s0cratus' ideas, Quantum theory, Vacuum, SRT, etc.

[s0cratus]

If somebody interesting to know a little more about
Light quanta, please, look discussion on the sait:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics...19e83dddd08374e

( 72 messages)
=================================

[s0cratus]

Why physicists never say: ‘potential mass/energy E=Mc^2’ ?
==================== . .
#
In the early decades after Einstein introduced his SRT, the standard
practice was to make a distinction between rest mass and relativistic
mass, and many teacher who learned from old texts and older
professors have not yet broken that habit.
Among scientists who deal with relativity in practical situations
daily, no such distinction is made. Mass is just mass; the mass
of a particle increases as it is accelerated, and there is no need
to distinguish between the rest mass and the total mass.

#
SRT is Special Relativity Theory, but I agree with billsuss'
premise It seems that some people really don't like to make
themselves clear when asking a question. This question
is a perfect example of that.
#

[s0cratus]

Why physicists never say: ‘potential mass/energy E=Mc^2’?
#
Comment:
Because they've both potential, both kinetic energy
on their mind at the same moment?
I don't see any problem here...
========== . .
My opinion.
The problem is :
In Classic physics there are ‘ potential’ and ‘ kinetic’ energy.
And „The Law of Conservation and Transformation of Energy/ Mass"
connects them together.
In Quantum physics the ’rest mass/enegy’ looks as a static particle.
As you say: “ Because they've both potential, both kinetic energy
on their mind at the same moment? “
And you say: ‘I don't see any problem here... ‘.
I think that there is problem here.
Because in QT there are ’rest mass/enegy E=Mc^2’ and
active / kinetic energy E=hf. But how „The Law of
Conservation and Transformation of Energy/ Mass"
can unite them together nobody explains.

In other words:
Don,t know how to explain transforms the potenial
mass/enegy E=Mc^2 into the active / kinetic energy E=hf
the physicsts began to use new terminology and new words.
================== . .

[s0cratus]

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

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

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

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

[s0cratus]

The God. !!! ???
================= . .
The God is something Infinity and Eternal.
He exists in every place and in everything.
He is Absolute and Concrete.
#
What is God?
Can God create our world without physics laws and formulas ?
No.
If God can act only in such way, then what is the first law
( formula, system) from which He begins to create our world?

In my opinion ‘ The theory of Vacuum and Quantum of Light ‘
gives answer to this question.
========================== . . .
#
'Quantum of Light' is the Subject, not the Object!
http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab...Display&id=1598

Dr. Cynthia Kolb Whitney
#
Photons have knowledge in them,
. . .
The Truth itself is hidden inside light.
. . . . .
The relationship between light itself and knowledge is the answer
to the 'disturbing feelings' people get in this field, because they
don't want to admit that if Light was itself Intelligent
there might be religious implications to it.
14 Aug, 2008
Posted by: ron naldoda

Physicists spooked by faster-than-light information transfer.

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/ful....2008.1038.html
===================== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab...Display&id=1372
===================== . .

[s0cratus]

Mark to electron.

More than ten different models of the electron are presented here. (!!!)
More than twenty models are discussed briefly. (!!!)
Thus, the book gives a complete picture of contemporary theoretical
thinking (traditional and new) about the physics of the electron.
/ about the book "What is the Electron?"
Volodimir Simulik
Montreal, Canada. 2005. /
http://redshift.vif.com/BookBlurbs/Electron.htm

It is possible to find 100 more models of electron in the internet.
And, in my opinion, if somebody create 1234 model of electron
(and . . .etc.) it will be also wrong.
Why?
Because interacting with vacuum all parameters of these
electron’s models become infinite.

So, maybe at first is better to understand what infinity is
and then try to create model of electron and write book
‘What is the electron ?’
=============== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

[s0cratus]

I want to correct my last message.

It is possible to find 100 more models of electron in the internet.
No one is recognized as right.
And, in my opinion, if somebody create 1234 model of electron
(and . . .etc.) it will be also wrong.
Why?
Because interacting with Vacuum all parameters of these
electron’s models will become infinite.
The reason of these infinite parameters is Vacuum.
So, maybe at first is better to understand what Vacuum is
and then try to create model of electron and write book
‘What is the electron ?’
=============== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
=============== . .

[s0cratus]

Lao Tzu and Physics.
==========
#
Dao generates the One,
The One generates the Two,
The Two generates the Three.
The Three generates all things.
All things have darkness at their back
and strive towards the light,
and the flowing power gives them harmony.
/ Tao Te Ching, Chapter 42, Lao Tzu /
============= . .
Comment.
1.
In the beginning was Vacuum/ Dao.
The Vacuum/ Dao is not died space but according to
Quantum theory it is Energetic space : T=0K.
2.
Dao generates the One.
It means:
The Energetic (Infinite/Eternal) Vacuum space generates
energetic virtual particles- frozen light quanta..
They are in rest/ potential condition and written by formulas:
C/D = pi, E = Mc^2, R/N = k, h = 0, i^2 = -1.
They can change its rest/potential condition and become active.
We call this active Energetic particle Electron: e^2= ahc
3.
The One generates the Two.
It means:
The Ones (frozen light quanta and Electron) create Proton.
4.
The Two generates the Three.
It means:
As result of interaction between Electron and Proton
the atom was created.
5.
The Three generates all things.
It means:
The atoms create all things.
6.
All things have darkness at their back
and strive towards the light,
and the flowing power gives them harmony.
It means:
The Quantum of Light is hidden in everything.
But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says:
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form.
They do not know My transcendental nature and
My supreme dominion over all that be.
/ Chapter 9. Text 11./
=========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

==================

[s0cratus]

God as a Great Scientist !!!
#
Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, all matter
(all elementary particles and all quarks and their
girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks, all kinds of
waves: electromagnetic, gravitational, muons…
gluons field ….. etc.) – was assembled in a “single point”.
And after there was a “Big Bang”.
The scientists wrote very thick books about this theory.
But nobody wrote the reason of the “Big Bang” because
nobody knows it.
I know the reason.
The action, when the God compresses all Universe
into his palm, we have named ‘a singular point’.
And action, when the God opens his palm,
we have named the ‘a Big Bang’.
============ ==============.
The Catholic Church adopted the theory of Big Bang
as a good proof of God existing. And Pope Pius XII
declared this in 1951.
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/
#
The masses in the Universe are very few.
The distances between stars are very far.
About 99% of the matter in the Universe is unseen.
Nobody knows what it is.
But God using his > 99% Hidden mass of the Universe
take control over the < 1% Visible mass of the Universe.
He is a smart physicist and mathematician .
He smiles and laughs when others say:
‘ The formulas are cleverer than men’.
========== . .
#
How can God using 99% Hidden matter
take control over 1% of the Visible matter?
Here is the scheme.

THE GENESIS. (scheme.)
1.
In the beginning was Vacuum some kind of
Infinite/ Eternal Energy Space: T = 0K.
2.
According to Quantum Theory this Infinite Energy Space create
‘ virtual energetic particles – frozen light quanta’. They are in
‘rest’/ potential condition and have following physical parameters:
C/D=pi , E=Mc^2, R/N=k , h = 0 , i^2=-1 .
3.
Moving Quantum of Light is a Photon.

Planck: h =E/t h = 1, c=1.
Einstein: h =kb h =1, c =1.
4.
Working Quantum of Light/ Photon is an Electron.

Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck: h(bar) = h/2pi , c>1.
E = hf,
Sommerfeld: e^2 = hca (Electron).
The Lorentz transformations.
5.
Star formation:
e- -> k -> He II -> He I -> rotating He –> plasma reaction -
- -> thermonuclear reaction: ( P. Kapitza , L. Landau,
E.L. Andronikashvili theories ),
( Theories of superconductivity and superfluidity.).
a) hf > kT
b) hf = kT
c) kT > hf
6.
As result of Star formation Proton was created.
p ( Proton)
7.
Evolution of interaction between Electron and Proton:
a) electromagnetic,
b) nuclear,
c) biological.
8.
Laws:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / law.
c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ law.
9.
Testing:
a) Theory - Dualism of Consciousness
(consciousness / subconsciousness.)
b) Personal practice. – Parapsychology. (Meditation.)
============ . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab...Display&id=1372
========== . =========== .
#
I want to know how God created this world.
I am not interested in this or that phenomenon,
in the spectrum of this or that element.
I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details.
/Einstein/
#

[s0cratus]

May 14, 2009. 10:46 am |
Categories: Army and Marines, DarpaWatch, Science!

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/05/pe...telepathy-push/

Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push.
Forget the battlefield radios, the combat PDAs or even infantry hand signals.
When the soldiers of the future want to communicate, they’ll read each other’s minds.
At least, that’s the hope of researchers at the Pentagon’s mad-science division Darpa.
The agency’s budget for the next fiscal year includes $4 million to start up a program
called Silent Talk.
The goal is to “allow user-to-user communication on the battlefield without the use
of vocalized speech through analysis of neural signals.” That’s on top of the $4
million the Army handed out last year to the University of California to investigate
the potential for computer-mediated telepathy.
Before being vocalized, speech exists as word-specific neural signals in the mind.
Darpa wants to develop technology that would detect these signals of “pre-speech,”
analyze them, and then transmit the statement to an intended interlocutor. Darpa plans
to use EEG to read the brain waves. It’s a technique they’re also testing in a project to
devise mind-reading binoculars that alert soldiers to threats faster the conscious mind
can process them.
The project has three major goals, according to Darpa. First, try to map a person’s
EEG patterns to his or her individual words. Then, see if those patterns are generalizable
— if everyone has similar patterns. Last, “construct a fieldable pre-prototype that would
decode the signal and transmit over a limited range.”
The military has been funding a handful of mind-tapping technology recently, and
already have monkeys capable of telepathic limb control. Telepathy may also have
advantages beyond covert battlefield chatter. Last year, the National Research Council
and the Defense Intelligence Agency released a report suggesting that neuroscience
might also be useful to “make the enemy obey our commands.” The first step, though,
may be getting a grunt to obey his officer’s remotely-transmitted thoughts.
– Katie Drummond and Noah Shachtman

ALSO:
DARPA to Map Monkey Brains
Feds Turn to ‘Brain Music’ to Boost Emergency Worker Performance …
Darpa: Heat + Energy = Brains. Now Make Us Some.
Top Pentagon Scientists Fear Brain-Modified Foes
Monkey Brain Controls Walking ‘Bot
Pentagon Begins Fake Cat Brain Project
Darpa’s Math Quiz: Model the Brain, Find Biology’s Laws, Solve …
Pentagon’s PCs Bend to Your Brain
Binoculars that Tap the Brain
Army Funds ‘Synthetic Telepathy’ Research
Darpa Wants Brainy Machines to Replace Bored G.I.s
==================================== . .
#
But modern parapsychologists ( as well as ancient wise men )
know to transfer their thoughts without nanotechnological machines.

Books:
1.
Uri.
/ Andrija Puharich /
2.
Geller effect.
/ Guy Lyon Playfair /
3.
Books about Wolf Messing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Messing
4.
Etc.
5.
Maybe it is interesting to now about:
Telekinesis at the quantum level .

http://www.whps.com/misaha/ArticleEngl-4.htm

======= . .

[s0cratus]

======= .
1.
Now the physicists think that Vacuum as
an Absolute Reference Frame in a state of T=2,7K
( after big bang). But if somebody belief in “ big bang”,
he must take in calculation that T=2,7K expands and
therefore the T=2,7K is temporary parameter and with
time it will go to T= 0K.
2.
The ‘Theory of Ideal Gas’ speculate with temperature parameter T=0K.

Question.
Can ‘Theory of Ideal Gas’ be model of Vacuum ?
================== .

[s0cratus]

Can ‘Theory of Ideal Gas’ be model of Vacuum ?
========== .
Comments.
#
Hi Sadovnik

The notion of a ideal gas is only to simplify it's dynamics in order to frame it
in a mathematical model . When dealing with the real world a gas will never
be perfect but at least understanding and the the tools to predict it are in place .
I see no reason for a vacuum to be perfect unless it was at 0 K
The number zero is as demanding number similar to as infinity . Leaving this
aside I believe space can be modeled under ideal conditions . Making it a ideal
gas is another question . I say no but I am not adamant about it . It depends on
what a photon is . Information has to get from a to b in space . If a photon is a
particle then I see no problem with space being modeled after a ideal gas .
However you must take the bitter pill that goes with this . Energy expands
a gas which is in contradiction with relativity . The energy that goes into
expansion can not also increase it's mass due to conservation of energy .
Only when a gas is inhibited from expanded will all the energy go into
more inertia . Even then there is a problem with heat radiation taking energy
out of the system . So you can see in the case of a ideal gas the bulk of the
energy went into expansion . You can not say it is a ideal gas then change
all the rules when relativity comes along . Some would not agree with this
but I see no way around it .
That was an interesting question .
/ John /

#
I think the ideal gas is a good analogy of the vacuum
except the ideal gas sub-particles all travel at the speed of light C.
/ jerrygg38 /

#
only in the most naive way: by defining a vacuum as a gas of density
zero. Of course this is outside the domain of validity for this theory.
/ Lars /

#
1). It's Socrates, not Socratus.

2). You seem not to understand the meaning and use of theoretical
Terms (such as "ideal gas") in scientific theories.

3). Your quotes are taken out of context, making it seem as
if the world's leading physicists are admitting physics doesn't
know anything. This is called "quote mining". It is clearly not true,
and dishonest, to boot.

4). In any rate, even if modern physics were 100% wrong,
that would be no evidence of God's existence, let alone for the truth
of any particular religion.

5). Just because we don't know how something happened doesn't
mean God did it. For thousands of years people didn't know what
causes lightning, so they said it was God being angry and smiting sinners.
They were wrong. Today we don't know what dark energy is, so some
people say it is something God created. But that doesn't mean that's true.

6). Physics WORKS. It allows us to make predictions and experiments
an engineering feats. If it were deeply wrong, your computer would
not work, for example. Religion doesn't work. It cannot reliably predict,
it cannot be tested, it passes no experiments.

7). For this reason, it is very likely that physics is approximately true,
while religion is not.

Avital Pilpel
http://www.avitalpilpel.com/
=========== . .

[s0cratus]

1.
In physics, a black body is an idealized object that absorbs all
electromagnetic radiation that falls on it. No electromagnetic
radiation passes through it and none is reflected. Because no
light (visible electromagnetic radiation) is reflected or transmitted,
the object appears black when it is cold. However, a black body
emits a temperature-dependent spectrum of light. This
thermal radiation from a black body is termed black-body radiation.
#
Studying the laws of the black body historically led to quantum mechanics
#
Blackbody radiation is light in thermal equilibrium, light radiation with
a given temperature. It is the basic thermodynamic state of light. Because
light is the oscillation of a continuous electromagnetic field, the study
of blackbody radiation reveals how continuous fields can have a
temperature, something which contradicts classical physics. Because
the thermal state of light was so confusing before the advent of
quantum mechanics, the 19th century arguments that light has a
thermal equilibrium state were made very carefully.
#
Today the black-body cavity may be thought of as containing a gas of photons
#
An almost perfect black-body spectrum is exhibited by the
cosmic microwave background radiation., Hawking radiation is the
hypothetical black-body radiation emitted by black holes.
!!!
#
Super black is an example of such a material, made from a
nickel-phosphorus alloy. More recently, a team of Japanese scientists
discovered a material even closer to a black body, based on
single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNTs), which absorbs between
97% and 99% of the wavelengths of the light that hits it.

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

2.
Max Laue (who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1914 )
called the model of a black body as the ‘ Kirchhoff's vacuum.’
3.
And I have naive question:
Can a ideal black body be model of real Vacuum T= 0K ?
========== .

[jsaldea12]

On existence of God vs. science, what did Socrates said: " I am the greatest of all Greeks because I, alone, know I know nothing.


jsaldea 12


6.23.09

[s0cratus]

Where and Who is God ?

By idea the God ( HE / SHE / IT ) must be :
1.
Something Infinity Absolute it means to be in every place
2.
And something Absolute Concrete/ Limited it means
to be exactly in the concrete place.

Question:
Can God create our World without physics laws and formulas ?
The answer is: No !
Question:
Have physicists found these two Absolute parameters
in the Universe ?
My answer is: Yes !
One Infinity Absolute Parameter is Vacuum: T=0K.
Second Absolute Concrete/ Limited Parameter is speed of
Quantum of Light in Vacuum: c=1.

Using these two Absolute Parameters I explain
the creation of the Universe step by step.
== .
Thomas Jefferson wrote in the letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
/ ...the more a subject is understood,
the more briefly it may be explained. /

Einstein said:
/ You do not really understand something unless
you can explain it to your grandmother. /

I think everybody can understand my theory.
==== .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab...Display&id=1372
===================== . .