show all replies (2 not shown)

hide replies

Constantinos,

I really like the way your essay is written. Right from the outset you "lay it on the line." It is also written in a very clear way that takes the reader on a smooth journey from your original premise right through to your conclusion. It does not confuse the reader with too much information nor does it merely reiterate current mainstream thinking.

You said "Just as we...

view entire post

Constantinos,

I really like the way your essay is written. Right from the outset you "lay it on the line." It is also written in a very clear way that takes the reader on a smooth journey from your original premise right through to your conclusion. It does not confuse the reader with too much information nor does it merely reiterate current mainstream thinking.

You said "Just as we can write bad literature using good English we can also write bad physics using good math. In either case we do not blame the language for the story. We can't fault math for the failings of Physics." That is so well said. I have tried to illustrate this in some of my blog forum posts, by saying how magical illusion described mathematically would make the magic appear to be real. You make the excellent point "mathematical truths are always conditional."Which you then go on to elaborate. You are right beautiful mathematics alone does not make something true.Just before your derivation of planks law you make a heartfelt plea for realism. It is a viewpoint that many will agree with , quite possibly more than will openly admit to it.

Although you have presented the derivation of planks law before. I think I finally get why you are doing this. You are showing that it is a result of the process of detection and not a Law of the Universe itself. Please correct me if I am wrong on this. So this quantity h is a threshold that allows a phenomenon to cross the boundary from unobserved reality to observed reality. There is certainly a difference between what can be detected and made a part of our experienced or as Edwin says "received reality" ( I call image reality) and what just is, unobserved.

I am not persuaded that it is time that gives objects physical existence but it is necessary for their detection, so that they can be perceived.They are manifest to us because of the duration of the processes by which we detect them. As there has to be an interaction with the detector which has duration and transmission and processing of the information to give awareness, which also has a duration. Though this kind of elapsed time could be considered at a foundational level to be just universal spatial change. For any object to go from what it was (configuration) to what it is (configuration) and from where it was (location) to where it is(location) time can be used as a description. Both configuration in space and location in space are spatial descriptions however. So that kind of time is not really foundational(what is).I think the spatial change is foundational and it is our desire to use terms of measurement that labels it with energy or time or momentum.

You are right there is "something" that is which allows causality. It is missing from the space-time model of the universe where time is a geometric dimension and there are theoretical points in time and space.I have tried to argue that both a model with universally uni-temporal time that allows passage of time to occur (through continuous spatial change) but is not a time dimension, and space-time which is a model of the appearance of reality, spread over time and space, are necessary.

I think in your final paragraph you are saying that physics is a man-made construct like history, culture and politics and not God given or written in the Universe. Again please correct me if I have misinterpreted your intention.I think that, if I have not misunderstood, that is a good point. All we can have are our man-made models of reality. They are not reality itself. It is a well written, enjoyable and thought provoking essay.I hope it gets the attention it deserves.

view post as summary

show all replies (2 not shown)

hide replies

show all replies (5 not shown)

hide replies

Constantinos,

About your comments on my essay http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/915 I am attaching as follows part of a paper I wrote several years ago. I did several thougs about we do not need a photon in order to explain the lihgt velocity or EM waves propagation.

Following is that paper:

TRUE NATURE OF THE VACUUM: Let´s go to the basic. (By Dante H....

view entire post

Constantinos,

About your comments on my essay http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/915 I am attaching as follows part of a paper I wrote several years ago. I did several thougs about we do not need a photon in order to explain the lihgt velocity or EM waves propagation.

Following is that paper:

TRUE NATURE OF THE VACUUM: Let´s go to the basic. (By Dante H. Barbis)

The need of the idea of the ether arises from the principles of classic mechanics by which we conceive that the transmission of light through space requires a medium (ether) so that it (light) can move inside it. Many years ago, trying to locate the absolute system (stationary ether), several experiments was made, such as those of Trouton-Noble and of Michelson-Morley. It was suppose that if ether exists, an observer on the earth could detect the “ether wind” whose speed would be the orbital velocity of the earth. A movement on the interference pattern should be detected with A. Michelson’s optical interpherometer, in a ray of light when the instrument turns in a 90 degree angle.

This famous optical experiment was performed, first by A. Michelson in 1881 in an effort to discover the movement of earth through space.

The negative result was surprising and disillusioning. The experiments were repeated and a more precise effort was performed by D. C. Miller who used Michelson and Morley instrument whit larger optical trajectories but with a negative result.

To save the idea of the existence of ether and so explain the negative result of the experiments with the optical interpherometer, other hypothesis were proposed such as that of the contraction of bodies, that of Lorentz-Fitzgerald and that of the attraction of ether. The last supposed that ether in contact with bodies with a finite mass was adhered to them and therefore this portion of fixed ether has zero velocity with regard to these bodies. Each body carried with its local ether.

In this way the negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment was overcome. But the hypothesis of the attraction of ether was discarded when well known phenomena where taken into account such as those of the stellar aberration and Fizeau’s convection coefficient.

No objection exists up till now to the special theory of relativity of Albert Einstein, one of whose points is the constantans or invariance of the light speed. This means that the speed of light within the vacuum has the same value = c in all the inertial systems and also the proven fact that the propagation of a luminous signal is independent of its source.

This is precisely one of my concerns: all of us accept the invariance of the light speed but nobody tries to explain why light or electromagnetic waves have precisely that speed or what physically determine it.

Based on the principle of the invariance of the light speed, I have developed a new theory about the existence of a common environment. I have to prefer to reject the presumptions that existed on the nature of the ether, such as the ether is a system at rest or that it is formed by particles that are normally at rest (stationary ether) with a zero mass and that could eventually be attracted. Remember that the properties attributed to this ether were somewhat strange: zero density and perfect transparence.

These ultra-tiny particles or “basic particles” that make up the ether would permit the transmission of any signal. But this means that the atomic particles that produce a disturbance, or any signal to be transmitted, must create that signal with a speed equal to c = 299,792,500 m/sec of propagation. It was never thought that this was not strictly true because an infinite amount of energy would be needed to transmit the signal towards the infinite or “invent” particles with a zero mass in charge of the signal transmitting.

In accordance with the original conception, since ether only serves as a medium, the signal should be born or be delivered to ether with a speed such as c. Which is not always so, because we know that the atomic particles that interact amongst themselves or that change their velocity emit radiation (for example: an electron when passing from one orbit to another because a deceleration) and that these radiations propagate at light velocity even though the atomic particles that caused (the radiation) were moving at less speed that c. Another example, that can be suggested, is that the velocity of the positive and negative ions that moves in the dipoles of one antenna depends on the frequency of the electromagnetic wave to be transmitted and that velocity is always less than c; but we also know that the wave front of the generated electromagnetic wave move with a velocity = c. Therefore we can concluded that in all these cases the environment (the medium) receives a disturbance, and then, it (the medium) can propagate that disturbance at a speed = c, without taking care that the atomic particles that created this signal did so moving at speeds slower than of light velocity.

By the way, I am not according to Max Born, who emphasized the fact that: “The elastic properties of matter were deduced better and better from the electromagnetically forces and that it would be illogical, in its turn, to attempt to explain electromagnetic phenomena in accordance with the elastic properties of some hypothetical environment”.

What occurs (this is my theory) that the environment where the matter exists, or the medium, or the ether if you wish, is plenty of “Basic Particles”: could be superstrings, neutrinos, gravitrons, photons, axions, you named; but in any case the vacuum is not really vacuum because it is full of “Basic Particles”.

All the space is full of one kind of “Basic Particles” tinier than the atomic particles we know so far. These ultra tiny particles are moving (they are not at rest) and colliding into each other in a perpetual movement similar to the molecules in a gas, so this is a “vibrating environment”, or a “vibrating ether” if you wish. The most important part of this theory is that those basic particles have a speed of their own that is approximately 45% higher that the light speed, and if we produce a disturbance at any place of that medium in order to make a wave and we take a given direction and measure the average speed of the front wave we created, the average speed of that wave will be = c.

The fact that all the space, also the space inside the atoms, is filled with these basic particles and that they are moving at 1.45c speed (the vibrating environment) makes the following possible:

a) The Basic Particles are moving in all directions at the same time: The relative speed of any body in relation of this “vibrating ether” cannot be measured because this vibrating environment is not at rest with regard (in relation of) to any other system or body of the Universe. The particles that make up the vibrating environment are moving in all directions at the same time and its average velocity is almost 45% more than c. That is why Michelson-Morley’s experiment cannot determine the existence of an inertial system of reference, which is at rest or in a uniform movement in a given direction since this environment moves in all directions at the same time.

b) This particles cannot be dragged nor can they be detected as we will see later, and

c) Any perturbation or activation at a given point, makes that the basic particles being altered in their movements and that they convey this alteration to the neighboring basic particles and these in their turn to the ones next to them, transmitting that perturbation until the infinity and at a velocity = c .

Thus, once this environment receives a signal (perturbation) it propagates that signal at the speed which is inherent to the environment, and in all directions, so, the propagated speed will be always c. The explanation for the invariance of the light speed is specifically based on the nature of a vibrating environment formed by mobile particles, that are moving (vibrating) and colliding into each other at a velocity greater than c.

The basic particles have mass and their mass is invariable, even though these particles move at a higher speed that of light their mass has not grown until it becomes infinite not will be zero at rest (at the instant in which two of them collide front to front). According to my theory, the non-invariance of mass is given for all atomic particles, or molecules, or bodies that moves within the vibrating environment but not for the basic particles that make up the vibrating environment. These basic particles may continue to collide with each other for thousands of millions of years and their average velocity will continue to be the same. They do move in the absolute vacuum and there is not any kind of friction that could put a brake on their movement.

Although there are many differences between the propagation of electromagnetic waves in this kind of environment and sound waves in a gas, there are also certain similarities, From a mechanical point of view it is important to note the perfect correlation between the average quadratic velocity of the molecules of a gas and the sound velocity propagation within the gas. If we analyze the following table we can reach certain conclusions:

SOUND VELOCITY IN SOME GASSES

(at 20 °C of temperature)

GAS Average Quadratic Velocity V

(m/sec) Sound

Velocity S

(m/sec) Velocity

Factor (**)

V/S

Hydrogen 1,840.00 1,269.50 1.45

Helium 1,308.36 902.30
1.45

Water vapor (*) 615.38 410.00 1.50

Nitrogen 493.72 339.30 1.46

Air 486.00
331.45 1.47

Oxigen 461.60 317.20 1.46

CO2 392.28 260.00 1.50

(*
) The water vapor temperature is considered at 100 °C.

(**) The differences in the velocity factor between one gas an another are due the fact that some molecules are mono-atomic and other polyatomic and therefore the elasticity of their impacts is different.

The velocity factor is more than 1 because the molecules of the gas that will transmit the sound are moving in all possible directions and not precisely in the referent direction in which we wish to measure the sound speed. It is totally improbable that all the gas molecules that make up the front wave of the sound moves in a single direction in a given moment and that the collisions with the following molecules be perfectly frontal and thus successively. If this were possible, then the sound velocity in hydrogen, for example, would be 45% faster.

What happens is that the front wave is formed at a given moment by millions of molecules that move each in a different direction and the average of the projection of all the velocity vectors at a referent direction is precisely the sound speed.

If V is the average quadratic velocity of the molecules of a gas, the average of the projections of these velocities in a given direction (taking into consideration only those molecules on a side of the perpendicular plane to the referent direction) shall be:

V • Cos  • EF,

the average angle being 45° and EF being the Elasticity Factor of collision of the molecules of each gas. Therefore the sound velocity S will be:

S = V • 0.70711 • EF

The same thing happens with light, the basic particles that at a given moment are making up the front wave of an electromagnetic signal are moving in all directions (at velocity 1.4 c approximately) and we must project each basic particle velocity vector in a single given direction. Each particle velocity vector must be multiply by Cos . The elasticity factor could be 1.

Lots of basic particles takes part in the formation of the electromagnetic waves, each with a given direction at a given instant. A specific particle could be precisely in a referent direction (  = 0°) at the impact instant with the following particle, but this second particle, due the direction it brought will rebound in an angle between 0° and 90° (with regard of the referent direction) provided that as product of the impact it will contribute towards the propagation of the wave, that is, it will rebound on the same side of a perpendicular plane to the direction of the wave propagation.

Statistically, we can consider that the average of  is 45° and the factor between the basic particles average velocity V and the electromagnetic wave velocity 1/Cos 45° = 1.41. Therefore, the average quadratic velocity of the basic particles that make up the vibrating environment must be 1.41 c.

Just imagine the energy the basic particles has, moving at v = 1.41 c. I do not care about the small mass the basic particles has, its mass could be one thousandth of the electron mass, but there are billions of billions of basic particles for each electron in the Universe. This powerfully environment probably delivered part of its energy, at the Big Bang time, in order to build the different atomic particles we know; then, after a while an equilibrium was take place in the Universe, the different atomic particles get its own energy at that time –of course, its energy could to change on depend of the energy interchange with other atomic particles. After delivery part of its energy the basic particles maintain the energy, and so the velocity they have now.

3.2 WHY THE BASIC PARTICLES CAN NOT BE DRAGGED OR DETECTED?

We have already said that the basic particles that make up this new conception of “vibrating environment or vibrating ether” are of a dimension and mass that is far smaller than the smallest known atomic particles, such as in example, the electron.

These basic particles fill all space and also the interatomic spaces. They are responsible for transmitting electromagnetic signals between the atom’s nucleus and its electrons and between the electrons of an atom and those of the neighboring atoms that make up the molecules.

The basic particles that make up this vibrating environment are the basis of the existence of gravitational and electromagnetic fields.

Normally, the basic particles are moving around a fixed point in space. Their average journey is very short even though they do it a higher speed than that of light since they quickly find other basic particles with which they collide and change their trajectory.

But this movement ruled by chance in the vicinity of atomic particles is greatly modified, since the basic particles are the environment which supports the electromagnetic interactions, which allow the atomic particles to remain linked within the nucleus, and the electrons to remain in their orbits. The electric fields and the magnetic fields are configurations of the basic particle’s movement and directions. The intensity of these fields is in reality a greater density of the basic particles at a given point and at given moment.

Therefore, the basic particles that make up the environment are normally around or in the vicinity of a same place in space. When a body such as the earth draws near, each of the basic particles will go through the atoms of the molecules, of the earth, varying the direction of their movement in order to make up the electromagnetic field of each atom that passes at every moment, and thus they will change their trajectory billions of billions of times but remain around the same place once the earth has passed. This environment is not dragged.

The same thing occurs with all the basic particles of free space, in the interstellar space, they are in movement by chance that is only modified by the transmission of the light coming from the stars and for the gravitational fields coming from the stellar bodies. It is unnecessary for these basic particles to move beyond their place they are, even they has to transmit the light from one galaxy to another, they simply transmit the signal to the following basic particles and then returns to their initial position. That is how an electromagnetic or gravitational signal can displace itself towards infinity without needing a “photon with no mass” or the injection of additional energy. The signals, after a first instant, become independent of their source.

It is also easy to imagine why no atomic particle and therefore no molecule or body can move at a higher speed than light, since the existence of these atoms and molecules is based on the vibrating environment whose constituent particles have the limiting velocity in a given direction, equal to c. But what is more important is the fact that for an electron or an atomic particle to accelerate, some electromagnetic fields must act upon it, and if the potentials of this electromagnetic field move at a maximum velocity that is equal to c, no matter what intensity the field is carrying with it, its effect on the particle would not be to push it to a greater speed than that of c. If the atoms that make a body try to move at a speed that is higher than that of light, the basic particles would not have the capacity of transmitting the internal electromagnetic fields of each atom nor the electromagnetic fields between them, at least, in the direction of the movement, therefore the distance between the atoms and the molecules would be shortened in this direction as they drew nearer the speed of light, and they would disintegrate at the moment they reach this velocity.

The elements with which we count on in a laboratory to detect atomic particles are mainly the ionizations or traces left by these atomic particles by collisions with other particles or by their interaction with electromagnetic fields. The atomic particles have a “field of matter” that is nothing else but a specific configuration of the basic particles due the effect of the atomic particle spin, and the other known qualities of each atomic particle such as the precession, mass and electric charge. The basic particles cannot be mainly detected by their size. The instruments we have are too gross to be able to detect them. These particles do no posses and electric charge but they have mass. They are simple spheres of dense material that are not affected by any type of know field, but because the matter and velocity they has we can realize that they form the dark energy.

Dante H. Barbis

view post as summary

Hello Constantinos,

As promised, I'm posting my comments on your essay. I'm not sure, if you will like it, but I've tried to do my best.

The main result is a claim that the well-known Planck radiation law could be derived mathematically, as " an exact mathematical identity (a tautology) that describes the interaction of energy". The presented derivation is based on the "Mathematical...

view entire post

Hello Constantinos,

As promised, I'm posting my comments on your essay. I'm not sure, if you will like it, but I've tried to do my best.

The main result is a claim that the well-known Planck radiation law could be derived mathematically, as " an exact mathematical identity (a tautology) that describes the interaction of energy". The presented derivation is based on the "Mathematical Identity" Eq.(1), where the r.h.s. depends on the average value E_av. Notice that the demanded integrability of E(t) is generally not sufficient for the existence of E_av, E(t) have to be at least continuous on the respective closed intervals. If E_av exists, then Eq.(1) becomes a trivial identity In my opinion, Eq.(1) and the whole "mathematical machinery" developed in the associated papers is rather superfluous for the task of "reverse engineering" the Planck formula. Instead, a direct calculation of E_av gives immediately



and hence



which takes a Planck-like form. Assuming that the exponentiated expressions are equal



we get



exactly as stated in your presentation. The assumption that



is not needed here, notice also that the limit in Eq.(3) enforces that



in contradiction to the previous statement (!)

The next problematic thing is the assumption that E(t) applies to the "sensor' rather than to the "source", because it seems to imply that the "source" radiates only when the radiation could be absorbed by an appropriate "sensor", tuned to the proper frequency. Notice that such a behavior would be rather awkward and, to my knowledge, was never observed.

The postulated "undefined and undefinable prime physis" fundamental quantity is another highly problematic thing. Several contradictory statements about the mysterious \eta quantity are scattered over the essay and the associated papers. According to the energy, momentum and force definitions given on page 4 of the essay it have to be a sufficiently smooth function of position and momentum variables. Later, on page 6, according to the discussion of the Schroedinger equation, it should be rather a complex-valued function to accommodate for the in general complex-valued wave function. Finally, while discussing the Planck constant h, there is a statement that "\eta can be any value". To my knowledge, a quantity which is compliant with all this statements cannot exist.

Well, maybe it means that a world without quanta cannot exist either ?

Best regards,

-Joachim.

view post as summary

show all replies (3 not shown)

hide replies