Proceeding from this basis, the properties of the investigated object, the laws of its existence, the structure and interaction with other objects are determined. ...... The proposed essay uses the single entity - toroidal gravitational waves (real and observable objects, rather than hypothetical strings), on the basis of which all objects are built. ......" very nice fundamental idea sir
Here in my essay energy to mass conversion is proposed...……..….. yours is very nice essay best wishes …. I highly appreciate hope your essay and hope for reciprocity ….You may please spend some of the valuable time on Dynamic Universe Model also and give your some of the valuable & esteemed guidance
Some of the Main foundational points of Dynamic Universe Model :-No Isotropy
-No Homogeneity
-No Space-time continuum
-Non-uniform density of matter, universe is lumpy
-No singularities
-No collisions between bodies
-No blackholes
-No warm holes
-No Bigbang
-No repulsion between distant Galaxies
-Non-empty Universe
-No imaginary or negative time axis
-No imaginary X, Y, Z axes
-No differential and Integral Equations mathematically
-No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to GR on any condition
-No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models
-No many mini Bigbangs
-No Missing Mass / Dark matter
-No Dark energy
-No Bigbang generated CMB detected
-No Multi-verses
Here:
-Accelerating Expanding universe with 33% Blue shifted Galaxies
-Newton’s Gravitation law works everywhere in the same way
-All bodies dynamically moving
-All bodies move in dynamic Equilibrium
-Closed universe model no light or bodies will go away from universe
-Single Universe no baby universes
-Time is linear as observed on earth, moving forward only
-Independent x,y,z coordinate axes and Time axis no interdependencies between axes..
-UGF (Universal Gravitational Force) calculated on every point-mass
-Tensors (Linear) used for giving UNIQUE solutions for each time step
-Uses everyday physics as achievable by engineering
-21000 linear equations are used in an Excel sheet
-Computerized calculations uses 16 decimal digit accuracy
-Data mining and data warehousing techniques are used for data extraction from large amounts of data.
- Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true….Have a look at
http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_15.h
tml
I request you to please have a look at my essay also, and give some of your esteemed criticism for your information……..
Dynamic Universe Model says that the energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation passing grazingly near any gravitating mass changes its in frequency and finally will convert into neutrinos (mass). We all know that there is no experiment or quest in this direction. Energy conversion happens from mass to energy with the famous E=mC2, the other side of this conversion was not thought off. This is a new fundamental prediction by Dynamic Universe Model, a foundational quest in the area of Astrophysics and Cosmology.
In accordance with Dynamic Universe Model frequency shift happens on both the sides of spectrum when any electromagnetic radiation passes grazingly near gravitating mass. With this new verification, we will open a new frontier that will unlock a way for formation of the basis for continual Nucleosynthesis (continuous formation of elements) in our Universe. Amount of frequency shift will depend on relative velocity difference. All the papers of author can be downloaded from “http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/ ”
I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you repliedBest
=snp
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 7, 2018 @ 06:44 GMT
Hi S N P Gupta
Excellent essay about the dynamic universe, it is so close to me.
I completely agree with you, although we use different terms und
I congratulate you on what you have accomplished so far.
Kind regards,
Vladimir Fedorov
Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Feb. 8, 2018 @ 13:34 GMT
Thank you for the nice words of appreciation Prof Fedorov
I am giving maximum appreciation you for your essay 10... Best wishes for the essay...
=snp
post approved
Peter Jackson wrote on Feb. 12, 2018 @ 17:39 GMT
Vladimir,
Nice essay again, very well written for a second (or third?) language. We've agreed on much in the past and I do so again. Not with every detail, but then agreement is not a scoring criteria and all hypotheses should be proffered.
I think and hope you'll like min again, completing a long haul to remove the weirdness from QM, though of course doctrinal physics may take forever to update!
Very well done.
Best of luck in the contest.
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 06:27 GMT
Dear Peter,
Here we are again all together.
Thank you for the good evaluation of my work.
I like your description to. I enjoyed reading your contribution.
Аgree with Declan Andrew Traill «often correct explanations in Physics turn out to be ridiculously simple».
Vladimir Fedorov
Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 16, 2018 @ 09:18 GMT
Vladimir
Thank you. I hope we can work together to advance understanding. It's a massive task. See my posts on Chandra Roychouri's essay. We need more coffins, quickly.
I have a question on gravitational waves for you.
Apart from obvious angular considerations; What is the difference between the variations in G potential from the moon at any one position on Earth?
And are not our seas excellent meters of such G fluctuations? (The tidal flows around the UK are largely moon dependent).
Thanks
Peter
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 17, 2018 @ 13:36 GMT
Dear Peter,
Thank you for the interesting question for all.
«Apart from obvious angular considerations; What is the difference between the variations in G potential from the moon at any one position on Earth?
And are not our seas excellent meters of such G fluctuations? (The tidal flows around the UK are largely moon dependent)».
If we consider the influence of...
view entire post
Dear Peter,
Thank you for the interesting question for all.
«Apart from obvious angular considerations; What is the difference between the variations in G potential from the moon at any one position on Earth?
And are not our seas excellent meters of such G fluctuations? (The tidal flows around the UK are largely moon dependent)».
If we consider the influence of only the moon, it seems that it attracts water in the oceans.
But the two tides are illogical in this scheme of action forces.
But if we consider the simultaneous gravitational action of the sun and the moon, then everything becomes logical ( https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hzn3q0vZVToxOMVFkwGsRlOxnNe
b9OiY/ ).
When the angle between the directions to the Sun and the Moon is 90 degrees, there is a minimum of tides throughout the Earth.
If the Sun and the Moon attract water in the oceans, then it would seem that their vectors of strength should be summed and there must be tides, but they are not.
Consequently, the tides are not a consequence of the force of attraction, but are a consequence of the formation of increased gravity (heavy water) in places shifted 90 degrees from directions to the sun or the moon.
The increased gravity of water is caused by the orbital toroidal gravitational waves of the Moon and the Sun (analogues of Wheeler's geones, https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2806, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VMlesBfYVVa-Fp6bIr1I-uzU-Vn
q3FFY/ ) in which the Moon and the Earth are in potential well of stability and which provide a minimum of the action of the forces of attraction and inertia, in accordance with the extreme principle of least action in soliton gravitational waves.
Those. in places of low tide, water is heavier and it is created the effect of 2 low tides in places shifted on 90 and 270 degrees away from the direction to the Moon or the Sun, hence will be two logical the existing tides, in 0 and 180 degrees from the direction to them.
Low tides on Earth are similar to low tides on the Sun from the action of coronal loops (toroidal gravitational waves) in dark spots.
The registered gravitational waves in the LIGO project these are stationary toroidal gravitational waves of the Earth's gravisphere (magnetosphere) (https://www.nasa.gov/images/content/668517main_vab-orig_ful
l.jpg) and the orbital toroidal gravitational wave of the Earth (http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/yabbfiles/Attachments/Dipolnaya
_sostavlayushaya_infrarad.jpg) that form the weather and cause tides and ebbs on the Earth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
view post as summary
Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 17, 2018 @ 19:26 GMT
Vladimir, ...(copied to mine)
Thanks. Interesting. But as a level 1 racing yachtsman I have a logic and direct correspondence between ~13hr tidal periods, spring & neap tides, & sun and moon and can even predict adjustments for wind. I understand your description, which doesn't seem to conflict, i.e. more net gravity with no bodies overhead so less UP vector leaving more DOWN, giving a 180 degree major axis ellipse, but I'd like to understand why you find 'vector summing' doesn't work the same way after allowing for lag, flow momentum and angular influences, which can be major factors. However that wasn't what my question was about.
I'm interested in why & how the motions of larger bodies further away are assumed to be a different case to smaller closer bodies. In my own field a body of mass is a body of mass. All should have the same influence on the magnetosphere, however it's 'described'. Surely there aren't two different 'types' of gravity?
Sure it may be 'detectable' but I suspect they just haven't thought far enough out of the boxes and away from theory so have confirmation bias. i.e. there's no explicit proof of the 'curved space-time' hypothesis in the LIGO finding. Is that fair?
Very best
Peter
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 19, 2018 @ 14:17 GMT
Peter, ...(copied to you)
You asked:
«I'm interested in why & how the motions of larger bodies further away are assumed to be a different case to smaller closer bodies».
«Surely there aren't two different 'types' of gravity?».
Answer: «there are no two types of gravity».
There is the only remote mechanism in the Universe for forming the force of...
view entire post
Peter, ...(copied to you)
You asked:
«I'm interested in why & how the motions of larger bodies further away are assumed to be a different case to smaller closer bodies».
«Surely there aren't two different 'types' of gravity?».
Answer: «there are no two types of gravity».
There is the only remote mechanism in the Universe for forming the force of interaction between the elements of matter, which is realized as a result of the interaction of the de Broglie toroidal gravitational waves at the common frequencies of the parametric resonance (entanglement effect).
This quantum mechanism of gravity is shown in a photo of phenomena observed in outer space (essay 2017) https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2806.
On the photo https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1MvF-AefpMmNWJ2MGJkRmJvR00
/ two interacting large bodies are shown which, using a multitude of toroidal gravitational waves, move small elements of Saturn's rings (their moving is an indicator of the action of force between bodies) https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/resources/4755/?category=images.
It should be noted that there are no toroidal gravitational waves directly connecting the bodys. Toroidal gravitational waves interact with each other only at Lagrange points.
Similarly, with the help of toroidal gravitational waves, the Earth and the Moon interact, and the ocean tides are indicators of their interaction
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hzn3q0vZVToxOMVFkwGsRlOxnNe
b9OiY/.
Orbital toroidal gravitational waves are formed due to parametric resonance in the medium of the physical vacuum (these are soliton waves), which minimize the force of interaction between bodies in a very rigid superfluid medium of the physical vacuum.
Ie, any force leads to the formation of toroidal gravitational waves aimed at minimizing the force, including minimizing the inertia force. Therefore the force of attraction of the Moon to the Earth is minimized, and the law of gravitation of Newton is unfair for both stars in galaxies and for orbital bodies.
Those. The moon is in orbit in the potential well of gravitational fundamental interaction and is not attracted to the Earth. All fundamental interactions have a potential stability pit as a strong interaction.
For example, no one uses the law of gravitation of Newton to calculate the ephemeris of planets and satellites. It is impossible to explain complex trajectories of the orbital motion of bodies without quantum reformation of toroidal gravitational waves. On a photo of rings of Saturn https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/system/resources/detail_files/55
12_IMG004512.jpg
depicts the principle of the formation of a complex trajectory of the orbital motion of the small bodies of the rings of Saturn under the action of toroidal gravitational waves of two gravitationally interacting satellites of Saturn. And here is showed, complicated moving of the Pioneers https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1MvF-AefpMmVXJfWjF1VF9JaVU
/ .
However, the mechanism of minimizing the force with the help of toroidal gravitational waves is not ideal. No ideality is caused by the absorption coefficient in the medium of the physical vacuum (the Hubble parameter).
In order that the Moon does not fall from the orbit, due to the imperfection of the mechanism of minimizing the force of its attraction to the Earth, on the Moon constantly acts the force that pushes the Moon in orbital toroidal gravitational wave with an equivalent speed of 1 km/s (the first cosmic velocity of the Moon). Therefore, on the surface of the Moon, a gravitational potential is formed equal to the square of the equivalent speed of 1 km/s.
A constant force is also acting on the Earth, it pushes forward it on orbit around the Sun by a stream of physical vacuum in a toroidal gravitational wave, with an equivalent velocity of 8 km/s (this was discovered by Michelson and Morley). Accordingly, a gravitational potential equal to the square of the equivalent velocity of 8 km/s (the first cosmic velocity of the Earth) is formed on the Earth's surface.
For example, it was found that the Sun moves relative to the propagation medium of microwave radiation at a speed of 369 km/s. To minimize the resistance force in a rigid environment of physical vacuum, the Sun forms a huge gravisphere, several light-years in size. The force of the deceleration of the sun in the medium of the physical vacuum is determined by the Hubble parameter, as is the anomalous inhibition of the Pioneers and the red shift of the photons. The entire energy of the braking of the solar system is concentrated in the Sun according to the principle of the action of the heat pump. Through the force of deceleration of the Sun, its radiation power is easily calculated.
Thus, one of the most fundamental parameters in the universe is the energy dissipation coefficient (Hubble parameter) in the medium of the physical vacuum, which determines all the parametric processes in the universe. The stars in the Universe are shining, due to the dissipation of photon energy in the medium of the physical vacuum.
You also asked:
«i.e. there's no explicit proof of the 'curved space-time' hypothesis in the LIGO finding. Is that fair?»
Instead of curvature of space-time, there is a derivative of spatial coordinates in time. Equivalent of "'curved space-time" is the variable speed of propagation of gravitational interaction.
For example, on the surface of the Earth, the velocity of propagation of the gravitational interaction is 8 km/s less than at the periphery of the Earth's gravisphere. Therefore, the elements (gravitons) of toroidal gravitational waves (similarly to the coronal loops on the Sun) are accelerated in bodies, when exiting the Earth (or are decelerated in bodies, at the entrance to the Earth). Thus, the reactive force of attraction of bodies is formed.
In the Earth's magnetosphere often occur conversion powerful toroidal gravitational waves. In this case, there are intense https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B1MvF-AefpMmQnJaUXdOTEo4NW
8 bursts of electromagnetic radiation over a wide frequency range and recorded the characteristic signals of gravitational waves LIGO project, that unreasonably taken as the signals from the "binary pulsars".
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
view post as summary
Peter Jackson replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 19:10 GMT
Vladimir,
Thanks. I think there'll also be a lot of nonsense about gravity for some time yet. Spending millions on machines to do what we can do simply with closer bodies is perverse, as is 'interpreting' it according to beliefs.
Just to advise I'm now applying scores and yours was was one at the top.
Best of luck
Peter
report post as inappropriate
Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Feb. 17, 2018 @ 17:13 GMT
Dear Vladimir,
Very deep critical analysis and deep ideas aimed at overcoming the crisis of understanding in fundamental science. Today, the broadest competition of ideas is needed, especially in
cosmology . I would just add an ontological justification (basification) for your conception. In physics, it is necessary to introduce the Ontological standard of substantiation of fundamental theories. Physicists and
poets should have a single picture of the Universum as an holistic generating process, filled with the meanings of the "LifeWorld" (E. Husserl).
Yours faithfully,
Vladimir Rogozhin
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 12:28 GMT
Dear Vladimir, ...(copied to your)
I completely agree with you.
«In physics, it is necessary to introduce the Ontological standard of substantiation of fundamental theories».
Ontology studies the fundamental principles of the device of being.
The basis of the universe is the physical vacuum. Conceptual physicists believe that space is empty and has ideal properties...
view entire post
Dear Vladimir, ...(copied to your)
I completely agree with you.
«In physics, it is necessary to introduce the Ontological standard of substantiation of fundamental theories».
Ontology studies the fundamental principles of the device of being.
The basis of the universe is the physical vacuum. Conceptual physicists believe that space is empty and has ideal properties to carry the real photon energy billions of years without energy loss. This is a key mistake - all scientists know that there cannot be ideal properties in science, but they do not notice it, or it is global hypnosis, as in Germany at the turn of the 1940s. It is this leads to the justification of the causelessness of processes, science has turned into a fantasy and to what you write.
«The modern crisis of the philosophical foundations of Fundamental Science is manifested as a comprehensive conceptual crisis, crisis of understanding, crisis of interpretation and representation, crisis of methodology, loss of certainty».
When I write about the environment of a physical vacuum, from an ontological point of view, I emphasize its real energy and material basis of the world, instead of an abstract foundation, in the form of emptiness, as well as virtual and quasiparticles.
For example, phonons are generally considered quasiparticles, which form photons that carry real energy. I believe that such supernatural, phantom and abstract concepts should not be in science. All particles are real. If a photon is fixed, this means that in the physical vacuum environment there was a pair of real particles.
On the one hand, matter consists of energy, on the other hand, it is energy that forms the mass. Mass derived from energy, it can be formed, under certain conditions, and may not be formed.
For example, an electron-positron pair is actually a phonon (it is not a quasiparticle) that has energy and mass. "Annihilation" of the electron-positron pair leads to the formation of a pair of massless photons. Each photon carries half the energy of the electron-positron pair. In fact, one photon is the pure kinetic energy of an electron-positron pair. The potential energy of the electron-positron pair is a pair of vast gravispheres from the medium of the physical vacuum, which includes a set of de Broglie waves. Gravispheres form a mass, and their energy is parametrically transformed into a second photon during the "annihilation" process.
Thus, the electron-positron pair has a mass, while the photon has no mass and its temperature is close to zero. At the same time, in the process of "annihilation" only the structure of the elements of matter has changed. For example, for an electron - the toroidal structure has turned into a cylindrical spiral. The electron, as consisted of a nematic sequence of 137 quarks, continues to consist of 137 quarks in the photon. In this case, the cross section of the interaction of a photon with the medium of a physical vacuum decreased by a factor of 137, in comparison with the electron-positron pair. Therefore, a photon is a pair of elements (a pair of baryons) of a deeper neutrino and quark level of the fractal structure of matter. Therefore, an electron in the Cooper pair can move in the equilibrium superconducting state only at a speed 43.6 times slower than the speed of light, and the photons move at the speed of light. A boson from a pair of quarks is a graviton (gluon).
An electron-positron pair can be formed only from a photon with an energy of 1023 keV.
The inverse transformation of photons with an energy of 511 keV into a pair of particles with an energy of 256 keV leads to the absorption of energy from the medium of the physical vacuum for constructing their gravispheres and mass formation. Therefore, laser cooling will allow cooling of the body, practically to zero temperature.
In fact, "annihilation" of particles is the process of their division on the second subharmonic of a parametric transformation with the release of energy, which can be used to synthesize heavier particles with energy absorption.
Thus, the process of division and synthesis of the elements of the physical vacuum environment is the main process of energy circulation in the universe, which leads to parametric resonance and solitons. Phase transformation of the elements of the physical vacuum environment is the cause of self-organization of matter according to the principles of the heat pump.
Thus, the most fundamental parameter in the universe is the energy dissipation coefficient (Hubble parameter) in the medium of the physical vacuum, which determines all the parametric processes in the universe. The stars in the universe are shining, due to the dissipation of energy in the physical environment. For example, the Hubble parameter easily calculates the solar radiation power.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
view post as summary
James Lee Hoover wrote on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 01:41 GMT
Vladimir,
The fundamental in the universe are elements in two basic phase states: toroidal gravitational waves and photons? True, Any object with mass that accelerates - including spinning and orbiting objects produces gravitational waves. They are small except for neutron stars and black holes that LIGO detects. "All processes in the universe are based on energy circulation." I can understand that toroidal motion produces fusion. All our ideas contribute to one another as do yours. I also agree that "Fundamental science should be based on the fundamental principles of research, without the use of abstract and ideal concepts, and we can't disagree about the power of toroidal gravitational waves. I speak of this as well in my essay. Hope you get a chance to look at mine and compare.
Jim
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 05:52 GMT
Dear James,
Here we are again all together.
With great interest I read your essay, which of course is worthy of the highest praise.
I am glad for our mutual understanding «most likely will continue to redefine the meaning of fundamental, knowing that scientific knowledge and what we deem the fundamental evolve, requiring constant editing, revision and refinement».
I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
James Lee Hoover replied on Feb. 18, 2018 @ 06:30 GMT
Vladimir,
Thank you for taking the time to read my essay.
Bet of luck in the contest.
Jim Hoover
report post as inappropriate
George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 11:28 GMT
Dear Vladimir Nikolaevich!
Your approach to necessity of revision of basic concepts and methodology used in modern physics, indeed are remarkable. I can say that I am fully share that "Fundamental science should be based on the fundamental principles of research, without use of abstract and ideal concepts". This is just great!
This demand oblige us to use in our constructions what we really have under our hands, without referring to this or that hypothetical or abstractly-arbitrary essences. Great Newton says "Hypotheses non fingo (Latin:"I contrive no hypotheses.")
But majority of advanced scientists can not do without different kinds of hypnotic things for now, which comes not from experiments or reality, but these coming from their brains and freely working fantasy!
Almost the same demand tried to putting Einstein, however it was defined by the corresponding negative stamp of the "operationalism"!
And the disappointed maestro claimed them the "people with amputated brains!" I am saying this history to show you how is difficult to bring people on the right way, especially when they do not wish listening on this.
You idea of loop gravity (the idea of thoroidal fields) seems to me workable that can brought to concrete results by simplest ways. If you allow me I will say this idea must be generalized applied to the concept of field in whole. I can talk on this matter so long but here is not the right place and right time for detailed examination of everything. Thus, I will only say that your criticism is very right and your efforts to solve fundamental problems also directed on the right way. So, I can wish you only a success!
Best Regards
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 11:54 GMT
Dear George,
Thanks for the kind words.
I also can talk on this matter so long but here is not the right place and right time for detailed examination of everything.
Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 14:23 GMT
Dear Vladimir Nicolaevich,
Thank you for your nice words and appreciation of my submission.
I also have read and appreciated highly your essay.
You are listening well to the "music" of our universe.
I am a proponent of bot LQG and the emerging gravity as treated by Verlinden.
Especially the first is an explanation that can give my own Reality Loops model mathematical background.
The foundational laws of our reality are for now and in the future not attainable I think, but in this contest, you can see that there may be 7 billion approaches.
best regards and good luck to you.
(and thank you)
Wilhelmus
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 14:19 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus, …(copied to your and mine)
Many thanks warm words about my work and for mutual understanding.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Don Limuti wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 15:55 GMT
Hello Vladimir,
I like your essay (and thanks for looking at mine). I find that the map is not the territory (Korzybski) and the concepts of physics are not the territory of physics. However, the concepts should not be written off...we need them and they keep on changing ...its the way we move from truth to truth. And as you point out the territory is what we are after.
I am going to write a longer response, in a day, but right now I know this is an excellent essay and will vote so.
Thanks,
Don Limuti
report post as inappropriate
Don Limuti replied on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 01:04 GMT
Hello again Vladimir,
Your conclusion: Thus, "fundamental" implies the absence in nature of ideal properties of matter and abstract concepts, and also requires a rethinking of the physical essence of phenomenological constants.
I humorously believe that certain things should not be discussed in polite company i.e. politics, religion, sex, and high philosophy.
Phenomenology goes after "the thing in itself". The thing that is beyond attributes. I congratulate your bravery in going after this territory beyond the concepts.
Best of luck in the contest,
Don Limuti
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 07:00 GMT
Dear Don,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.
Understanding, respect and your advices are highly valued.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Gary D. Simpson wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 16:41 GMT
Vlad,
I'm not sure what to comment regarding your essay. You present many interesting ideas with supporting calculations, but it is hard for me to see the big picture that you are trying to create. I think this is partly the result of your essay attempting to cover too much material. For example, between eq 12 and eq 13, you present the fine structure constant as being the ratio between two successive values in a series. This alone would have been sufficient for the entire essay. The fine structure constant is one of the biggest puzzles in Physics.
In any event, you have given me much to think about.
Best Regards and Good Luck,
Gary Simpson
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 07:11 GMT
Dear Gary,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.
The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
austin fearnley wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 18:25 GMT
Thank you for your comments on my essay. I have now re-read your paper.
First, your work on toroidal gravitation is too advanced and unfamiliar for me to follow without spending a lot ot time, though I do like your use of fractal structures. I have picked out a few ideas in your work which stuck a chord with me and which may or may not be useful or relevant.
You mention 'levels'...
view entire post
Thank you for your comments on my essay. I have now re-read your paper.
First, your work on toroidal gravitation is too advanced and unfamiliar for me to follow without spending a lot ot time, though I do like your use of fractal structures. I have picked out a few ideas in your work which stuck a chord with me and which may or may not be useful or relevant.
You mention 'levels' of matter of which the electron matter is one available now. In my (lego-like) preon model the electron is at the lowest level being made from the smallest number of preons. My graviton (only in model#7) is at a higher level of complexity having more preons in it than the electron, so a pair of gravitons could become (as you have it) two pairs of photons in my model#7.
Entanglement, for me, needs to be mundane and not mystical. With a preon model I can make a graviton (almost but not quite exactly) out of two photons. And one could say that the two photons are entangled within the graviton. But it has to be a mundane and deterministic phenomenon for me. In some ways I see entanglement, and its mystical associations, as a Standard Model mechanism for coping with effects of preon structures without admitting the existence of preons. Similarly, all the various colour/anticolor entangled properties of gluons can be constructed mundanely using preons. In my model, gluons have more preons than the electron which allows the reaggregation of preon groups into a variety of colour/anticolour groups.
I have tried to model the Standard Model particles, using preons with SM eigenvalues and did not go beyond the SM's three generations. I see no need to limit the number of generations to three but I have no target data to try to build such particles. Many of the very high generations could by now have decayed into lower generations. This generates more space in the universe because of the exclusion principle and the very large number of lower generation particles that one can make from one higher generation particle.
A second point is your mention of obtaining work from vacuum energy. I have not thought about this much before now but it is indirectly in my model. In my model the accelerated electron does not simply radiate a photon. The electron interacts with a higgs field or a higgs particle (an additional higgs with low mass) and changes the spin and weak isospin [and chiral handedness] of the electron. Likewise a higgs particle or field is emitted when a photon is absorbed by an electron. So, in my model, even the simplest interaction depends on the use of vacuum energy. Sometimes giving and sometimes receiving.
In some sense the cold end of the universe represents a final phase when all the available vacuum energy has been used up. Creating an industrial scale extraction from the vacuum would speed up the end of the universe, so by Sod's Law it may be correct!
Best wishes
Austin Fearnley
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 12:20 GMT
Dear Austin,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words and interest shown in my work.
I also have read and appreciated highly your essay.
You are listening well to the "music" of our universe.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Branko L Zivlak wrote on Feb. 21, 2018 @ 21:56 GMT
Dear Vladimir,
Thank you for your interest in my essay.
Regarding the view in your essay.“The gravitational constant reflects Kepler's third law in the solar system and is not fundamental constant for other planetary systems.
In my essay, the opposite view is obtained by my calculations.
„Each planet and star have its final lifetime, but Kepler's laws describing relations between them are eternal. The same applies to Newton's, Maxwell's and Planck's laws ... and the phenomena to which they relate.“ Still, I appreciate your efforts and the opposite views with a good score.
Regards,
Branko
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 13:16 GMT
Dear Branko,
(copy to yours and mine)
Thanks for visiting my FQXi Essay page.
Each of our work is valuable in that it is information for thought.
I do not exclude the fact that the gravitational constant is valid for many stars, for example, for all yellow dwarfs. But I have doubts about other classes of stars, because they are in other quantum states and can reflect other levels of matter with a different gravitational coefficient.
I'm against using the gravitational coefficient everywhere. I proposed a formula for calculating it, to check whether can be used it to the system in question or not.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 03:12 GMT
Dear Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov,
I enjoyed very much your fascinating essay. This year, as last year, we are in agreement about the fundamental nature of gravito-magnetism. You state that:
"
The nature of the fundamental elements in the universe can be in two basic phase states: in the form of toroidal gravitational waves and in the form of photons."
It's not clear...
view entire post
Dear Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov,
I enjoyed very much your fascinating essay. This year, as last year, we are in agreement about the fundamental nature of gravito-magnetism. You state that:
"
The nature of the fundamental elements in the universe can be in two basic phase states: in the form of toroidal gravitational waves and in the form of photons."
It's not clear to me that our understanding of toroidal gravity is the same. In '
The Nature of Quantum Gravity', I see induced gravito-magnetic circulation as the deBroglie wave induced by the electron's momentum density. Association of photons and neutrinos is not compatible with my understanding. I believe the gravito-electro-dynamics represented by eqns(1) in my essay iteratively yield appropriate solutions. One must go from the vortex to the torus, dynamically, to accomplish what we both wish to do.
You seem to say that the speed of gravitational interaction is 770 times greater than photon propagation; this would conflict with recent data from colliding neutron stars, which indicate gravity and light propagate at the same speed. We do agree that "
distortion of space-time is more of an abstract concepts and physical process." And, as last year, when you say "there are no fundamental particles … with a greater mass than the electron", I believe this should be "
greater mass density".
So we agree on the fundamental importance of gravito-magnetism however the details must, in my opinion, be worked out from the dynamic equations. The non-linearity of gravity makes this quite a difficult task, probably accounting for the general lack of solutions in this area. It seems your calculations are heavily based on harmonics, and it is not clear to me that that is sufficient. I encourage you to continue developing your model.
My best wishes for continued development of your very interesting theory. I shall continue developing mine, and perhaps we will converge to a best theory.
Edwin Eugene Klingman
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Declan Andrew Traill wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 03:46 GMT
Vladimir,
Thanks for the positive comment on my essay. I have just read your paper, although admit I skipped over much of the detail, but got the general thesis. It is a very interesting paper, and I agree that matter is comprised of vortices held together (in part) by gravity. I think you would be interested in my paper where I model electrons and positrons as 3D Electromagnetic standing waves: http://vixra.org/pdf/1507.0054v6.pdf
My wave function solutions could work for any mass plugged in - leading to infinite possible particles, except that my suspicion is that only certain masses lead to just the right amount of wave curvature (due to gravitational bending) to allow stable particles to form. Thus only certain particles can exist. So this bending effect of gravity causes certain energy densities to be able to form stable wave function structures. Also I have long suspected that the Universe may have a fractal nature - the repeated application of simple laws building up bigger and bigger structures, but with a similar appearance at different size scales.
Best Regards,
Declan Traill
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 13:41 GMT
Dear Declan, …(copied to your and mine)
Thanks for the positive comment on my essay.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
George Kirakosyan wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 03:53 GMT
dear Vladimir Nikolaevich
I have finalized study your article, it is really contains many nice points that is close to me, "but here is not the right place and right time for detailed examination of everything" - ценю юмор!
And we are people who strive always doing his duty.
Be well my dear and I wish you succeeded in the contest!
Best regards
report post as inappropriate
Steven Andresen wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 07:44 GMT
Dear Vladimir
If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don’t rate them at all. Infact I haven’t issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to...
view entire post
Dear Vladimir
If you are looking for another essay to read and rate in the final days of the contest, will you consider mine please? I read all essays from those who comment on my page, and if I cant rate an essay highly, then I don’t rate them at all. Infact I haven’t issued a rating lower that ten. So you have nothing to lose by having me read your essay, and everything to gain.
Beyond my essay’s introduction, I place a microscope on the subjects of universal complexity and natural forces. I do so within context that clock operation is driven by Quantum Mechanical forces (atomic and photonic), while clocks also serve measure of General Relativity’s effects (spacetime, time dilation). In this respect clocks can be said to possess a split personality, giving them the distinction that they are simultaneously a study in QM, while GR is a study of clocks. The situation stands whereby we have two fundamental theories of the world, but just one world. And we have a singular device which serves study of both those fundamental theories. Two fundamental theories, but one device? Please join me and my essay in questioning this circumstance?
My essay goes on to identify natural forces in their universal roles, how they motivate the building of and maintaining complex universal structures and processes. When we look at how star fusion processes sit within a “narrow range of sensitivity” that stars are neither led to explode nor collapse under gravity. We think how lucky we are that the universe is just so. We can also count our lucky stars that the fusion process that marks the birth of a star, also leads to an eruption of photons from its surface. And again, how lucky we are! for if they didn’t then gas accumulation wouldn’t be halted and the star would again be led to collapse.
Could a natural organisation principle have been responsible for fine tuning universal systems? Faced with how lucky we appear to have been, shouldn’t we consider this possibility?
For our luck surely didnt run out there, for these photons stream down on earth, liquifying oceans which drive geochemical processes that we “life” are reliant upon. The Earth is made up of elements that possess the chemical potentials that life is entirely dependent upon. Those chemical potentials are not expressed in the absence of water solvency. So again, how amazingly fortunate we are that these chemical potentials exist in the first instance, and additionally within an environment of abundant water solvency such as Earth, able to express these potentials.
My essay is attempt of something audacious. It questions the fundamental nature of the interaction between space and matter Guv = Tuv, and hypothesizes the equality between space curvature and atomic forces is due to common process. Space gives up a potential in exchange for atomic forces in a conversion process, which drives atomic activity. And furthermore, that Baryons only exist because this energy potential of space exists and is available for exploitation. Baryon characteristics and behaviours, complexity of structure and process might then be explained in terms of being evolved and optimised for this purpose and existence. Removing need for so many layers of extraordinary luck to eventuate our own existence. It attempts an interpretation of the above mentioned stellar processes within these terms, but also extends much further. It shines a light on molecular structure that binds matter together, as potentially being an evolved agency that enhances rigidity and therefor persistence of universal system. We then turn a questioning mind towards Earths unlikely geochemical processes, (for which we living things owe so much) and look at its central theme and propensity for molecular rock forming processes. The existence of chemical potentials and their diverse range of molecular bond formation activities? The abundance of water solvent on Earth, for which many geochemical rock forming processes could not be expressed without? The question of a watery Earth? is then implicated as being part of an evolved system that arose for purpose and reason, alongside the same reason and purpose that molecular bonds and chemistry processes arose.
By identifying atomic forces as having their origin in space, we have identified how they perpetually act, and deliver work products. Forces drive clocks and clock activity is shown by GR to dilate. My essay details the principle of force dilation and applies it to a universal mystery. My essay raises the possibility, that nature in possession of a natural energy potential, will spontaneously generate a circumstance of Darwinian emergence. It did so on Earth, and perhaps it did so within a wider scope. We learnt how biology generates intricate structure and complexity, and now we learn how it might explain for intricate structure and complexity within universal physical systems.
To steal a phrase from my essay “A world product of evolved optimization”.
Best of luck for the conclusion of the contest
Kind regards
Steven Andresen
Darwinian Universal Fundamental Origin
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 08:28 GMT
Dear Steven,
Thank you very much for writing me a message.
Excuse me for being short-sighted, I refrained from communicating with you after your categorical statement in 2017.
«These topics being prominent in the minds of people, evidences the complexity and fine tuning problem is a most pressing issue confronting our universal awareness. No matter we try, it will not find...
view entire post
Dear Steven,
Thank you very much for writing me a message.
Excuse me for being short-sighted, I refrained from communicating with you after your categorical statement in 2017.
«These topics being prominent in the minds of people, evidences the complexity and fine tuning problem is a most pressing issue confronting our universal awareness. No matter we try, it will not find explanation in absence of a natural organisation principle!».
I consider that I am one of the few who answered the question posed about the self-organization of matter even in the title of my essay.
It is so close to me.
«Questions of a fundamental nature of the world push up against our theories of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity».
«It does indeed appear we exist as a world of matter fields of force, operating under temporal governance».
In my essay it is shown that all the force interactions of the elements of matter are carried out at resonance frequencies of toroidal gravitational waves. In the universe, there is a general grid of resonant frequencies of limiting elements (such as an electron), which synchronizes all quantum parametric processes), so time is a derivative of the period of synchronous resonance frequencies and cannot be distorted.
«MOND having achieved prediction of spiral galaxy rotation velocities, the same formula fails to extend prediction to motions of galaxy groups. If a single fudge factor fixed everything, it might tell us something important. But it’s difficult to justify a unique fudge to suit numerous unique examples of gravitational interaction».
«a unique fudge to suit numerous unique examples of gravitational interaction». are explained very simply. Due to the invariable gravitational potential in the disks of galaxies, the stars move approximately at the same speed, which does not correspond to Newton's law of gravitation and Kepler's laws.
I think that the overwhelming majority of scientists do not assume that the gravitational potential is equal to the square of the equilibrium orbital velocity, because all are accustomed to consider the gravitational potential through the gravitational coefficient, which, in my opinion, is not fundamental.
In addition, the gravitational potential is related to the temperature of the medium of the physical vacuum (analog of "dark matter"). And the temperature in the galactic disk is approximately the same, so the speed of the stars does not depend on the distance to the center of the galaxy.
I highly appreciate hope your essay and hope for reciprocity ….
I request you to please post your reply in my essay also, so that I can get an intimation that you replied.
I highly appreciate your well-written essay in an effort to understand.
I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
view post as summary
Steven Andresen replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 10:26 GMT
Dear Vladimir
I am traveling tonight and only have my phone with me to write, but I will read and rate your essay when I have the chance. I'll talk to you again then.
Steve
report post as inappropriate
Christian Corda wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 09:12 GMT
Dear Vladimir,
Thanks for visiting my FQXi Essay page.
You wrote an interesting Essay, despite it is not conventional. Here are some comments and/or questions:
You wrote that the abstract distortion of space-time is equivalent to a non-ideal medium of the physical vacuum-the variable velocity of propagation of the gravitational fundamental interaction. But, if it is equivalent, how can be also an incorrect use of ideals properties? Equivalent means that we have two ways to interpret a phenomenon and that both of them are correct.
How can you conciliate the gravitational potential due to toroidal gravitational waves which Einstein's Equivalence Principle, which has today a strong empiric evidence and the consequence that gravitational energy cannot be localized?
I appreciate your removing probabilistic behavior of physics with deterministic one.
Beyond your Essay, I am interested on your device for the detection of gravitational waves. Can you give me some detail?
In any case, you wrote a nice and entertaining Essay, deserving an high score.
Good luck in the Contest.
Cheers, Ch.
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 10:18 GMT
Dear Christian,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words, interest shown in my work and for excellent questions.
You wrote: «Beyond your Essay, I am interested on your device for the detection of gravitational waves. Can you give me some detail?»
Brief description of the experiment can be read in my Research notebook «The deterministic gravitational...
view entire post
Dear Christian,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words, interest shown in my work and for excellent questions.
You wrote: «Beyond your Essay, I am interested on your device for the detection of gravitational waves. Can you give me some detail?»
Brief description of the experiment can be read in my Research notebook «The deterministic gravitational waves» https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VMlesBfYVVa-Fp6bIr1I-uzU-Vn
q3FFY/view pages 53-60.
I will tell only the history of the experiment that in 2006 I read a lot about the gravitational waves of LIGO and I had an idea that gravitational waves from stars can be recorded with the help of the Casimir effect on the surfaces of bodies. Then I hung on a torsion balance a package of many sheets of writing paper between framed by frames of the same paper. I assumed that such a package should be a similarity to a gravitational telescope with a flat radiation pattern, and signals from stars should be repeated every day, but I did not see it. But what I saw turned all my ideas about physics.
When I processed the data and plotted the graph for 2 weeks of measurement https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1MvF-AefpMmOWx2SkE0ZjJXTG8
/view , I realized that some neutrino matter is registered from the eastern quadrature of the Earth's orbit, obviously those detected by Michelson and Morley.
I assembled the second installation, where I placed just a packet of writing paper without frames. There were practically no variations. But when I replaced it with a package with frames, I got the same variations of large amplitude as in the first setup. Those. The package of paper with frames was approximately 100 times more efficient when receiving gravitational waves than a packet without frames.
The most vivid impression of observations on the monitor in real time was stable periodic signals of large amplitude with a period of 72 seconds. For me it was a enigma. I thought I was on the verge of a great discovery. It is now known to us that such the periodic signals of 72 seconds are recorded in the LISA project in million kilometers from the Earth. This is now I brought in the essay the simple relationships for the calculation, in practice, of all possible resonance frequencies of gravitational waves.
These experiments were not intended for publication, they were for me.
So, I realized that:
1. Gravitons exist. Flows of gravitons can be focused and manage them.
2. Gravitational waves can be easily registred with the help of packets of parallel planar bodies. X-ray telescopes can easily be converted into gravitational telescopes.
3. The space is filled with neutrino rigid and superfluid matter.
4. The Earth does not fall from the orbit, not because space is empty, but because there is a toroidal gravitational wave in orbit that pushes the Earth along orbit from the eastern quadrature of the orbit, compensating for the resistance.
I understood many other interesting points.
It is difficult to persuade people. Stimulus can only be the desire to know the truth.
You wrote «that the abstract distortion of space-time is equivalent to a non-ideal medium of the physical vacuum-the variable velocity of propagation of the gravitational fundamental interaction. But, if it is equivalent, how can be also an incorrect use of ideals properties? Equivalent means that we have two ways to interpret a phenomenon and that both of them are correct».
Yes, formally, they «that both of them are correct» - the result of the calculations is the same.
For example, the force of gravitation on Earth can be calculated through the gravitational coefficient (the empirical form of recording the law of gravitation), but can be calculated by the physical form, through the gravitational potential, which has the dimension of the square of the velocity.
However, very few people know the very simple truth that the gravitational potential is equal to the square of the equilibrium orbital velocity. And, practically, no one knows that the equilibrium orbital velocity is equal to the change in the speed of propagation of the gravitational interaction, which is equivalent to the derivative of spatial coordinates in time (to the formal equivalent - to the distortion of space-time in general relativity). Mechanisms are different - the result is one.
For example, the speed of propagation of gravitational interaction increases from the surface of the Earth to the periphery of its gravisphere. Near the surface of the Earth, the speed of propagation of gravitational interaction is on 8 km/s less than on the periphery of the gravisphere. Gravitons in toroidal gravitational waves accelerating near the surface of the Earth form the reactive force of gravity for terrestrial bodies.
You wrote «that the abstract distortion of space-time is equivalent to a non-ideal medium of the physical vacuum-the variable velocity of propagation of the gravitational fundamental interaction. But, if it is equivalent, how can be also an incorrect use of ideals properties? Equivalent means that we have two ways to interpret a phenomenon and that both of them are correct».
I can quote Valery Morozov: "The formulation of the energy-momentum parameters of a gravitational field in general relativity can not be a tensor, but it is a pseudotensor, a quantity that transforms as a tensor only under linear coordinate transformations. This means that in GRT the energy of the gravitational field can not in principle be localized (which follows from the weak equivalence principle). Various authors introduce their own energy-momentum pseudotensors of the gravitational field, which possess certain "correct" properties, but one their variety shows that the problem does not have a satisfactory solution".
However, these problems are not mine, but GRT, dig into mathematics, and not in physical mechanisms. I have nothing against the very principle of equivalence. The force of gravitation and the force of inertia have a single mechanism of action. My conclusions are based on a comparison of facts that can be observed, and on phenomena that have analogs around us.
In my essay 2017, I clearly demonstrated in the example of phenomena in space that there is, assumedly, the only mechanism for the formation of force with the help of toroidal gravitational waves, which minimize the force of gravitation and inertia.
The gravitational field in a toroidal gravitational wave is a vortex of the medium of a physical vacuum. I suppose the solar system is a vortex of a medium of a physical vacuum with spherical equipotential surfaces having the same speed of rotation and same gravitational potential. Despite the fact that the Earth in orbit is not moving relative to the medium of the physical vacuum, the large vortex gravisphere of the Earth has a resistance.
However, the gravisphere of Earth in orbit is in the potential well of stability of the orbital soliton gravitational wave, which pushes the Earth along of orbit and compensates for the resistance force.
The gradient of the gravitational potential of the orbital wave is equal to the gradient of the gravitational potential in the region of the Earth's orbit in the solar system and is directed in the opposite direction. Therefore, the forces of gravity of the Earth to the Sun and the forces of its inertia do not exist
On the tides, you can see my answer to the question of Peter Jackson.
If the force of attraction was, the Earth would emit X-ray radiation of enormous power in accordance with the Unruh effect, but the Earth does not radiate, and the comets radiate, because they are attracted to the Sun.
By most powerful X-ray radiation 1 GW was possessed by a small comet Hyakutake, which moved around the Sun against the motion of the planets.
For comparison, Jupiter, which is in a circular orbit, has the same power of 1 GW X-ray as Comet Hyakutake, although the masses of these bodies are not comparable.
Consequently, GRT and Newton's law of gravitation are not valid for orbital bodies. Those. these laws are not fundamental, they are valid only for the surface of the Sun, the surfaces of planets and satellites in the solar system. Fundamental is the assertion that all fundamental interactions have potential stability pits, and are easily combined by a single formalism.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
view post as summary
Hans van Leunen wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 09:27 GMT
The problem with theories that are based on geometric founding structures that are not point-like, is that a mechanism must provide these geometric structures. Point-like objects can be generated by stochastic processes, such as a combination of a Poisson process and a binomial process. The binomial process can be implemented by a spatial point spread function. This mechanism comes already close to the mechanism that produces the wavefunction of objects. The stochastic processes can cooperate to generate more complicated geometric structures.
See: "Stochastic control of the Universe"; http://vixra.org/abs/1712.0243
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 14:06 GMT
Dear Hans, …(copied to your and mine)
Thank you very much for your attention and explanations.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Paul Schroeder wrote on Feb. 22, 2018 @ 15:25 GMT
Hi Vladimir,
I am glad your response to mine directed me to your essay. We agree on many details about the universe, such as the flaw in Newton’s laws as applied to orbiting. Your well written and technical essay is well beyond my education level. It does serve as a challenge for me to at least update my terminology limitations.
Thank you for the very nice comment about my essay. I am learning from yours. If you want to learn more of mine, I have included the principal ideas of the Universe is Otherwise system on the two pages that follow the essay at FQXi. Also My 3 paper summary of ‘The Universe is Otherwise’ is easy reading. It goes well beyond issues addressed here. I can send it to you.
While meeting with you, as proposed is unlikely, I would agree with carrying on communication of our common like-minded thoughts.
Paul Schroeder
Pshrodr8@aol.com
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 04:53 GMT
Dear Paul, …(copied to your and mine)
Thanks for visiting my FQXi Essay page.
I'm glad that you liked my thoughts. Send your works as you like, you can send it by e-mail fedorovvlad53@gmail.com.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 14:51 GMT
Dear Vladimir
(copy to yours and mine)
The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.
If you are aware of more valuable essays don't hesitate to inform me.
best regards
Wilhelmus
report post as inappropriate
Brajesh Mishra wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 16:20 GMT
Dear Vladimir,
Thanks a lot for reading and giving encouraging remarks my submission The Mysterious “Fundamental” (https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2998).
I have tried to understand the new ideas propounded in your essay. Prima acie, they appear out-of-box and impressive. However, to gain a wider audience, I would suggest you to subsequently develop your ideas for people who are from non-science background. I salute the challenge you have taken to swim against the tide.
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 10:45 GMT
Dear Brajesh,
(copy to yours and mine)
Thanks for the kind words and advice. «I would suggest you to subsequently develop your ideas for people who are from non-science background».
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
corciovei silviu wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 19:58 GMT
Mr. Fedorov
I fully enjoyed the way you put things together it and I think further words are useless.
Rate it accordingly.
If you would have the pleasure for a short axiomatic approach of the subject, I will appreciate your opinion.
Silviu
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 04:16 GMT
Dear Corciovei,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding. The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.
I highly appreciate your well-written essay in an effort to understand.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Jack Hamilton James wrote on Feb. 23, 2018 @ 21:16 GMT
Thankyou Vladimir,
I appreciate your comments on my essay and I am glad we had a similar approach. I read your current essay and found your claims on Newton very interesting ( from what I could understand as my physics is not as strong as yours ) and will reflect on them further.
Good luck with your latest endeavours into nature and truth.
Best,
Jack
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 04:40 GMT
Dear Jack,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.
The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Feb. 24, 2018 @ 20:14 GMT
Hi,
I copy my answer on your comment on my essay page https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3093 also here.
Thanks.
Seemed my answer was 'eaten' by the net. I try again.
toroidal gravitational waves is an interesting note. "Orbital bodies are in potential pits of stability of toroidal gravitational waves of de Broglie" - What is stability is a fundamental question too. Stability is only found within limits, and I would say it is symmetry protected states. Gravity as the weakest force is also the most longrange one, and in that way the most powerful. It is continous, but also chaotic, give rise to fractals, hence it has forms, often interpreted as Lie Groups etc.
Toroidal forces can also be other than gravitational. They Point to asymmetry, I Think.
The question of a varying G has some evidence. Also g varies on our Earth. The interesting question is what happens in the vacuum, or at its boundary, and what forms our space + time.
I have sometimes thought Newtonian gravity might be a quantum version :) Who knows?
Ulla Mattfolk.
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 06:54 GMT
Dear Ulla,
(copy to yours and mine)
Your essay and comments allowed to consider us like-minded people.
Like me, you think about very interesting questions «The interesting question is what happens in the vacuum, or at its boundary, and what forms our space + time».
In my essay it is shown that all the force interactions of the elements of matter are carried out at resonance frequencies of toroidal gravitational waves. In the universe, there is a general grid of resonant frequencies of limiting elements (such as an electron), which synchronizes all quantum parametric processes), so time is a derivative of the period of synchronous resonance frequencies and cannot be distorted.
It is known that on the surface of the flat bodies there is Casimir effect, which, as I explain, is associated with the presence of turbulent gravitational shell and large gradient of the gravitational potential.
The bodies are attracted to each other on the Earth because there is a turbulent gravitational shell near the surface of the Earth.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Anil Shanker wrote on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 01:43 GMT
Dear Vladimir,
Thank you for the work you have been doing on "Archeology (archectonics) of consciousness", which I consider very meaningful. People look upon metaphysics as a lowly science. But as you quote E. Schrodinger: Metaphysics is transformed in physics in the process of development. There is a long way for us to go to crystallize the fine workings of nature, which I believe is nothing but a combinatorial output of several domains of activity at the level of cognition, sublime consciousness, supramolecular biological and cosmic organization, and fundamental driving forces.
I hope to continue to work together on understanding these aspects in a holistic manner further. With the teamwork, I am sure one day we will grasp and unravel these layers for the benefit of humanity and supreme consciousness/absoluteness.
Best regards,
Anil
report post as inappropriate
Jouko Harri Tiainen wrote on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 15:07 GMT
Vladimir!
Well I have to say toroidal gravitational waves sounds like a super interesting idea -- after reading your paper I have to say it is smashing. So much information and detail (almost an overload of information and diagrams and graphs) about ideas and concepts that are very foreign to my way of thinking.
I have some "overarching" questions -- does your model indicate the...
view entire post
Vladimir!
Well I have to say toroidal gravitational waves sounds like a super interesting idea -- after reading your paper I have to say it is smashing. So much information and detail (almost an overload of information and diagrams and graphs) about ideas and concepts that are very foreign to my way of thinking.
I have some "overarching" questions -- does your model indicate the metaphysical nature of the world when tordial gravitational waves are interacting. Do we a "real world" in the sense we have realism. Since all are waves and fractals, if "fractal waves are it" then how do you explain "the world" as one entity.
Since there is "no place" for "the bird's eye view" hence we cannot an objective viewpoint so we cannot have objective truth in any sense only "a series of "truths" against the fractal background of tori waves.
I understand how your model "matches" the radial velocity curve of galaxies, but due to the fractal background doesn't that imply we will have a constant curve for the entire universe as a whole.
I don't see how you can get acceleration down a slope, that is Newton's laws (sorry if you cover that in your dense paper). And if all is fractal what happens to Man's noble enterprise called "science"
Your theory cannot support - the hypothesis chain of induction to an deductive conclusion -- since it is fractals all the way down and up --like a stack of turtles all the same way up -- you cannot turn over any turtle individually to stop the infinite regression of f1 to f2 to f3 and so on, since you cannot stop the series hence only induction. Therefore you cannot really set up a math structure of deterministic entities. As you claim.
Secondly -- how do you differentiate between animate and inanimate matter. Is there a "place or space" for consciousness. How can we have any observers who can perform any observation if all is just waves on fractals.
Sorry for being so philosophical about your very complex essay -- but the "big picture" metaphysics isn't dealt with at all. How can you perform science at all in your schema from a fundamental viewpoint with "isolated" entities which can have an objective view of "anything at all" -- these are the deep questions your fabulous paper evokes in my mind's eye.
I have rated your essay very highly indeed, well done. Yours Harri
If you have time have a look at my essay - -it equates the imaginary unit with the speed of light and Plank's constant. That we make a "elementary square area" the imaginary unit and then apply Pythagoras Theorem to that area. An interesting approach though it is tough to understand if it comes to anything it was more for the idea. See here https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3133 Harri
Most very interesting ideas -- marvelous effort and
view post as summary
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 08:20 GMT
Dear Jouko,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.
The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.
I highly appreciate your well-written essay in an effort to understand.
«I'm happy that maybe you are on the threshold of some new discovery.
So by reinterpreting the Born Rule, as probabilities |Ψ|2 or (Ψ*Ψ) then the wave-functions of the ket *i and bra i* states respectfully, give us enough mathematical elbow room to accommodate both Relativity and Quantum mechanics in one scheme».
«Current maths thinking only uses "one" encoding side -- the complex conjugate of the
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 08:36 GMT
Dear Jouko,
(copy to yours and mine)
Many thanks for the kind words about my work and for mutual understanding.
The understanding and appreciation are highly valued.
I highly appreciate your well-written essay in an effort to understand.
«I'm happy that maybe you are on the threshold of some new discovery.
So by reinterpreting the Born Rule, as probabilities |Ψ|2 or (Ψ*Ψ) then the wave-functions of the ket *i and bra i* states respectfully, give us enough mathematical elbow room to accommodate both Relativity and Quantum mechanics in one scheme».
«Current maths thinking only uses "one" encoding side -- the complex conjugate of the a+ib| side -- to obtain areas. Basically in current maths thinking there is only z=a+ib, with zero=0+i0. We can devise a different set of complex numbers z=a-ib with zero=0-i0. And both can be related to the area of the imaginary unit, to obtain a new dual mathematics».
As a radio engineer and mechanic, I highly appreciate the idea of a new interpretation of complex numbers.
In a couple of days, I'll try to answer some of your questions.
I wish you happiness in your scientific work in search of truth.
I hope that my modest achievements can be information for reflection for you.
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren wrote on Feb. 25, 2018 @ 22:42 GMT
Dear Vladimir Fedorov,
I totally agree with you as saying that "Fundamental" means the underlying principles, laws, essence, structure, constants and properties of matter.
I understood that your idea is based on nonideal medium of a physical vacuum.
Exactly the medium is the most fundamental for reality of the Nature.
My first question, would you describe it more clearly?
Is that similar at that https://www.intechopen.com/books/selected-topics-in-applicat
ions-of-quantum-mechanics/physical-vacuum-is-a-special-super
fluid-medium
In other words, the medium is an invisible perfect fluid similar the Aether, or not?
How do the fractal structure of matter physically come from the medium?
That is very interesting for me, “The matter of the fundamental elements in the universe can be in two basic phase states: in the form of toroidal gravitational waves and in the form of photons.”
For the one mentioned above by you, If one assumes the space as an invisible perfect fluid with critical speed of c (the light speed), a single photon may exist in form of a vortex ring of the invisible perfect fluid. More strictly speaking, a single photon may exist in form of Chaplykin Lamb dipole of the invisible perfect fluid whose only speed of free motion is to be c, there is no way to move at a speed more or less than the critical speed of c.
Regarding the annihilation of electron and positron, electron and its antiparticle, may exist in form of a bubble of the invisible perfect fluid.
Therefore, there must exist continuous deformation between the vortex ring (photon) and the bubble (electron or positron). Mathematically, there are two homeomorphic spaces share the same topological properties.
The Best Regards,
Ch.Bayarsaikhan
report post as inappropriate
Author Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov replied on Mar. 1, 2018 @ 07:34 GMT
Dear Bayarsaikhan,
Many thanks for the kind words, interest shown in my work and for excellent questions.
The questions on the forum help to identify topics that I did not explain well enough in the essay.
You write: «I understood that your idea is based on nonideal medium of a physical vacuum».
Non ideality of the medium of the physical vacuum is a key concept....
view entire post
Dear Bayarsaikhan,
Many thanks for the kind words, interest shown in my work and for excellent questions.
The questions on the forum help to identify topics that I did not explain well enough in the essay.
You write: «I understood that your idea is based on nonideal medium of a physical vacuum».
Non ideality of the medium of the physical vacuum is a key concept.
«The rightmost term describes dissipation of the energy stored in the vortex. As a result, the vortex with the lapse of time will disappear».
This is the main reason why doctrinal physics abandoned toroidal vortices. And to prove that vortices are stable in a linear system is impossible.
Therefore, to solve this problem Sbitnev suggested the following.
«Assuming that the fluid is a physical vacuum, which meets the requirements specified earlier, we must say that the viscosity vanishes».
On the one hand, Sbitnev is mistaken that it is possible to solve the instability of vortices by introducing the ideal properties of the viscosity of a medium in a physical vacuum. Each of us knows that there are no ideal properties of matter. It's just mysticism. For example, the introduction of ideal properties contradicts the observed deceleration of the Pioneers, they were decelerated with the viscosity index determined by the Hubble parameter, how the photons that form the redshift are decelerated.
On the other hand, having declared ideal properties, Sbitnev has lost all opportunity to adequately explain the causality of all processes in the universe and the self-organization of matter.
For example, let us recall the main argument of OTO supporters when they refused from ether - if the ether were, then due to friction, the Earth would fall on the Sun. In fact, Sbitnev commits a similar error by announcing the ideal properties of the viscosity of the physical vacuum medium.
In my work is affirmed that all processes in the universe are carried out because of the finite viscosity of the medium of the physical vacuum, determined by a parameter equal to or greater than the Hubble parameter. The low viscosity is compensated by the fact that all processes occur at the frequencies of high-quality parametric resonance between soliton toroidal gravitational waves (de Broglie and Compton waves), where a weak coupling leads to strong interactions. This is analogous to a weak connection in high-Q circuits, which leads to the transfer of almost all energy.
The nonlinearity of the medium of the physical vacuum is due to the well-known dynamic regularity of the de Broglie wavelength from the velocity of the Compton wave. Most importantly, it is necessary to understand that the dynamic de Broglie waves are necessary to maintain the Compton waves in a stable state with any change in the rate of their perturbation.
Each de Broglie wave forms its de Broglie wave, as a result, it has a certain range of stability. Thus, around each toroidal gravitational wave of Compton, a large gravisphere (this is your bubble) is formed from the set of toroidal gravitational waves of de Broglie.
Gravisphere concentrates energy in the center of gravitation, working on the principle of the heat pump. Gravisphere has a variable density, forms the effect of mass and inertia, continuously rebuilding its structure and changing energy. Thus, the gravisphere is always adjusted to new conditions of motion in a rigid and non-linear medium of the physical vacuum, minimizing the resistance force.
The medium of the physical vacuum consists of toroidal gravitational waves of de Broglie, which are quantum-parametrically transformed on harmonics or subharmonics of parametric resonance. Some waves of de Broglie "annihilate", turning into photons, others are synthesized. Those. photons dissipate energy, and toroidal gravitational waves focus the energy.
In my essay in 2018 I gave simple relationships for the basic parameters of elements (of de Broglie waves) of the physical vacuum medium, including for fundamental frequency grids on which the elements of matter are transformed.
The Earth does not fall from the orbit, not because space is empty, but because there is a toroidal gravitational wave in orbit (toroidal gravisphere, toroidal gravitational field).
A constant force is also acting on the Earth, it pushes forward it on orbit around the Sun by a stream of physical vacuum in a toroidal gravitational wave, with an equivalent velocity of 8 km/s (this was discovered by Michelson and Morley). Accordingly, a gravitational potential equal to the square of the equivalent velocity of 8 km/s (the first cosmic velocity of the Earth) is formed on the Earth's surface.
For example, it was found that the Sun moves relative to the propagation medium of microwave radiation at a speed of 369 km/s. To minimize the resistance force in a rigid environment of physical vacuum, the Sun forms a huge gravisphere, several light-years in size. The force of the deceleration of the sun in the medium of the physical vacuum is determined by the Hubble parameter, as is the anomalous inhibition of the Pioneers and the red shift of the photons. The entire energy of the braking of the solar system is concentrated in the Sun according to the principle of the action of the heat pump. Through the force of deceleration of the Sun, its radiation power is easily calculated.
Thus, one of the most fundamental parameters in the universe is the energy dissipation coefficient (Hubble parameter) in the medium of the physical vacuum, which determines all the parametric processes in the universe. The stars in the Universe are shining, due to the dissipation of photon energy in the medium of the physical vacuum.
Only a periodic process of motion of bodies along the orbit is able to form such orbital waves (toroidal gravispheres), which completely compensate for the energy loss on the non-ideality of the medium of the physical vacuum. Moreover, stable planetary systems are only those that have a common system of interconnected parametric resonances, as the atoms. Therefore, the solar system is an analog of a stable atom and is in a strictly defined quantum state.
You asked:
«How do the fractal structure of matter physically come from the medium?»
This is easy understanding to me. I'll try to explain.
We know that pairs of Cooper electrons at low temperatures in a state of superfluidity they move in equilibrium in eddy currents without resistance in the state of superconductivity of matter. This phenomenon is analogous to the free motion of photons in the medium of a physical vacuum. Only electrons are elements of a higher level of matter and can move in equilibrium 43.6 times slower than the speed of light. And at a speed close to the speed of light, the parameters of their de Broglie waves are close to the parameters of the electron.
The electron itself is the limiting element of matter and can not have another energy. Each wave of de Broglie forms the following de Broglie wave, close to the Compton wave. Thus, the mass of an electron and all its de Broglie waves tends to infinity. If the relativistic electrons will be to collide, we can obtain elements of a deeper level of matter, but with more energy than an electron.
For example, we can obtain quarks whose equilibrium velocity is equal to the speed of light.
The following example: if the elements of the electron-positron pair consisting of 137 quarks are broken, then a pair of spiral elements (photons of the quark matter level) are formed, also from 137 quarks. Quarks moved in an equilibrium state in an electron, and continue to move at the speed of light in the composition of photon spirals (pairs of nematic crystals). The pairs of spirals of photons are screwed into a rigid medium of a physical vacuum and move rectilinearly.
At a forced speed of 43.6 times more of the speed of light, the mass of the limiting quarks tends to infinity, and they can turn into heavier preons. Preons can become Amers, etc. So in the process of collisions, limiting elements and their de Broglie waves of all levels of matter in the Universe are formed. Fundamental elements (which have a fractal structure) are formed from the de Broglie waves from multiple levels of matter, at common resonant frequencies. Those. elements of different levels of matter in one common fundamental element have one common resonant frequency of parametric resonance.
I think that reading my Research notebook will help you understand my position.
Deterministic gravitational waves. (Research notebook v02) Jan. 20, 2017. Gravitational waves v02.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VMlesBfYVVa-Fp6bIr1I-uzU-Vn
q3FFY/view?usp=sharing
Vladimir Fedorov
https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080
view post as summary
Maxim Yurievich Khlopov wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 10:04 GMT
Dear Vladimir,
Thank you for interesting ideas of your essay. They are very stimulating and deserve high estimation.
With the best regards
M.Yu.Khlopov
report post as inappropriate
Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 26, 2018 @ 22:48 GMT
This essay is a marvel of wonders Vladimir...
There is a lot to like and approve of in this essay, and some of what you write is both inspired and inspiring, while I see a few other things as curious, suspicious, or just plain wrong. I think part of what is erroneous comes out of an attempt you make to force fit your work with pieces of the mainstream thought that are off target or incompatible with the way you have framed your ideas.
Matter and the universe as fractal? I have no problem with that; in fact I like it a lot. Toroidal gravity waves contributing to particle structure? After seeing Alexander Burinskii talk at FFP15; I know exactly how or why that might work. Even the pieces about an EM drive don't phase me. I've seen some proof of concept demonstrations, so I know it's not out of the realm of possibility.
But I feel as though you have fed me a salad of mixed greens rather than a meal. And you have given folks a mixture of profound truths with some falsehoods or obfuscation, in the style of Bob Frissell's book "Nothing in This Book Is True, But It’s Exactly How Things Are." I too have hung out with New Age folks, and I had to listen to quite a few mainstream Physics talks, before I learned how to present offbeat ideas to scientists.
I am still learning.
Warm Regards,
Jonathan
report post as inappropriate
Steve Agnew wrote on Feb. 28, 2018 @ 05:04 GMT
You are from Krasnoyarsk, which I have visited as part of a visit of K-26 for an accident evaluation. But now you are in Bulgaria. Your essay is very good, but only algebraic and not calculus and a fundamental theory must deal with calculus and not just algebra.
There is a logic to what is called operator algebra and that is the essence of what is indeed fundamental, but you intuition is truly amazing. Do continue in your quest to understand what is fundamental...
report post as inappropriate
John-Erik Persson wrote on Feb. 28, 2018 @ 14:18 GMT
Vladimir Fedorov
I have read your article. I found it very interesting and informative.
Best regards from ______________ John-Erik Persson
report post as inappropriate
John-Erik Persson wrote on Mar. 13, 2018 @ 18:17 GMT
Vladimir Federov
Thanks for interesting discussions. If you nread this you may be interested in my last blog at:
blogBest regards from _________________ John-Erik Persson
report post as inappropriate
Login or
create account to post reply or comment.