Search FQXi

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

Display:
all posts
member posts highlighted
member posts only

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Steve Dufourny: on 6/24/22 at 19:22pm UTC, wrote We know these problems of renormalisation for the quantum gravitation but...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/24/22 at 13:50pm UTC, wrote The gluons problem, the color confinment, the quantum gravitation , the gap...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/23/22 at 14:54pm UTC, wrote These gluons and this QG need to consider this DE and DM in our standard...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/23/22 at 14:18pm UTC, wrote I believe strongly that all the bosons probably have a mass and have a...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/23/22 at 13:40pm UTC, wrote you know what I find totally ironical , it is that these thinkers working...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/23/22 at 10:28am UTC, wrote These gravitons can be taken differently than our actual reasonings wanting...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/22/22 at 20:07pm UTC, wrote the papers of Wilczek and Penrose about this quantum gravitationa are very...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/22/22 at 14:18pm UTC, wrote Sometimes thinkers who don t really understand what I tell tell me that I...

FQXi FORUM
June 25, 2022

CATEGORY: High Energy Physics [back]
TOPIC: The Noise of Gravitons [refresh]

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on May. 29, 2020 @ 17:54 GMT
The Gravity Research Foundation recently announced the winners of its 2020 essay contest.

Thank you to Steve Agnew for suggesting that we open a thread to discuss the first-prize-winning essay: "The Noise of Gravitons" by FQXi members Maulikh Parikh & Frank Wilczek, and their colleague George Zahariade.

this post has been edited by the forum administrator

Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 18, 2020 @ 06:49 GMT
Hi Zeeya,

It's a very well written paper and the mathematics is quite elegant. However, when you say, "he mode can have a finalstate|f〉, which, after interaction with the detector, will generically be different from itsinitial state because the detector masses will typically both absorband emit gravitons(through spontaneous as well as stimulated emission). ",

the part about a mass emitting and absorbing gravitons suggests an understanding of gravitons and how they behave, that should be talked about. I think the way the physics community is looking at gravitons is wrong!

You are treating gravitons as exchange particles that transmit momentum and energy between masses. But gravity is curvature of spacetime! If that is true, then shouldn't gravitons be contributors to spacetime?

Is it possible to treat gravitons as things that contribute to spacetime geometry? Perhaps gravitons are made of spacetime geometry itself...

report post as inappropriate
FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali replied on Sep. 18, 2020 @ 16:44 GMT
Hi Jason,

I think you may be confused into thinking that I wrote the paper, "The Noise of Gravitons." I did not, so I am afraid I cannot answer your question about the wording within the paper. I simply opened the thread at the request of Steve Agnew who thought users of the site may want to read the paper.

Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 18, 2020 @ 19:28 GMT
Very well. But in all seriousness, I think the physics community is looking at it wrong.

report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 18, 2020 @ 19:01 GMT
Forgive me Zeeya. I didn't realize you were a layperson.

report post as inappropriate
sappy jackson replied on Oct. 12, 2020 @ 09:43 GMT

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 03:46 GMT
...well at least now two people are interested enough to comment on graviton noise. The LIGO measurements have shown gravity waves from black hole and neutron star mergers, but LIGO also shows gravity wave stochastic noise. Although electromagnetic noise dominates each LIGO location, the gravity waves phase coherence among LIGO locations also shows gravity wave noise.

We are in an ocean of gravity wave noise and that noise tells us a lot about our gravity ocean. Right now, we focus on the gravity wave storms, but there is useful information in the gravity wave noise as well. In fact, continuous spontaneous localization theory argues that gravity noise is responsible for the collapse of wavefunctions.

This seems to be likely true, but Science will likely need to measure gravity waves far away from earth to show this is true. Gravitons are still hypothetical particles, but since photon exchange carries charge force by QED, graviton exchange should therefore carry gravity force.

report post as inappropriate
Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 07:22 GMT
Hi Steve,

I hope you don't mind if I share an intuitive thought experiment with you about how gravitons actually work.

Gravitons begin as points from the Planck scale

report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 07:24 GMT
The FQXI editor seems to have cut off the rest of it. I"ll try again a little later.

report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 07:36 GMT
Hi Steve,

I hope you don't mind if I share an intuitive thought experiment with you about how gravitons actually work.

Gravitons begin as points from the Planck scale. They expand at the speed of light in all directions such that they obey,

[equation]

Which is the equation of a sphere. As these gravitons expand, they are likely to bump into particles. If they do,...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 07:22 GMT
Hi Steve,

I hope you don't mind if I share an intuitive thought experiment with you about how gravitons actually work.

Gravitons begin as points from the Planck scale

report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 07:32 GMT
Hi Steve,

I hope you don't mind if I share an intuitive thought experiment with you about how gravitons actually work.

Gravitons begin as points from the Planck scale

report post as inappropriate
Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 08:24 GMT
Thank you Steve Agnew. Interesting thoughts. I try to think about chaos and time. Maybe it is chaos and gravitation, because both are about movements.

Regards, Ulla Mattfolk

report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 08:39 GMT
The expanding graviton is stochastic by design. They randomly interact. The age range is what determines whether it will contribute to the lepton field, Higgs field or the spacetime continuum.

All those virtual photons that were proven to exist via the Casimir effect, are gravitons.

Curvature of spacetime due to planets, stars, and gravitationally signfiicant bodies are the result of the mass-energy, the stress-energy tensor casting a sort of negative energy "reflection" upon the spacetime continuum, which causes spacetime to warp, and also causes the average of momentum to vary with distance.

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Sep. 19, 2020 @ 15:17 GMT
https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.00439 here you can see the termal noise as a blue line, actually with a spike near zero... /Ulla

report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Sep. 20, 2020 @ 03:47 GMT
Does anyone else have a theory of how gravitons are related to spacetime geometry?

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 20, 2020 @ 14:34 GMT
This paper is a very good paper when we extrapolate the gravitons and the GR and the gravitational waves, but the problem is to consider still only this spacetimes made of photons only , furthermore the gravitational waves are effects on the GR like we know and we have had results due to these BHs colliding and so we have these waves acting on this spacetime and we have ghad results with Ligo . But never the quantum gravitation has been proved to be correlated with these gravitational waves and also that it is different modes for photons . In fact the paper is a good attempt but it considers like strings in fact and onmly photons liuke primordial essence and so they have inserted the noise to find them with the gravitational waves, but it is just photons oscillating, not particles of gravitation. The secret for me is to consider the vaccumm differently , the DE and also this Dark matter like a different non relativistic spacetime superimposed and consider the particles of gravitation correlated with this cold dark matter and we link with the anti matter. That needs a new partitions and new encodings in our nuclei, the fact to focus on this GR and gravitational waves is not the secret, it is not remormalisable and quantisable in this line of reasoning. This paper permits to find the modes of gravitational waves but has nothing to dfo with the quantum gravitation for me. So they have tried to unify the QM and the GR with these gravitational waves in changing the modes of photons giving gravitons, but that does not quantify the quantum gravitation unfortunally, that gives just noises for the modes of phtons oscillating differently due to gravitational waves, Wilczek is very relevant and I respect his idea but it is not quantised and not the good road for me. But it is just my opinion. The noise of gravitational waves is nnot the noise of particles of gravitation, it is different.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 20, 2020 @ 15:01 GMT
That implies this prison that I told you due to our GR and the D branes of strings theorists. They consider these gravitons and wave lenghts different but that does not explain the vector of this quantum gravitational force. The fact for example to take a string closed giving a circle and you can give modes and vibrations giving the properties of spin, charhes or others , that does not solve the...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 20, 2020 @ 15:27 GMT
well, let s go farer now, we need to explain this DM, this DE, this antimatter and this quantum gravitation and we must unify for this the GR and the QM. So all has a logic of unification and if we don t consider these unknowns, so we cannot, first of all we must superimpose a space time made of cold dark matter at my humble opinion to this GR and we must consider the vacuum like a coded energy ,...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 20, 2020 @ 15:44 GMT
I have an idea to find these particles of DM encoded in our nuclei , and proving correctly this quantum gravitation , the particles of gravitation are bosons also and they are the bosons Z´, we could find them in the collisions at the LHC if we utilise maybe the cold also and that can prove this cold cosm Dark matter instead of this amtimatter cosmological , and that permits to explain the cold dark matter encoded in nuclei and so the antimatter correctly , that will prove also that we have not only photons like primordial essence and that this hylogenesis is foundamental and the non baryonicmatter balancing also and we can better understand the evolution furthermore and even predict the future of our universe and the spherisation.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 03:30 GMT
Well finally...people are interested in graviton phase noise...I cannot emphasize how important graviton phase noise is for any understanding of physical reality.

This pleases me greatly. Noise is such a throw-away concept of Science that simply accepts noise as the limit of measurement...but does no posit noise as the basis of neural free choice. Continuous spontaneous localization depends on some perturbation to collapse a wavefunction.

Graviton noise seems to be that perturbation and yet Science does not yet realize that this is actually the basis of physical reality. Once again, no one that I know believes this except for me...but I believe that one person can change the universe...and am...

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 08:06 GMT
Hi, I liked this paper about these noises, of course it is a very interesting work about these waves and how they interacts with this spacetime, and I liked the tools and partitions utilised for this ocean of gravitational waves . But I just tell that we don t know these gravitons and we cannot affirm that these gravitons are the quanta of these gravitational waves, the perturbation of collapse of wavefucntion is about the phtons and the GR and we cannot affirm if it is the link to affirm these gravitons, first of all we must really prove these gravitons and what they are really and after we can make an experiment to check them and after we can correlate in unifying the GRand thr QM or we unify with a depper logic, I just tell a thing logic, if these gravitons are not the quanta of gravitational waves, so the perturbation is just about waves acting in this GR, like a partiton of ranking of all the noises, I liked the equations utilised in this paper, but we cannot affirm still what are these gravitons, the best seem to find them in our nuclei and for this the LHC could help with the good experiment. Regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 08:29 GMT
What I find relevant is the signals for the noises , and the links with the informations, these gravitational waves carry kinds of informations and we convey them to explain this phenomenom, we have so like a partiton of all these noises acting on this spacetime relativistic, because we see these pertubations and the collapsing of wavefunctions, it is logic in fact , we have the effets of cosmological objects in time and locally and so we rank these waves in function of the noises in time and space respecting the photonic spacetime and this GR, but what I explain is simple, if these gravitational waves are just effects on this GR and that the quanta of gravitational waves are not gravitons but here just photons oscillating differewntly in function of objects and in ranking them in time , so we must be prudent about the conclusions, we cannot affrim that the gravitons are correlated.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 08:43 GMT
we must find these gravitons and their properties , and we must maybe find this conjecture between the strings and the coded particles, let s imagine this, let s consider higher spacetime diemsnions due to strings and let s consider the Kaluza Klein modes and the branes ,and let s consider this general relativity and let s try to consider hiddem variables due to the unknowns that I explained in superimposing these 2 other spacetimes, let s analyse the branes and the dimensions and let s consider these spacetimes superimposed and lets consider the scalar fields in considering these hidden variables for the modes. If the 3 aaethers that I explained are a reality and that the foundamental objects are these 3D spheres in motions and oscillations and if the superfluidity is a reality for the real spacetime made of 3 spacetimes, so we can rank the modes and converge , the real interest is to find the couplings and why we have these different couplings considering the 3 spacetimes.All this to tell that we have an interesting point to analyse for the modes and the mass of gravitons, if their mass is not 0 , that implies relevances for the other spacetimes. That could permit to see better the real perturbations on this GR in detailing better the effects of this gravitation withnthese 2 other spacetimes superimposed ,the scalar tensor theory so becomes more complex and need new parameters.

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 09:52 GMT
Stewe Agnew.

Graviton noise seems to be that perturbation and yet Science does not yet realize that this is actually the basis of physical reality.

You want to do the polarization between the waves and noise? But also the waves becomes noise by time. I am not sure about this approach. Maybe you think of the spin2 particle, which indeed looks very chaotical. For waves it is a sandwich perturbation? https://www.degruyter.com/view/journals/zna/31/12/article-p1
664.xml?language=en

Gravitation is not perturbed, because it is not renormalized, because we are immensed in it, but actually chaos shows how we can understand the renormalization also.

Can you give us some links here?

Ulla.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 09:59 GMT
The real problem seems to conclude that the gravitational waves and the gravitons are linked, like if they were the quanta of gravitational waves, so they are photons oscillating with different modes and they try to unify so the GR and the QM, but it seems not our foundamental reality, the perturbations of wavefunctions are not the problem, they are just gravitational waves, waves simply photonic due to movements of cosmological objects, the quantum gravitation is for me a different reasoning. We need really to unify not only the GR and the QM but all our unknowns, and the DE and DM seem essential at all scales.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 10:06 GMT
You know in studying and reading many papers of the best thinkers and in reading the conclusions of the LHC or the Nasa or others, they conclude that it lacks something to superimpose to reach this quantum gravitation, all the best mathematicians and universities and thinkers have tried since more than 20 years and even in computing mathematical tools, it lacks something to superimpose and there are hidden variables, if we cannot renormalise and quantify there are reasons, the GR and QM cannot be unified in considering only this relativistic spacetime, we need really to understand these unknowns , the antimatter , the DM, the DE and we must unfify all in superimposing these unknowns and find the good partition, if not we shall trun still in round and we shall have just assumptions. It lacks really pieces to superimpose to our GR and this standard kmodel to find the real balances and the real matter energy transformations. The GR is correct of course for our spacetome photonic, it is just that it is not only the one peice of our universal reality, the thinkers can tell all what they want, the relativity is not sufficient to explain these deep unknowns.

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 10:07 GMT
It is indeed interesting that gravitation is too high, so we get these dark sides.

I also think of Einsteins efforts to understand the quantum world, even if he was one of its founders. He thought there is something more to it. Can it be the chaos that still was not found when he lived? Or understood. It indeed looks very Machian to me.

Ulla.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 21, 2020 @ 20:45 GMT
Let s consider the 3 main spacetimes , it is an assumption of course and let s consider the finite primoridal series of 3D spheres coded, one for the space vacuum the DE, the main codes and the two fuels the photons for the thermodynamics , heat and electronagnetism and the cold dark matter for the gravitation and the cold like a balance correlated also with antimatter. Let s consider so this GR...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate
Steve Agnew replied on Sep. 22, 2020 @ 04:42 GMT
Theoretically, the key to quantum gravity is in using the simple dimensions of matter, action, and quantum phase. This does mean that Science must move beyond the limitations of space and time to achieve an understanding of physical reality.

Science is so used to random noise that it does not realize how much useful information is in quantum phase noise...but it is very hard to measure quantum phase noise. Earth measurements are limited because of earth spin, but measurements in space far away from earth should finally be able to measure quantum phase noise from the gravity waves of our local cluster as well as our own galaxy.

Our sun responds to the gravity of nearby stars, but there is also an extra gravity vector force due to the coupling of star matter decays. The best measurements of gravity phase noise are LIGO and there are efforts to extract information from that noise.

Gravity wave polarization measurements are complicated since the three LIGO experiments are different orientations. The complexities of laser and interferometry polarization further complicate analysis. The ESA LISA mission will have the best chance of measuring quantum graviton phase noise...

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 22, 2020 @ 08:28 GMT
Hi Steve, I know indeed about these methods correlated with the GR , in fact they try like I told to unify this QM and GR and many have tried like this beautiful paper of Wilczek, this paper is for me like I said about the gravitational waves and the noises correlated , but we must recognise that it is an assumption , first of all we have not found these gravitons and secondly we cannot affrim that this road is the good one to unify this QM and the spacetime.My ideas also are assumptions and I don t affrim them but between us , see that it is maybe a road to explain this quantum gravitation, I insist on the fact that the majority consider only these photons like the primoridal essence and that this GR is the only one piece of pur universal puzzle, we must recognise steve that we cannot affirm, we can tell all what we want, it is a fact , and frankly I doubt that we have only this GR at our cosmological scale to explain the things and that our standard model also is only made of encoded photons if I can say oscillating differently. The interferometry here was to prove the gravitational waves and never the gravitons, and also even the LHC or the Nasa and many accept that the gravitons are maybe not the quanta of gravitational waves, I just tell this, we cannot be sure even with the noises and the partition, it is a beautiful paper for me to rank all the noises of gravitational waves but we cannot tell that it is the noise of gravitons. So the gravitational waves phase noise yes ,m gravitons phase noises, I don t agree, I like this thinker Wilczek he is relevant but I am sure that himself he don t affrim , he tries like all to find them and prove them these gravitons, his paper is an assumption .At this moment this quantum gravitation has not been proved simply, we must recognise this,Regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 22, 2020 @ 09:47 GMT
Dear Steve, imagine if My assumption superimposing these spacetimes is correct to reach the scales for this quantum gravitation and find their interactions and properties, the GR is really for me just a photonic spacetime and it is not our only one truth. The planck scale is an extrapolation and imagine if my reasoning is on the good road considering these coded 3D spheres at this planck scale and...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Sep. 23, 2020 @ 11:33 GMT
Here is my equation improved hypothetical considering the 3 main spacetimes and the transformations energy matters, it is intuitive , we considered just the relativity so we had E=mc^2, but if this quantum gravitation, anti matter and cold dark matter are correlated so we have a deeper logic, and we can add their linear velocity more a parameter correlated with the cold Xl^2 and if we consider the Dark energy like an anti gravitational push, spherical and that we consider it like the main codes for the vacuum energetical, so we can add Y to have still more energy, that implies so this equation intuitive, E=m(c^2+Xl^2)+Y , we have more energy that we thought simply , of course it is intuitive and we must find these parameters but it is maybe on the good road. If this equation is correct , it is revolutionary but we must prove of course and find the roads to check it.

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 09:15 GMT
Gravitation is shown to be an emergent classical phenomenon. https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.05574

How is the gravitation described as a gauge group OUTSIDE U(1)? Does it mean the graviton contains it all? How is the noise separated?

Ulla.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Agnew replied on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 17:44 GMT
First of all Singh's paper shows only that the very complex Lie group of SO(4) has many of the expected properties of gravitons, but that is very far from proving that gravity is an emergent classical phenomenon. The trivial U(1) group is just one dimension of Singh's 8D octanion graviton (see attachment).

The important question to ask is how can any measurement ever show a reality of 8 dimensions when we only really have 4D space and time? My opinion is that the math is interesting, but really not that useful for describing the rather simple reality of matter, action, and quantum phase. This is after all just a simple SO(3) Lie group that is noncommutative, but also includes gravity as anticommutative. Science assumes gravity is commutative since spin = 2 gravitons are not part of gravity relativity. Of course, spin = 2 gravitons are actually anticommutative, but that is a different story.

Anticommutative is also noncommutative, but in action and matter, not space and time. This means that quantum gravity uncertainties manifest themselves as uncertainties in matter and action, not location and momentum as in quantum charge.

Graviton noise is the key to understanding physical reality and is something that Science can and does measure. However, in the ocean of electromagnetic noise on earth, gravity noise is very difficult to measure as shown by LIGO. Even at Lagrange 2, LISA had a very hard time measuring gravity noise, but of course it was not meant to measure gravity noise. The next LISA will actually measure gravity noise, and so that will be exciting.

The cosmic microwave background is also an example of gravity noise along with electromagnetic noise, but the gravity noise is ambiguous at large angles of correlation due to the limits of electromagnetic noise in the measurement. Future missions far away from earth will push the noise limits of that CMB and that will be exciting as well...

attachments: 2020singhLieGroup.JPG

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 17:55 GMT
The gravitons first of all must be proved and found in our standard model and at this moment it is not the case, and like I told, the BB is an assumption interesting with thw CMB but we cannot affirm that we have not a deeper logic , the antiverse like you told also is a pure assumption not proved with an anti BB and finally the noises of gravitational waves cannot affirm that it is the nnoise of gravitons because if all what I told is correct, so the gravitons are not the quanta of gravitational waves, we are indeed at an exciting moment but nobody can affirm nor prove , we just have assumptions and ideas even if the vanity is there and that all we are persuaded. Sorry it is a fact even if that irritates .The future missions and experiments are to find these gravitons and prove them in pour standard model, after we shall have their properties and there we coyuld conclude, now we have just assumptions with or without the approvements of persons persuaded. It is like this that the sciences act ,regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 18:07 GMT
The spin = 2 graviton questions are interesting, but note that all quantum spin has the property of taking 4 pi rotation and so this is not just a property of spin = 2 particles like gravitons. There are in fact many spin = 2 atoms and molecules and of course, two photons also form a spin = 2 particle whenever they are coincident.

Feynman simply showed that a hypothetical graviton would...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 18:28 GMT
we know all this Steve , we search a particle , and what I tell is simple, we have not found it and we cannot affirm that they are the quanta of gravitational waves and that the real secret is to unify the QM and the GR but apparently I speak in the wind , you seem persuaded that they are photons oscillating differently and the helicity is not the problem, the aim is not to repeat things known to explain them, the real interest is to first of all prove them with mathematical proofs and after we know the properties and there we can see if they are correlated with this GR, at this moment we don t know. I repeat even Einstein said that he was not sure that the GR was the only one piece of puzzle. So in conclusion I love Wilczek and I find him very relevant , he is smart but himself I am sure he recognises that his paper is an assumption, in fact he has won because his paper the noise of gravitons was the best in all the papers because it is a good idea but it is not proved, in fact he has won due to a beautiful idea simply, not for a proof, we don t know what are these gravitons and what are their properties. All the papers that this institute have received were all assumptions and they have chosen the best assumption with the best general idea and the best partition, but it is not a reason to be sure, the difference is there. We don t need lessons about what they are probably respecting the stadard model, we need to prove them first of all and nobody has renormalised and quantified them at this moment, is it difficult to understand ? Regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 18:51 GMT
lol and for the spin, this angular momentum different than the orbital one , see that the 3D spheres become relevant, odd that the standard model utilises these rotations but have not thought about 3D spheres like foundamental objects and that they have considered the fields like origin of our geometries, I insist on the fact that this 3D coded spheres are foundamental , it seems logic and if we utilise the spin it could be well to correlate with these 3D psheres and the series that I explained,well so the spin are vectors but let be simple, the rotations of 3D psheres become important and even this thermo, the spin 2 tells us an important thing, it is different than the others , that is why not only the senses of rotations become important but the angles probably more the cold at my opinion. I beleive strongly that these spin 2 gravitational momemtum permit to balance a thing that we don t know still, that is why this cold dark matter becomes inmportant being encoded in nuclei.In fact this gravitation permits like the anti matter, the cold dark matter to balance the actual spin 1 and 1/2 that is why these distance must be changed to respect the newtoniam mechanics and reach , quantify it ,and renormalise it, in fact it is not the gravitation wich is emergent but our actual standard model in logic, all this is an assumption, but be sure that converges I have calculated. The angles of 3D rotating oscillating spheres ......we can rank simply.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Sep. 24, 2020 @ 19:15 GMT
In fact Ulla if my reasoning is on the good road with these 3 main finite series having this dirac large number and the same than our cosmological finite series of 3D spheres, that becomes relevant for the rankings, there are so many things to add , not only the spin and other of our standard models, but many others properties if we have the vacuum for the main codes and these two fuels, you imagine the complexity of combinations , already the volumes, the angles, the densities, the exchanges this and that wowww it is infinite in combinations in fact

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Sep. 25, 2020 @ 11:11 GMT
This all start to look like numerology. I just discuss with Bruno Marshal about consciousness, and he says numbers code for consciousness, so... there is some primitive information about the ontology of what a number is.

Gravitation is about the inverse of Dirac Large numbers compared to em-force. What could possibly be a common point in that case? It is not only about a sqrt. oscillation....

view entire post

report post as inappropriate
John R. Cox replied on Sep. 25, 2020 @ 14:19 GMT
Ulla,

You speak of EM emission as being 'one ray' which I can imagine as a soliton. This actually goes back to the point of departure of quantum mechanics from the classical because there has yet to be a rationalization for the spherical spread of luminosity and the measurable linear photo-electric effect. The working definition of "a photon" is a planck multiple value per second in which intensity becomes ambiguous. Consequently the latest claim that I have run across several years ago by a lab at (if I remember correctly) the University of Maryland, had a best count result of 4 photons.

What is lacking is an understanding of the Transition Zone in the near field, and until such time as there is an accepted general consensus on how a photon can be emitted (or ejected) in a direction away from the source, we will continue to have an entirely probabilistic, mathematical methodology of where that photon might become observable. 'Onward! through the fog!' jrc

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew replied on Sep. 25, 2020 @ 23:45 GMT
Okay...so now spin = 2 is no longer an issue for a graviton, right? There now seems to be a bunch of things...

The Fibonacci sequence does create a spiral of square tiles with the same pitch as that of our galaxy spirals, so that is fun.

Of course, an anticorrelated spin = 2 biphoton does exist for each hydrogen atom as the superposition of its bonding exchange photon with its CMB light emitted from when that hydrogen bond formed. So that should not be contentious but certainly associating that biphoton dispersion with gravity is sweet because the matter-action math works. That is, gravity scales from charge with the size of the universe just as Dirac large numbers hypothesis.

The figure that I posted for U(1) came from that Singh paper for the octanion SO(4). It was not my figure, but it is a nice picture explanation of the complex octanion math.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew replied on Sep. 25, 2020 @ 23:57 GMT
Okay, the challenge below is a good one for matter action. Photons are the exchange glue that binds all matter together and so an emitted photon is never really free of either its precursor or its outcome. In fact they are in a quantum superposition with correlated phases.

From photon bonding events with an observer, we deduce that there are many other possible bonding events with this same photon precursor. From the relative phase and energy of an observer bond with a precursor emerges both space and time. Photon bonding gives meaning to the notion of both space and time and so the meaning of "spherical spread" emerges from those photon bonds, not the other way around.

The linear photoelectric effect is just a trivial matter of energy balance from a broad spectrum of possible oscillators. A single atom, of course, has a well-defined photon energy and can actually be transform limited...

"...because there has yet to be a rationalization for the spherical spread of luminosity and the measurable linear photo-electric effect."

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Sep. 26, 2020 @ 17:29 GMT
John,

You speak of EM emission as being 'one ray' which I can imagine as a soliton.

I said it is the first transformation that is 'kicked' so I thought of the Majorana lepton, but it can also be other things. A BH should have two rays, or the biphoton.

In theory there can be many Higgses too, remember. Is the so called Higgs field also a gravitational field? It should be. There you get the biphotons.

A monopole can be a one ray, if it is much skewed, just as the sandwitch-effect in chaos theory. We also simulated this, and also the Aalto people found it. Then you need an outer field-effect. It is solitonic maybe?

Ulla.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Agnew replied on Sep. 28, 2020 @ 18:27 GMT
A black hole is a matter-action transformation to pure quantum phase. Of course, the BH has all of the original gravity of its matter, but all of the information of that matter is now encoded as quantum phase. This includes the quantum phase of each atom's photon exchange bond, which still correlates with each atom's CMB creation photon.

Of course, gravity as a scalar force is a matter-action scalar monopole just like charge, but in matter action with radiation, gravity is also a vector force as well, just like magnetism is due to moving charge. Vector gravitism is responsible for galaxy rotation without the need to invoke any dark matter mysteries. Likewise, gravitism is also responsible for galaxy motion in clusters and gravity lensing of light, not dark matter.

report post as inappropriate

Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Sep. 26, 2020 @ 17:37 GMT
Sarfatti also talked of near-field effects, but it is something I must learn better. It can tell about interference maybe? Is this near-field not quantized? But even so the difference between gravitation and em-force is much bigger.

If you can show me how the near-field would be a solution I would be glad.

Ulla,

report post as inappropriate
John R. Cox replied on Sep. 26, 2020 @ 18:47 GMT
Ulla,

you can of course 'wiki' Near Field and Far Field as an introduction which is very abbreviated, it is a complex area of investigation but generally technological rather than theoretical.

Briefly, for all that is stated as 'knowns' in the interminable debate of whether EMR is a wave or a particle, the ONLY direct observation of electro-magnetic radiation is at the receiving end...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

John R. Cox replied on Sep. 27, 2020 @ 00:24 GMT
Ulla and Doc Agnew,

The near field offers some interesting opportunities for phasing between discrete matter phase constituents of atomic structure, without requiring a foregone conclusion that a matter phase is continuously in existence at any one place or in motion. Conceivable, an electron mass might percolate out of an energy phase given favorable conditions.

So the reactive region which would be ~0.159 the distance of the equivalent wavelength for a frequency value photon could conceivably be modeled as a bulge on a discrete matter phase particle, and be constituted of the energy quantity that would be commensurate with the value of a photon for the respective 'quantum leap' of an electron between energy orbital shell levels. This suggestion would allow a much more forgiving range of possible wavelengths. It is also interesting that the orthogonal 1/2 pi angle finds a complimentarity in the 1/2 pi reactive region proportion of the wavelength, and modeling 'a bulge' as the genesis of a photon would perhaps shape the whole near field to 'wrap around' the locale of the 'outcome'. That suggests a physical realization of Euler's Formula where x=pi evaluates to Euler's Identity. The near field collapsing volume might account for the electro-magnetic domain and the second wavelength of the transition zone would 'wrap' as the local gravitational domain. That might model well as the physical vehicle that precurses the outcome of a time dependent quantum leap.

If you'll pardon the brain-storm. jrc

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew replied on Sep. 28, 2020 @ 14:57 GMT
The near field versus far field for a photon is very interesting and quite complex as you so aptly show and the Wiki pic also shows. At long radio wavelengths, single photons are quite large but radio waves usually come from a coherent motion of electrons in a macroscopic antenna. So the near field is a superposition of a very large number of electron fields and therefore photons and the antenna radiation is not yet "free". In the far field, the antenna becomes a point source and the waves then coherent and dipolar.

The near field is simply affected by multipoles and not yet a dipole field.

It is better to focus on a nice radiowave like the hydrogen atom 21 cm line at 1.4 GHz. This is a spin-flip transition that is highly forbidden and has a 10 million year half-life. How can such a large 21 cm single photon come from such a tini-tiny hydrogen atom 0.1 nm and yet the radiowave comes from 4.8e-9 size electron cloud.

The near field for a hydrogen is now defined relative to the size of the hydrogen atom and there are also multipolar effects for this near field. This transition can be observed as part of a maser and so the near field can actually be measured in a hydrogen maser.

Gravity is due to the far field effects of single photons, so once again, the far field gets us back to graviton noise. Graviton noise is the noise of ground-state atom oscillations ever since CMB creation...

attachments: nearFieldFarField.JPG

report post as inappropriate

Raghunath Tiruvaipati wrote on Oct. 25, 2020 @ 14:39 GMT
Hi Friends,

Electromagnetism is a field theory, Because of that, the result of QED was a quantum field theory - a quantum theory that contains a value at every point in space

in QED two particles communicate their electromagnetic information by emitting and absorbing a photon. A photon that acts in this manner is called a virtual photon or a messenger photon, because it is created solely for the purpose of exchanging this information

https://mxplank.com/Quantum-Physics%20-%20Quantum
-Electro-Dynamics-QED.php

Can somebody elaborate on QED , Please ?

Regards

Raghunath Tiruvaipati

Raghunath.Tiruvaipati@MXPlank.com

report post as inappropriate

wrote on Apr. 5, 2021 @ 18:05 GMT

report post as inappropriate

Anjali thakur ji wrote on Jan. 8, 2022 @ 11:30 GMT
I have been looking for this information for quite some time. Will look around your website.

post approved

Hazel Parker wrote on Apr. 1, 2022 @ 04:58 GMT
Law Assignments Help

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 2, 2022 @ 07:58 GMT
Hi , what is this law assigments help lol we are on a platform of theoretical physics , not about laws , that said the laws in physics are important and and connot the most of the time be violated, regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Apr. 2, 2022 @ 08:24 GMT
Returning about these gravitons. We know that we have this problem of renormalisation with the GR. The QFT and the self similar geometric structures imply problems of quantization of these gravitons. The problem is to consider these gravitons massless like foundamental strings in fact at my opinion. The problem comes from the fact to consider them travelling at c, and so it is still this...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 2, 2022 @ 08:47 GMT
The main problem for me humbly is our GR .If we take the GR we know that the gravitation is not vectorial at the difference of 3

l'interaction gravitationnelle n'a pas une représentation vectorielle, comme les trois autres forces. En effet, elle se fond alors avec la membrane de l'espace-temps : dans le paradigme de la relativité générale, les masses ne s'attirent plus : elles suivent simplement les géodésiques d'un espace-temps ordonné par le tenseur énergie-impulsion réparti dans l'univers. Dans ce cadre, il n'y a nul besoin d'une particule pour transmettre la gravitation, celle-ci étant inhérente à la 'forme' même de l'univers, ou plus exactement à ses déformations locales. Ceci justifie que, en un endroit précis de l'espace, des corps de masses différentes suivront strictement la même trajectoire (en l'absence de l'intervention de forces extérieures : électromagnétiques, par exemple, ou chocs).

post approved

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 2, 2022 @ 08:50 GMT
sorry , The main problem for me humbly is our GR .If we take the GR we know that the gravitation is not vectorial at the difference of 3 other forces. so we have a gravitation where the mass don t attract and it is there the problem .

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 2, 2022 @ 10:10 GMT
I have put my post under review because I wrote in french lol, sorry.

But retruning at all this, this reasoning can too improve the broken symmetry and the properties of Higgs bosons, it is not only with this broken symmetry that the mass appears but in fact this broken symmetry activates a process and permit the distribution of the mass of this cold dark matter encoded. An other point too...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Apr. 18, 2022 @ 10:02 GMT
You know, for these deepest unknowls like this DE and DM , at the two scales , quant and cosmological , it is difficult to measure or observe them due to probably problems of scales but also problems of relativity and photonic observations and measurements. But in logic there are roads to measure them, we can see their properties and interactions. In logic it is about the fact to factalise the dimensions but about the fact to factalise the dimension 3D. It is different for the geometrical algebras.

This DE and DM are free cosmologically speaking when we observe them, but at this quantum scale for the baryonic matter, they are in our standard model and interact and have properties, but how and where it is the problem.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 18, 2022 @ 10:40 GMT
It must exist experiments to find these parameters unknowns and interactions in our standard model, the problem is mainly they are not relativistic, but I have an idea, we could light these particles of DE and DM , and like they are going to react with these photons during a time, and after probably loose these photons, we could observe them during a time due to these photons anjd so we could deduce properties or others. The statistics and probabilities can be utilised. For some scales it is very difficult to predict what we have But maybe there are roads .

report post as inappropriate

Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Apr. 20, 2022 @ 13:03 GMT
To my great regret, I was just introduced to this 2020 article. My highest congratulations to the authors.

I just want to draw your attention to the figure in this short paper, the treatment of the epsilon-epsilon' configuration, in the Gaussian domain of a simple harmonic oscillator. Like a pendulum, a state change in the line is action in the system.

And yes, the importance of noise:

space roar

I can't help thinking we're on the brink of a coherent theory of quantum gravity.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 20, 2022 @ 14:54 GMT
Hi Tom,of course it is a good attempt this paper but that does not quantify the QG and don t solve the problem of gravitons insteravcting with themselves even with harmonic osciilations and actions with different paritions in the domain.

Like I said the main problem at my humbloe opinion is the philosophy of origin of our universe, the majority continues to turn in round in this prison of the GR and SR in consideirng only these photons like primary essence. I don t understand why they don t try to superimpose deeper paraneters, and this DE and DM are there to help, so why they insist always on the points or strings and the correlated geom alg and the fields like origin and extradiemnsions i n trying to unify G c and h, since that all they try we see well that it is not renormalisable in this line of reasoning, regards

report post as inappropriate

John R. Cox replied on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 01:12 GMT
Tom, Steve,

I think it is important to conceive of "a state change in the line is action in the system". This is naturally a continuum, and perhaps the most easily envisioned definitive recognition of simple connectivity that is quintessential of the whole of real, physical Spacetime.

Time is treated in a variety of applications, both linear and nonlinear, specific to the task under analysis. But all those characteristic properties of action must also be naturally coexistent in a unified reality. "That dog don't hunt!" is an old saying generally referring to the keen sense of smell canines are famous for, and if a dog can't follow it's nose, it can't track down the source of the scent. So treating Time as only one dimension, or one operative property, is following only one characteristic of the scent. We can, and must, accept the bounded interval of light velocity as a universal constraint; but that Dog 'hunts' for what that velocity might physically, really might be across any theoretically expressed proper measured interval. And that Speed of Time can only be something, anywhere, between nil and light velocity. And physically operating as a continuous 'hunting' between those bounds. We can arbitrarily structure that hunt theoretically; and propose that Time searches for its operational rate as an exponential function, rising from nil to its upper limit and back again. So it also argues that anywhere along a line across a spatial distance, that 'hunt' for existential velocity of Time, is a continuous changing of state. best as I can express the idea at the moment :-) jrc

report post as inappropriate

Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 12:50 GMT
John,

Good insights.

By a state change in the line, I mean the same thing as meant by measuring the motion of a pendulum bob forced from its equilibrium state.

The question of whether the bob was ever initially in its equilibrium state is the deep question posed to Lemaitre.

Nevertheless-- because I propose that time is a local nonlinear phenomenon (as opposed to those quantum theorists who characterize time as a nonlocal linear phenomenon)--every quantum measurement is time-dependent. As a consequence, as Einstein said, all physics is local.

report post as inappropriate
John R. Cox replied on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 17:43 GMT
Tom,

that brings up an interesting thought. Given the locality of pendular action, we can envision that pendulum swinging at various chosen distances from a center of gravity, yet still responding to the 'penny a day, doubled each day' harmonic series of a ballistic curve. Mechanically however, that curve operates along a circle arc determined by the fixed length of the rod or string. The bob cannot follow a ballistic curve, but its rate of change of fall does. So would we find the natural exponential function along a line from the pivot point of the pendulum, and the midpoint on the circle arc where the bob suffers reversal from fall to climb? jrc

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 18:57 GMT
John, I see this time very simply you know, it is correlated with the changes and motions and we have an evolution, with or without the general relativity this time does not really exist in fact in a sense. It is just a parameter that we have invented correlated with the motions and to have a duration.

So local, linear, non linear or this or that, they are just interpretations of humans and they search problems where they don t exist, we have like an universal clock of evolution at all scales irreversible , it is only simple than this for me . Not need to discourse about the time in fact and even in consdidering the GR and SR that does not change the reality ,so local or non local, linear or non linear they serach probelems where they don t even exist these problems.....

report post as inappropriate

John R. Cox replied on Apr. 22, 2022 @ 00:11 GMT
Steve D.

If you hold that Time is not existential, and only an emergent phenomenon propagated by the relative motion among groups of physical objects, then why do you continue to speak of Spacetime? Spacetime by definition is physically real, including the Time parameter. That is perhaps the most fundamental disagreement between Quants and Relatives. No Time: No Spacetime. jrc

report post as inappropriate

Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 13:13 GMT
If Steve Agnew is still around, I would like to engage. From an earlier post of Steve's:

"Graviton noise seems to be that perturbation and yet Science does not yet realize that this is actually the basis of physical reality. Once again, no one that I know believes this except for me...but I believe that one person can change the universe...and am... "

I'm with you.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 14:40 GMT
Hi Tom, It is total nonsense because it cannot be massless and cannot comes from this GR and from these gravitational waves, you make all the same error . I know that it is difficult to accept , the only one way to success with the GR is to consider a massive gravity and it is not possible because if yes the speeds of gravitational waves change and so there are problems. These graitons must have a totally different logic and must have a mass .

And you can even cponsider the quantum state of the gravitational fieldam and a tensor product of the Hilbert states of the individual graviton mode, that will not change the problem.

The massless state of foundamental strings too have the same problem of renormalisation, if the thinkers cannot see this evidence and that we must consider a deeper logic than this GR , so frankly they are just encodctrinated by the photons and the GR simply, and the perturbations, the fluctuations, the degrees of freedom in this GR are not the problem, the problem is philosophical and the fact to add a deeper logic to this GR.

Regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 14:45 GMT
and one person cannot chage the universe, let s be humble please too . One person maybe can change the earth but apparently the vanity is a problem because I have created a concrete project to solve the major problems on earth with the forum Global collaboration, but all they are vanitious or sometimes jealous or other, that makes me laugh the humans frankly , all they beleive they are special, we are not special , we are all equal.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 14:57 GMT
So to be frank you are oing to engage what lol, you have quantified it this QG, no , he has quantified it l, no , Wilczek has quantified it, no, is it really necessary to discuss about a general false reasoning about these gravitons massless ., lol you are going to make what, to change the energy tensor product with the geometrical algebras like this E8 and a non commutativity with different groups and orders, let s be serious, it is not renormalisable like this simply. The feynman diagrams cannot solve,m the GR cannot solve becaiuse the infinute resulsts cannot disappear and also the gravitons interact with nthemselves infinitelly.If the thinkers don t understand this, there is a serious problem there. And the planck scale it is the same still , it is just an assumption and all they try to unify G c and h with foundamental strings in 1D at this planck scale, is it a joke in fact , a hidden camera maybe and after hop hocus pocus a low vibrational state of energy and the ADS CFT correspondance, and after hop hocus pocus, different vibrational states in this GR explain the DM, I see an ocean of nnon sense still due to this relativistic prison, they are not able now to consider a deeper logic than just these photons, these strings and this GR,and it is sad because the 3D spheres and the DM and DE are there to solve.

report post as inappropriate

Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Apr. 21, 2022 @ 21:46 GMT

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 22, 2022 @ 09:07 GMT
Yes I have answered you, there is a problem, If you cannot debate about what I say, it is in fact a problem one of vanity, or second you don t understand what I say .Like this it is said,

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 22, 2022 @ 09:09 GMT
Like if the dialogue that you search is going to be relevant lol yes of course Tom, of course

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 22, 2022 @ 09:44 GMT
Tom, when you are on this kind of platform,you must understand that we have different points of vue and the real respecdt is to debate the different ideas in arguing. You don t do this , you put congratulations there and you don t explain deeper why . If you have persons debating other ideas , you could try to find roads for debating in tellingaguments against or for and why. Steve A have some ood ideas but there are common ideas like his antiverse , what I tell and repeat is that many consider only these pho9tons and GR like primary essence and they turn in rou nd in this philosophical prison, so now if you can tell me why the persons are persuaded that we have just this like primary essence , so give the proof , but you cannot give this proof and if ^persons are persuaded to better understand the philosophy of origin like if they have a syndrom of elected , it is not my problem, my problem is to find unknowns and our actual reasonings cannot do it

report post as inappropriate

Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Apr. 22, 2022 @ 11:09 GMT
Forget it. I'll try to talk to Agnew privately.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Apr. 22, 2022 @ 16:36 GMT
Make what you want Tom, you impress nobody you and his ideas too impress nobody, sorry I am frank, for me you are still one of the persons thinking he is relevant and know better the physics and the philosophy of origin but in fact you don t know the philosophy of origin and tha main causes and you don t know if the GR is the only one piece of puzzle and you don t know furtheremore what are the foundamental objects, so the real question is why you cannot debate about this . All what you make like thaq majority is to repeat the things knomn and in trying to add some personal ideas to this but nothing of generally innovative for me,so yes speak in private with him lol repeat the things known and congratulate yourselves , it is better indeed than to discuss about general new ideas . Regards

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on May. 6, 2022 @ 18:54 GMT
There is a difference between the noise of gravitons like in this paper and just photons oscillating of these gravitational waves. The gravitons are particles bosonic of our standard model ,if the professor Wilczek told us that it is the noise of gravitational waves , it seems better because I repeat but nothing can affirm that the gravitons are the quantaq of gravitational waves, it is still this...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on May. 29, 2022 @ 20:23 GMT
Here is the link of a paper of Pnerose in 1976,

.1007/BF00763433

Roger Penrose in 1976 about the gravitons and the quantum gravitation, we see that we have not evolved a lot and that the majority consider still the same reasoning with the GR like primary essence. All has been tried in this line of reasoning since moe than 70 years, and nothing, that is why we must think differently and mainly maybe about massive gravitons and this cold dark matter permit to solve, this GR must in logic be modified and the quantum gravitation is not with gravitons spin 2 massless, just because the vacuum is made of this DE encoding the photons and the cold dark matter to create the baryonic matter, this reasoning permits to solve many problems , the QG but too the constant cosmological problem , even the hard problem of consciousness could be extrapolated

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on May. 29, 2022 @ 20:49 GMT
If I can, I like these thinkers , wilczek like penrose,they are nobel prizes, but we can critic their assumptions, it is not because they are nobel prizes that their assumptions are true. We see a problem inside the theoretical sciences community, the GR and the photons like primary essence have created a kind of prison and it is mainly due to the philosophy correlated, like if god had only...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 14:19 GMT
Yes, I am still around, just otherwise distracted.

Today it is even more clear to me that graviton noise is what makes things happen and is the source of wavefunction collapse a la CSL, continuous spontaneous localization.

My latest and greatest is that it is actually two entangled photons that make up a graviton. Graviton exchange a la QED is not between bodies but rather graviton exchange is between each body and the rest of the universe. Gravity attraction, then, is simply a manifestation of universal matter collapse, which is the destiny of the universe.

Here is a diagram that shows the all the black holes of the universe provide the bonds that hold the universe together and in an eternal collapse... eternal only in the sense of until the next antiverse cycle.

Graviton noise, then, are the perpetual waves in this gravity universe that continuously collapse the biphoton bonds to black holes that are the backbone to the universe.

attachments: quantumGravityBiphoton.jpg

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 15:16 GMT
Hi, how can you be sure that the gravitons are the quanta of gravitational waves and that the photons like the GR are the primary essence of our reality , explain me the proof of this reasoning, and why two entangled so photons for this quantum gravitation, what are the renormalisations proved.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 15:19 GMT
I have put the link of the paper of Pnerose in 1976 , you could be interested to read it, already at this moment in 1976 they considered these gravitons being the quanta of gravitational waves and since more than 50 years all has been tied in this line of reasoning but no renormalisation.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 15:52 GMT
What I tell steve is true, we cannot affirm that thies ephotons and GR like primary essence is the only one truth. We know nothing still even in 100 years of relativity since einstein.

What I find surprising is that all now in majority consider this GR and photons alone like the cause of all , even the cause of our quantum mechanics, I have difficulties to understand this because we have...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 14:23 GMT
Maybe this will work...

attachments: quantumGravityBiphoton2.jpg

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 14:26 GMT
...or maybe this...

attachments: quantumGravityBiphoton3.jpg

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 15:17 GMT
I cannot see your paper, I d like to read it but not possible.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Jun. 1, 2022 @ 14:50 GMT
I can't win for losing... let's try a link... DiscreteMatter Gravitons]

report post as inappropriate

Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Jun. 2, 2022 @ 22:30 GMT
Steve Agnew, are you on ResearchGate?

report post as inappropriate
Steve Agnew replied on Jun. 3, 2022 @ 03:35 GMT
No, I am not on ResearchGate... I am on Academia.edu...

report post as inappropriate

Thomas Howard Ray replied on Jun. 3, 2022 @ 13:30 GMT
Cool. I am also a member of Academia. Perhaps we can have a productive dialogue there.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew replied on Jun. 3, 2022 @ 13:44 GMT
Sure. Academia.edu encourages commentary on papers and I have commented on many different papers.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew wrote on Jun. 3, 2022 @ 18:03 GMT
Graviton noise is now called the stochastics of gravitational wave background as the Wiki entry shows.

Biphoton graviton noise is then part of this stochastic background, which is very hard to measure buried in all of the other noise sources as Ligo nicely shows. However, it is very interesting to note that the CMB noise spectrum does determine our unique location in the universe and everywhere will measure a unique CMB spectrum.

In principle, an alien civilization could send us their CMB spectrum to give us their location in the universe. However, biological life will only exist for a few short billion years or so according to myTOE. This is because of the shrinking matter and growing action of myTOE only allows a several billion year time window for bio life.

Thus, myTOE resolves the Fermi paradox . Bio life can only emerge during the same epoch as we have emerged and so we are all in this together. Even our galaxy bio life has likewise synchronized and so it will take several thousand years of advanced civilization to find out who else is out there...

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 3, 2022 @ 18:19 GMT
It is fascinating to speak about the aliens civilizations, of course we are not alone , we are probably even numerous , some less advanced, others more advanced. There is that said a problem for the communications due to this special relativity, there are probably deeper secrets to cummunicate and with speeds faster than c . I believe that this DE is the secret maybe, if we recieve a message relativistic it is amessage from the past, we cannot communicate in a kind of instant or in the present due to our limited technologies. If an advanced civilisations try to communicate they utilise technologies totally different. Sometimes I dream about all this, I imagine planets with lifes , I have studied the works of Oparine mimating the primordial soap on earth, he had created amino acids in adding energy, to a mix of HCN, CH4, H2C2,H2O,NH3....I ask me if it is the only one way these soaps or if others conmbinations are possible with other environments even, the earth is speciafic, probably many environments bare possible, not only the earth system and its e volution.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 4, 2022 @ 11:46 GMT
The relevance is now to consider so the DM encoded in this spacde vacuum of the DE like the photons are encoded, and if the 3 systems merge together to create this baryonic matter , that becomes relevant in considering the higgs , the axions and the gravitons under a specific universal mechanism.

The higgs activate so a process permitting the mass. The gravitons can be taken like correlated with this DM encoded and after we can consider them having a very small mass and so the higgs and supersymmetry can be improved for the distribution of mass. I am not sure if we must consider a photons with a very very small mass, but if all this is under a specific mechanism of mass energy and that the 3 systems under the codes of this DE permit so the activation of mass and fields, it is relevant, even the antimatter can be correlated.There is so other fields , not just the higgs , but a gravitational one of course and deeper logisc to superimpose. It is like if these3 codes of the DE encoding the photons and the DM permit so the fields and so the specific mass in taking so the E of photons and the mass of this DM, there is also a new field for the diversity of matter , because we need too to explain the diversity of this mendeleev table but also the evolution with the chemistry and the biology, there is so other fields due to specific particles.

The axions, the gravitons, the antimatter appear in this SM due to fact to be encoded in this SM due to the codes of this DE and are from the cosmological free photons and cosmological free cold DM.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 4, 2022 @ 14:27 GMT
The massive gravitons correlated with the DM seem an answer . That implies a new physics , the neutrinos, the gravitons, the axions,and probably others are all under this logic probably correlated with the cold DM, like the bosons of our electromagnetims are correlated with the photons, these particles them are correlated with this DM and even the antimatter can be explained better.

The fact that this vacuum of the DE possessing the main codes encodes these photons and these particles of DM, permit to understand a lot of things , it is there that the tool that I have invented for the 3 series primary of 3D spheres cosmologically free,the photons , the cold DM and the DE become relevant when they merge to explain our SM and this matter baryonic. The combinations become relevant in playing with different partitions and the SUSY .

We can simply complete this SM and furthermore this new physics is incredible technologically speaking if we check these particles and fields due to these new particles. There is too a fith force appearing and new fields, not only the gravitational quantum fields., but fields too from this DE and DM encoded. It is revolutionary if we check these parameters.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 4, 2022 @ 14:34 GMT
We are arrived at a new era for the physics , we were in a kind of prison in considering just the GR and the photons like primary essence , but in adding this DE and this DM , it is incredible the possibilities and furthermore it is a revolution for the philosophy of origin of our universe too.

These parameters, particles , fields correlated with this DE and DM are more difficult to observe, measure and experiment due to fact that they interact differently , weaker and farer too but it is fascinating and exciting this new physics arriving. The theory of informations too can be improved and we have even roads for real quantum computers.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 4, 2022 @ 15:08 GMT
It is important to know that the higgs field does not explain all the mass , it just give the mass to elementary particles like the electrons and quarks ,we know that these quarks are in the protons and neutrons. So it lacks somethings and it is there that this DM encoded become relevant. Of course without the higgs field we could not exist because the electrons d be massless and so we could not exist but it is just a necessary field complemetary this higgs field but not the cause of the mass, it activates a process in fact at my opinion.

We must a little bit forget the fields like origin of all, the fiels and the mass and the energy them are the 3 systems permitting to create the reality and the matter baryonic, it is different. It is there that it becomes relevant to forget the GR a little bit to renormalise this QG because these gravitons are not the quanta of gravitational simply .And the gravitational field is more than we can imagine.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 21, 2022 @ 14:12 GMT
Dear Steve Agnew, we can coverge about the vacuum and the harmonmic oscillators of this vacuum. The difference is that I just consider a superfluidiy and that this vacuum of the DE possessing the main informations are made of 3D spheres in motions oscillating and antigravitation. So in encoding these photons and this cold DM, that creates the baryonic matter and the standard model. The series of 3D spheres for a photons or a particle of DM or a particle of DE have the dirac large number , I have calculated the cosmological number of spheres and oddly it approachs the dirac large number, so I have consider that a photon or a particle of DM or DE have this number for the series, that im;ies this superfluidity when we apply specific volumes for these series. Now imagine like I said that this vacuum of the DE encodeds these photons and this CDM, that permits to understand if we know better this DE the evolution, the atoms , the chemistry, the biology and why we evolve in function of these informations in this DE. The oscillations motions of these spherical volumes can be taken like a key for the main primary informations.

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 21, 2022 @ 14:28 GMT
It is the meaning of these spherical geometrical topological algebras that I have invented, see that we can create with this tool the number that we want for the series of spherical volumes and we can insert the motions oscilations where we want . The spherical coodonates so are interesting and the standard model can be extrapolated with nthese new fields . The densities at my opinion are important and if the volumes are preserved and the number when they merge together the 3 systems, it is interesting too.

We utilise the potential , the recurrences, the derivations,the functions.......many partitions can be utilised and many tools in maths and physics , we can even superimpose this GR even if I don t consider it like the cause of the reality.

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 21, 2022 @ 14:51 GMT
We consider of course the works of Lagrange and Hamilton for the different partitions utilised mainly for the equations of motions. All being about the equations of motions and the potential and kinetic energies. So the differential equations become interesting in function of partitions utilised.

We can after utilise the vector field, the scalar fields, the tensors fields and even the synplectomorphisms in function of motions for the deformations of spherical volumes at specifc topologies chosen in function of paritions.

The interest with this tool that I have invented is the infinite possibilities to play with the partitions. If these fields are emergent due to these motions oscillations of these series spherical merging , that become relevant. Always under the main informations of this scalar fields of the DE . That permits to rank the fermions, bosons and to discover new fields and particles . We can even reconsider this GR and the flows and we can rank the informations, their nature , timelifes and why and where .

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 22, 2022 @ 14:18 GMT
Sometimes thinkers who don t really understand what I tell tell me that I am against the general relativity which works well. I am not against this GR , I tell that this GR and photons alone like primary essence and the einstein field equations imply philosophical confusions about the origin of the universe and how is reallly transformed the energy. I just tell that this GR alone and the photons cannot solve the deepest unknwons and that we must probably superimpose at all scales, quant or cosmol , the dark matter and the dark energy. The problem actually is that the majority considers only this GR and these photons oscillating like the only one truth. Between us lol you believe really that this universe, god or mathematical accident has only created photons and that the fields and waves of these photons and GR create this baryonic matter and the reality , it seems total non sense .

I am not against this GR in resume, the problem is the besserwissers too eveywhere and a kind of accepted obliged general mainstream. It is always cool to think beyond the box in trying to add deeper parameters, physical and philosophical. This GR and photons alone have really created a kind of philosophical prison probably like I explained due to the euphory during this conference of 1927 at solvay where after the marketing aroung this GR have implied this euphory for the religiousl, philosophes, physicists, mathematicians, scientists, like if this GR of Einstein have told them, wowww he has understood god and the light lol .

If we want to complete this quantum mechanics, this comsology, this philosophy, there are deeper parameters to consider simply , it is just this that I tell in respecting the GR which works for several things .

report post as inappropriate