symmetrically structured spacetime, SUMMARY OF MY THREADS

It must be nice to have your own site here where you can post whatever you want and nobody ever bothers you.

kaneda!
If you can cite information/papers than will refute what I have been gathering then OPEN ANOTHER THREAD and we can discuss it there.
To summarize.... its should be about the minimum length and the quantum structure of spacetime.
jal

This guy does appear to be another Bruce Voigt. Merrily posting away, oblivious to the fact that no-one else is even vaguely interested in their posts.

Someone who completed his education before the web might have arrived an uneducated conclusions.

If you have been on the web for your education then there is no excuse for your ignorance.


--------------
GREAT REVIEWS THAT EXPLAINS WHAT I’M DOING …WITHOUT MATH.
Must read if you want a better understanding of what I have been doing.
( I'll just quote a few passages)

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0012/0012035v1.pdf
Discrete structures in gravity
Tullio Regge and Ruth M. Williams
May 18, 2006
Abstract
Discrete approaches to gravity, both classical and quantum, are reviewed briefly, with emphasis on the method using piecewise-linear spaces. Models of 3-dimensional quantum gravity involving 6j-symbols are then described, and progress in generalizing these models to four dimensions is discussed, as is the relationship of these models in both three and four dimensions to topological theories. Finally, the repercussions of the generalisations are explored for the original formulation
of discrete gravity using edge-length variables.
The related branches of mathematics which found their application to physics in this formulation of gravity are those of piecewise-linear spaces and topology and the geometric notion of intrinsic curvature on polyhedra.
The basic idea of the approach, which has subsequently become known as Regge calculus, is as follows. Rather than considering spaces (or space-times) with continuously varying curvature, we deal with spaces where the curvature is restricted to subspaces of codimension two. This is achieved by considering collections of n-dimensional blocks, which are glued together by identification of their flat (n-1)-dimensional faces. The curvature lies on the (n-2)-dimensional subspaces, known as hinges or bones. For technical reasons, it is convenient to use blocks which are simplices (triangles, tetrahedra and their higher dimensional analogues).
Consider first the realisation of these ideas in two dimensions. Here we have examples in everyday life, geodesic domes; these consist of networks of flat triangles which are fitted together to approximate curved surfaces, usually parts of a sphere.
In order for the piecewise-flat spaces to be of any practical use in relativity, beyond ease of visualisation, it must be possible to calculate geometric quantities like curvature and volume, and in particular to evaluate the Einstein action of such a space.
---------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/9808/9808192v1.pdf
Towards a background independent approach to M theory
Lee Smolin_
11 Aug 1998
Progress is reported on a background independent membrane field theory and on a realization of the holographic principle based on finite surfaces.
---------------
http://www.citebase.org/fulltext?format=ap...ep-th%2F0303185
How far are we from the quantum theory of gravity?
Lee Smolin
19 March 2003
What remains to be done in loop quantum gravity?
What remains to be done in string theory?
The most important conclusion of this survey is that there is now a realistic chance that experiment may over the next ten years be able to distinguish between the predictions of different quantum theories of gravity, including string theory and loop quantum gravity.
Given this, the first priority of theory must be to anticipate the experiments, by bringing the theories to the point where they make clean predictions that may allow them to be falsified.
--------------

Big Bang is dead
The big bang concept is built around the mathematical concept of singularity, zero, and quantum fluctuation around zero point energy (foaming vacuum). To this was added inflation which was built on the model of ice freezing. The expansion is added in to coincide with the observation of light being red shifted.
A new approach has been proposed which puts an end to the big bang and all approaches that use singularities to explain, wave packets, black holes etc.)
“Bounce” is a different mathematical approach.
It eliminates singularity, zero, and quantum fluctuation that go below zero.
BOUNCE imposes a minimum length.
Some might like to think of this as taking a different time slice where everything happens in our time frame and our perceived 3d universe.
Added to this is “re heating” which had to be added to reconcile the observations of the distributions of the galaxies and to try to account for “dark energy/matter”.

The big bang and the bounce are totally different mathematical approaches that should not be confused.
The bounce approach can be falsified/proven since it explain everything within a minimum length that is within our universe. This minimum length might be revealed at CERN if it scaled to 10^-18.
Already, 5 experiments on 2d H-dibaryon sphere configurations have been identified that suggest that there is a structure of quarks at a possible scale of 10^16.

People who work with the Standard Model identify their concepts with particles, waves and fields. They do not use a Quantum Minimum Length Structure or the language of LQG. As a result, they would be proposing a new particle or force field that would have small interaction at low energy (our large universe of matter and photons) which would/could account for dark matter/energy and the expansion of the universe.

Trying to keep the old/existing mathematical approach to expansion will not work with a Quantum Minimum Length Structure because it would mean that we would observe the fluctuations/variations of all the “energy waves” as they traveled from point A to point B.
In other words, we would observe fluctuations in the speed of light that could not be explained by relativity.
On the other hand, it would be child play for a math kid to arrange the double tetras in a geometric configuration which would be able to explain the bending of light around the sun.

A good razor is all that is needed to show that the expansion of the universe is achievable by adding more of the same minimum length units then what is being recycled.
----------------------
WARNING:
Everything that is being said is to be regarded as NEW speculation that replaces the old/established speculations. Until you hear the same thing from your favorite guru or better still, confirmation from CERN use a grain of salt.
---------------

I should have included these citations for big bang is dead.

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.2222v1.pdf
Loop Quantum Gravity:
Four Recent Advances and a Dozen Frequently Asked Questions
Abhay Ashtekar
15 may 2007
p. 5 …. However the recent, much more complete and detailed analysis [2] has shown that the universe does recollapse in LQC and agreement with classical general relativity on amax is excellent. Even for universes which are so small that amax ≈ 30ℓPl, the classical Friedmann formula ρmin = 3/(8π Ga2max) holds to one part in 10−5 and the agreement improves greatly for ‘macroscopic’ universes, i.e., ones with macroscopic values of amax.
----------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0612/0612104v2.pdf
Loop quantum cosmology of k=1 FRW models
Abhay Ashtekar, Tomasz Pawlowski, Parampreet Singh, and Kevin Vandersloot,
23 Jan 2007
p. 30 … results hold even for universes with amax ≈ 25ℓPl and the ‘sharply peaked’ property improves as amax grows.
Using the minimum scale … k = r = 1.3819765 ( see blog entry d = 2.763953198 Barbero-Immirzi parameter) and amax = 24ℓPl
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0703/0703144v1.pdf
Dynamical coherent states and physical solutions of quantum cosmological bounces
Martin Bojowald
29 march 2007
In this paper, a model, introduced in [1], is studied which is exactly solvable and includes characteristic effects of loop quantum gravity, one candidate for a background independent quantization [2, 3, 4]. The model itself is based on loop
quantum cosmology [5]. With new techniques [6, 7], coherent state properties can be determined explicitly. In this sense, the model is analogous to the harmonic oscillator in quantum mechanics and it has indeed the same solvability properties as explained in more detail below. This will allow us to perform a complete dynamical coherent state analysis, demonstrating how properties can differ considerably for distinct systems even when one considers only solvable models. The model we study is not only illuminating in this regard, but it also is of direct physical interest since it describes non-singular cosmological bounce models.
---------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0312/0312059v3.pdf
On the quantum width of a black hole horizon
Donald Marolf
05 jan 2004
Some time ago, it was argued by Sorkin [13] that one should cut-off the entropy of the
thermal atmosphere at an even larger distance from the black hole horizon.
Quantum fluctuations within Lc of the classical horizon are then perhaps better described as fluctuations of the black hole itself, and may plausibly be assumed to already be included in the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the black hole. (Though of course the details of how or whether the full entropy is reflected in a spacetime description remains unclear.)
It is amusing to note that for Schwarzschild black holes in 3+1 dimensions Lc is only just below nuclear length scales for astrophysical black holes and begins to approach atomic length scales for the largest known supermassive black holes.
Note: Lc is the quantum minimum length …. 10^-18 (below nuclear length scales) …. 10^-16 H-dibaryon sphere (to approach atomic length scales)

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.0006v1.pdf
Multiple-event probability in general-relativistic quantum mechanics: a discrete model
Mauricio Mondragon, Alejandro Perez, Carlo Rovelli
April 30, 2007
-------------------
Black Holes are 2d surfaces and have inbound material. The big bang is 2d surface and has outbound material. At the surfaces there are no orthogonal EMF (p,q)
This is not a Toy Model. It’s the real thing.
Scaling and dimensional reduction works with QMLS to reproduce our perceived universe.
-------------------

Warning:
Ignore/disregard everything said by someone who has not demonstrated his credentials. He/she is probably only making lucky guesses without understanding anything that he/she is saying. Science can only be understood after many years of study under the wings of the right guru.
It is only permitted to answer his/her questions which demonstrate your superiority.
Immediately cease if that person has not demonstrated humility and has not recognized your superiority.
Lastly, be polite, that unknown person may be connected to someone who will have a positive or a negative impact on your next paycheck.

--------------

more citations
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.2533v1.pdf
DARK ENERGY AND GRAVITY
T. Padmanabhan
(Dated: May 17, 2007)
Based on the role expected to be played by surfaces in spacetime, we shall take the relevant degrees of freedom to be the normalised vector fields ni(x) in the spacetime [54] with a norm which is fixed at every event but might vary from event to event: (i.e., nini ≡ ǫ(x) with ǫ(x) being a fixed function; one can choose the norm to be 0,±1 at each event by our choice of the vector fields but its nature can vary from event to event.)
The area scaling for surviving degrees of freedom emerges naturally but it is unclear how to connect up the energy fluctuations in these degrees of freedom to the source of gravity.
The resulting theory is far more general than Einstein gravity since the thermodynamic interpretations should transcend classical considerations and incorporate some of the microscopic corrections.
---------------------
http://www.phys.huji.ac.il/~bekenste/Holographic_Univ.pdf
Theoretical results suggest that the universe could be like a gigantic hologram by Jacob D. Bekenstein
-------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0404/0404055v2.pdf
Ln(3) and Black Hole Entropy_
Olaf Dreyer
14 April 2004
Abstract
We review an idea that uses details of the quasinormal mode spectrum of a black hole to obtain the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of A/4 in Loop Quantum Gravity. We further comment on a recent proposal concerning the quasinormal mode spectrum of rotating black holes. We conclude by remarking on a recent proposal to include supersymmetry.
-------------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0401/0401052v1.pdf
Highly Damped Quasinormal Modes of Kerr Black Holes:
A Complete Numerical Investigation
Emanuele Berti
Vitor Cardoso
Shijun Yoshida
(Dated: April 12, 2007)
Hod obtained, for the Schwarzschild BH, k = 3. Following his proposal, further enhanced by
the prospect of using similar reasoning in Loop Quantum Gravity to fix the Barbero-Immirzi parameter [6], the interest in highly damped BH QNMs has grown considerably [7]. There is now reason to believe that the connection between QN frequencies and the BH area quantum is not as straightforward as initially suggested.

For both charged and rotating black holes the asymptotic QNM frequency ωR depends only
on the black hole geometry, not on the perturbing field.
If QNMs do indeed play a role in black hole quantization this is an essential prerequisite, and it seems to hold.
-----------

Black holes are three dimensional structures, with central spheres probably made of mostly quarks and electrons. Incoming matter adds to their mass so we get ever bigger black holes as we have seen.

There is no firm evidence that they lose mass by any means.

I cannot do what these “math kids” are doing,
However, I THINK….NOW WE ARE STARTING TO KICK ***!
Things are moving.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.2629v1.pdf
DUAL COMPUTATIONS OF NON-ABELIAN YANG-MILLS ON THE LATTICE
J. WADE CHERRINGTON, J. DANIEL CHRISTENSEN, AND IGOR KHAVKINE
18 May 2007
By making topological excitations manifest, a dual model is well suited to evaluating proposed mechanisms of quark confinement, such as the dual superconductor picture.
Note: cubic packing and hex. packing for the plaquettes
Our claim of ergodicity does however depend on the unproven hypothesis that exceptional zeros of the 18j symbol are isolated, i.e. the zeros do not form surfaces that separate the space of admissible spin foams.
Note: Are these two concepts related? When turning a coin (plaquette), (2d) you go from the face (+), to the edge ( zero), to the back (-).
============

You might find this explanation of the Standard Model as interesting as I did.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0704/0704.2232v1.pdf
Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking as a Basis of Particle Mass
Chris Quigg
Theoretical Physics Department, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
P.O. Box 500, Batavia, Illinois 60510 USA
And Theory Group, Physics Department, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
17 April 2007

The aim of this article is to set the stage by reporting what we know and what we need to know, and to set some “Big Questions” that will guide our explorations.

The CP-PACS Collaboration (centered in Tsukuba, Japan) has made a
calculation omitting virtual quark-antiquark pairs that matches the observed lighthadron spectrum at the 10% level [11]. That discrepancy is larger than the statistical and systematic uncertainties, and so is interpreted as an artifact of the quenched (no dynamical fermions) approximation. New calculations that include virtual quarkantiquark pairs should show the full quantitative power of lattice QCD, and give us new insights into the successes and shortcomings of the simple quark model [12; 13].
Note: When using minimum scale (24 units on a 2d sphere) there exist a 10% extra area that needs to be explained.
------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-lat/pdf/0206/0206009v1.pdf
Light Hadron Spectrum and Quark Masses from Quenched Lattice QCD
S. Aoki, G. Boyd, R. Burkhalter, S. Ejiri, M. Fukugita, S. Hashimoto, Y. Iwasaki, K. Kanaya,
T. Kaneko, Y. Kuramashi, K. Nagai, M. Okawa, H. P. Shanahan, A. Ukawa, T. Yoshi´e
(June 13, 2002)
I don't have the training to determine if their 10% is related to the 10% that I get.
--------------
If you go back into my thread you will find Chris Quigg and the dual simplex model.
------------

I want to understand how the universe is made and how it works.
I reserve the right to change my mind on what I extrapolated from what I have learned if new information contradict what I have already learned.

There is a missing piece of the puzzle that everyone is trying to find.
I don’t care it they call it a brane, higgs, particle, dark matter, plaquettes, 5 force, white hole, etc.
At the end of the day, it’s going to fit into and be part of a structured spacetime.


http://www.astrobiology.cf.ac.uk/fredhoyle.html
Professor Sir Fred Hoyle [1915-2001]
Fred believed that, as a general rule, solutions to major unsolved problems had to be sought by exploring radical hypotheses, whilst at the same time not deviating from well-attested scientific tools and methods. For if such solutions did indeed lie in the realms of orthodox theory upon which everyone agreed, they would either have been discovered already, or they would be trivial.
==========
We should keep our feet on the ground.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/stdystat.htm
Errors in the Steady State and Quasi-SS Models
http://www.aas.org/head/headnews/headnews.nov00.html
3. Robert Michael Hjellming 1938-2000
=============
If matter really vanishes inside black holes, as if they were bottomless pits, where has the matter gone? British Theorist Roger Penrose suggested some time ago that the missing matter may pop out elsewhere in the universe —or even in an entirely different universe.
Picking up where Penrose left off, Robert M. Hjellming says that the point at which the matter re-emerges in the other universe would be a white hole. Even more intriguing, this passage of matter would not be a one-way street. Matter would also leave the other universe through black holes, says Hjellming, and appear in ours through white holes. Thus the flow of matter between the two universes would be kept in balance.
But, he adds, some evidence may already be at hand that white holes do exist. One of the great puzzles of contemporary astrophysics is the huge amount of energy —cosmic rays, X rays, infrared radiation —that is apparently coming from distant quasars and from the centers of galaxies, including the earth's own Milky Way; the output seems to be greater than can be accounted for by known physical processes, including the conversion of matter into energy by thermonuclear explosions. If it could be shown that matter and energy were coming from another universe, Hjellming says, that problem would be neatly solved.
=============
From J. Baez
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Rela...s/universe.html
The big bang is therefore more like a white hole which is the time reversal of a black hole. According to classical general relativity white holes should not exist since they cannot be created for the same (time-reversed) reasons that black holes cannot be destroyed. This might not apply if they always existed.
The possibility that the big bang is actually a white hole remains.
….. we must ask if there is a white hole model for the universe which would be as consistent with observations as the FRW models.
A white hole model which fitted cosmological observation would have to be the time reversal of a star collapsing to form a black hole.
It follows that the time reversal of this model for a collapsing sphere of dust is indistinguishable from the FRW models if the dust sphere is larger than the observable universe. In other words, we cannot rule out the possibility that the universe is a very large white hole.
==============
With minimum length there should be quantum mini black holes then there should also be quantum mini white holes.
Where are the many mini white holes hiding that are still adding to the structural elements into our universe so that we observe expansion, acceleration and dark mater/energy?

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

http://www.citebase.org/fulltext?format=ap...gr-qc%2F9505012
Spectroscopy of the quantum black hole
Jacob D. Bekenstein, V. F. Mukhanov
10 May 1995 (Received April 13, 2006)
One prediction is that there should be no lines with wavelength of order the black hole size or larger. This makes it possible to test quantum gravity with black holes well above Planck scale.
Note: substitute “white” for “black”
===========
Different calculations are being done to find the missing piece of the puzzle but nobody has agreed on the name for the baby elephant.

Quantum physic and cosmology abound with unsupported theories.
Here is a sample of reasonable thoughts from a search of the web on White Holes
The idea of a white hole is the opposite of a black hole, and is entertained more in science fiction than in actual science journals. Some believe it is the "other side" of a black hole. It is theorized to spew matter and energy out. A flaw in this theory, as many scientists have noted, is that the matter ejected from the white hole would accumulate in the vicinity of the hole, and then collapse upon itself, forming a black hole.
The existence of white holes is implied by a negative square root solution to the Schwarzchild metric for space-time-matter continuum.

A white hole will turn up in your mathematics if you explore the space-time around a black hole without including the star which made the black hole (ie. there is absolutely no matter in the solution). Once you add any matter to the space-time, the part which included a white hole disappears.

A physicist that specializes in relativity will probably say that white holes are simply time-reversed black holes in which all geodesics must emerge but not enter. A geodesic, by the way, is the 4-dimensional world-line of a particle as it traces its path through space and time. For a black hole, all geodesics at the event horizon may enter but not leave, however, if you reversed the direction of time, the same black hole with 'positive time' becomes a white hole with 'negative time'
Would anything be emerging from the white hole in a constant stream? Not unless it entered the black hole end in the first place, or spontaneously was produced inside the Kerr worm hole by perhaps a quantum mechanical process of some kind.
In astrophysics, a white hole is a postulated celestial body that is the time reversal of a black hole. While a black hole acts as a point mass that attracts and absorbs any nearby matter, a white hole acts as a point mass that repels or (perhaps) even ejects matter.
The existence of white holes that are not part of a wormhole is doubtful, as they appear to violate the second law of thermodynamics.
===================
second law of thermodynamics.
Meaning #1: a law stating that mechanical work can be derived from a body only when that body interacts with another at a lower temperature; any spontaneous process results in an increase of entropy
The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the universal law of increasing entropy. In simple terms, it is an expression of the fact that over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and density tend to even out in a physical system which is isolated from the outside world. Entropy is a measure of how far along this evening-out process has progressed.
The second law is only applicable to macroscopic systems. The second law is actually a statement about the probable behavior of an isolated system. As larger and larger systems are considered, the probability of the second law being practically true becomes more and more certain.
===========

If we are to do “new physics” at the quantum level then the “new physics” must also be reflected at the larger scales.
================

Present avenues of research are not looking too promising.
http://www.citebase.org/fulltext?format=ap...ro-ph%2F0306134
STATUS AND PERSPECTIVES OF DIRECT DARK MATTER SEARCHES
G. CHARDIN
04 June 2006
Supersymmetric particles represent the best motivated candidates to fill the Dark Matter gap
Worse, although CDM appears essential to produce cosmic structures observed at our present epoch, agreement with observations is marginal without additional components, such as neutrinos.
=================
Doing a little bit of balancing on the shoulders of giants and adding the facts of missing neutrinos, minimum scale, dark matter/energy, acceleration, and all of the empty spacetime particles that exist between galaxies, If black holes are connected to a 2d universe that are continuously subtracting spacetime then there must exist white hole that are continuously adding spacetime to account for the expansion and the acceleration of the universe.
-------------
I’M LOOKING FORWARD TO READING ABOUT A NEW COSMOLOGICAL MODEL THAT WILL AGREE WITH THE “NEW PHYSICS” OF MINIMUM LENGTH.

The big bang model has never worked…. Observations have never supported the big bang model. We just thought that it did.
From present observation, it appears that galaxies are distributed as if on the surfaces of connected soap bubbles AND accelerating.

Based on what we know of Black Hole mechanics in our universe, is 'shrinking the universe down to a point' a valid lookback (time reversal) of a gravitational collapse?

The only valid lookback that can be done is to stops at where the soap bubbles are so small that what we would be looking at is a bag of dust.
Models of a bag of dust cannot be made that evolve/agree with the distribution of galaxies as if on the surfaces of connected soap bubbles.

From the point of view of the observer at the center of the bubble, the walls are receding and found to be accelerating, as more space units are being added to the space structure, between him and the walls. Different bubbles …. Different sizes …. Different observations …. Different conclusions.
This then begs the question.
Where are the space units coming from?
Are they coming from the center of the bubbles or the surface of the bubbles?
We have not noticed anything happening in the center of the bubbles.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/question232.htm
How does gravity work?
Each particle of matter attracts every other particle with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
----------------------
The search for an answer is happening at all scales.
1. A NEW EXPANSION MECHANISM.
2. SPECIFIC TIME REQUIRED TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OLBERS’ PARADOX
3. ORIGIN MUST HAVE HIGH ENERGY
4. EXPLAIN THE ABUDANCE OF HYDROGEN, HELIUM
5. EXPLAIN NEUTRINOS
6. EXPLAIN DARK MATTER/ENERGY
7. NOT VIOLATE THE SECOND LAW OF TERMODYNAMICS
8. EXPLAIN THE QUANTUM MINIMUM LENGTH STRUCTURE
---------------
Professor Sir Fred Hoyle [1915-2001] CAME THE CLOSEST WITH THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION. He would have been right if he would have known about QMLS.
---------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeVeS
Tensor-Vector-Scalar gravity (TeVeS)

http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/19/6/5/1
Gravity's dark side
Feature: June 2006
http://www.physics.mcmaster.ca/origins/dar.../Talks/Bean.pdf
Constraining modified gravity theories of dark energy
Origin of Dark energy mat 2007

The latest info on the distribution of stars etc.
http://cfcp.uchicago.edu/research/publications/index.html
KICP Publications
--------------------
PICK UP YOUR SHOVEL.
The big bang is dead.
-------------------
insert: (speculative conclusions)
Where are the many mini white holes hiding that are still adding to the structural elements into our universe so that we observe expansion, acceleration and dark mater/energy?
Isotopes certainly qualify as unstable configurations of a structure.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/nucl-th/papers/0511/0511051.pdf
On the Cosmic Nuclear Cycle and the Similarity of Nuclei and Stars
O. Manuel, Michael Mozina, Hilton Ratcliffe
(Submitted on 18 Nov 2005)
Repulsive interactions between neutrons in compact stellar cores cause luminosity and a steady outflow of hydrogen from stellar surfaces. Neutron repulsion in more massive compact objects made by gravitational collapse produces violent, energetic, cosmological events (quasars, gamma ray bursts, and active galactic centers) that had been attributed to black holes before neutron repulsion was recognized.
Rather than evolving in one direction by fusion, nuclear matter on the cosmological scale cycles between fusion, gravitational collapse, and dissociation (including neutron-emission). This cycle involves neither the production of matter in an initial “Big Bang” nor the disappearance of matter into black holes. The similarity Bohr noted between atomic and planetary structures extends to a similarity between nuclear and stellar structures.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0510/0510001.pdf
Isotopes Tell Sun’s Origin and Operation
O. Manuel1, Sumeet A. Kamat2, and Michael Mozina
To be published in Proceedings of the First Crisis in Cosmology Conference Monção, Portugal, 23-25 June 2005
(Submitted on 28 Sep 2005)
The Source Of Luminosity In An Iron-Rich Sun
---------------
-----------------
WOW!!!! wow!!! What a paper!!!!
Tell Martin Bojowald (and those that he cited), that I’m throwing a party and supplying the refreshments and photo ops. (They can get an expense account from their depts.).
Marcus, you can forget all the other papers …. This is the most influential paper … and it will be for years to come.
I want to tell all the “seekers” about this paper.
I want to tell the whole world!
Contrarily to Martin Bojowald, I can take a definite position and say that his paper presents a strong argument as to why the “inflaton” is not needed.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.4398v1.pdf
The Dark Side of a Patchwork Universe
Martin Bojowald
30 may 2007
A complete understanding of the universe currently faces several problems, most of which are occasionally expected to be solved by some version of quantum gravity. This also applies to the dark energy problem.
Schematically, one has a picture where space is presented as a discrete structure building up from a small state at the big bang to a highly refined, nearly continuous fabric today. The evolution picture is thus that of an irregular lattice structure which changes in internal time by elementary changes of geometry.

Note: just add one more unit every once in a while

From the point of view of quantum field theory on curved space-times one can effectively view the finiteness of vacuum energy in loop quantum gravity as a cut-off provided by the underlying discrete structure of loop quantum gravity. On the grounds of dimensional arguments one would expect that the cut-off occurs at Planckian values of energy or length, which would certainly result in the well known mismatch between the predicted and observed cosmological constants.

Note: I would like to see arguments why the cutoff cannot be at 10^18 (gluon interaction sizes/length)

It is to be expected that vacuum energy in this formalism does not only depend on the matter state but also on quantum geometry.

In fact, such a quantum geometry epoch of inflation typically does not last long enough to provide all 60 e-foldings required for successful structure formation.
Moreover, such an isotropic model with only inverse volume corrections is not
very accurate at large volume because it does not fully take into account the dynamical discreteness of space manifesting itself in lattice refinements determined by the elementary moves of a Hamiltonian constraint.
Rather, during expansion the discrete structure of space subdivides as described in Sec. 2 which can be modeled by adding new small, discrete patches resulting from new vertices of graphs. When the number of patches increases with volume, their size stays nearly constant or could even decrease.

francesca
I did not even look at the other papers that you mentioned. Martin Bojowald’s paper was just tooooo much!
jal
---------------
I was waiting for comment from the more informed and critical members of this forum and I was also searching for clarifications and so as to improve my knowledge.
Since no one has posted any other comments …. here are my comments. (for a general audience)
Martin Bojowald in “The Dark Side of a Patchwork Universe” is also proposing that quantization could be an approach for solving the Casimir Effects, which is outside of the proton, neutron drip-line and proposes an intuitive understanding of the “quark sea” which is inside the drip-line.
-----------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0406/0406024v1.pdf
REVIEW ARTICLE
The Casimir effect: Recent controversies and Progress
Kimball A. Milton
02 june 2004
---------------
p. 61 This promises to add another bit of understanding to our knowledge of Casimir forces, knowledge that seems to grow only incrementally based on specific calculations, since a general understanding is still not at hand.
p. 62
6. Dynamical Casimir Effects
Dynamically,
photons indeed should be produced by QED by a rapidly oscillating bubble, but to produce the requisite number (106 per flash) necessitated, if not superluminal velocities at least macroscopic collapse time scales of order 10−15 s, rather than the observed 10−11 s scale [80].
-----------
The casmir effect has been observed down to 10nm. The similarity with the "quark sea" at 0.1 fm is only that... a similarity. The two are different.
--------------
10 june
http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.3793v1
Precision measurement of the Casimir-Lifshitz force in a fluid
Authors: Jeremy N. Munday, Federico Capasso
(Submitted on 25 May 2007)


----------------------
This is the only game in town.
http://www.phys.psu.edu/~cteq/handbook/v1.1/handbook.pdf
Handbook of perturbative QCD

--------------
Doing quantization (LQG) is much more intuitive that “dipping” into an unknown “quark sea” and picking out “particles” that make the parton model work.
-------------

--------------
http://cerncourier.com/main/article/44/5/13/1
… so lattices 2.5 fm across or larger are thought to be sufficient for calculations at present.
The development of higher order, "improved" discretizations of QCD has allowed calculations to be performed that give answers close to continuum QCD, with values for the lattice spacing of around 0.1 fm.
(Note: size of proton approx. 1.0 fm)
Two different values of the lattice spacing have been simulated to check discretization errors and two different volumes (2.5 and 3.5 fm across) to check finite volume errors.
-----------------
(Note: this is still within the nucleus/drip-line.)
--------------

Confusion reigns in the only game in town.
The naming of the processes/action and the naming of the particles are all mixed up.
(Let me use a coin for an example. It could be representing a quark/gluon in the “quark sea”)

To me it would be like turning a coin, front (+), side (zero/quark sea/Z.P.E.), back (-) and then renaming those actions as well as renaming the front, side, back when all along you forgot that it’s a coin that you are turning over. Then, renaming all the ways (x,y,z) that the coin can be turned. (Even if you have 3 coins.) I don’t see how the transformation from an action to a particle or any transformation from a particle to an action can change the coins. How can re-naming of the position or re-naming the momentum change the coins?
What would you do if you had 12 coins? Call it a quark sea? )
Would one more coin (13) or 4 more (16) be the entry point into the parton model in the drip-line?
-------------
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase.../haddia.html#c1
hadron diagram
----------------

I would bet that when CERN goes fishing in the “quark sea” that their anchor will reach bottom at 10^-18.
If I got it all wrong then I’ll take my place in a long line up of people who know more than me.
Maybe someone else has comment for the specialized audience?

(The image may not show due to overload)
----------------

jal. I have been assured that electrons are smaller than 10-^20 from experiments. I thought electrons and quarks about that size which means they could have been missed.


What happens if Physorg decide you're using this thread as a personal blogspot and just delete the lot of it?

kaneda!
What happens if you are interested in learning about science....?
------------
WHAT’S IN THE NUCLEON?
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0306/0306287v1.pdf
QCD Phenomenology
Lectures at the CERN–Dubna School, Pylos, August 2002
Yu.L. Dokshitzer
Abstract
The status of QCD phenomena and open problems are reviewed
29 June 2003
-------------------

(Chiral Quark–Soliton Model (CQSM) )
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0608/0608197v1.pdf
Nuclear matter in the chiral quark soliton model with vector mesons
S.Nagai1, N.Sawado, and N.Shiiki1,
(Dated: March 22, 2007)
The idea of investigating dense nuclear matter in the topological soliton models has been developed over decades. It was first applied for the nuclear matter system with the skyrmion centered cubic (CC) crystal by Klebanov [1]. This configuration was studied further by
W¨ust, Brown and Jackson to estimate the baryon density and discuss the phase transition between nuclear matter and quark matter [2]. Goldhabor and Manton found a new configuration, body-centered cubic (BCC) of half-skyrmions in a higher density regime [3]. The face centered cubic (FCC) and BCC lattice were studied by Castillejo et al. [4] and the phase transitions between those configurations were investigated by Kugler and Shtrikman [5]. Recently, the idea of using crystallized skyrmions to study nuclear matter was revived by Park, Min, Rho and Vento with the introduction of the Atiyah-Manton multi-soliton ansatz in a unit cell [6].

The chiral quark soliton model (CQSM) can be interpreted as the soliton bag model including not only valence quarks but also the vacuum sea quark polarization effects explicitly [16, 17, 18, 19]. The model provides correct observables of a nucleon such as mass, electromagnetic value, spin carried by quarks, parton distributions and octet, decuplet SU(3) baryon spectra [20, 21].
----------------
A good explanations of the quark sea with the use of instantons
----------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0205/0205054v1.pdf
INSTANTONS AND BARYON DYNAMICS
DMITRI DIAKONOV
06 may 2002
The average size of instantons found in ref. 11 is ¯_ ≈ 0.36 fm and their average separation is ¯R = (N/V )−1 4 ≈ 0.89 fm. Similar results have been obtained by other lattice groups using various techniques. A decade earlier the basic characteristics of the instanton ensemble were obtained analytically from the Feynman variational principle 12,13 and expressed through the only
dimensional parameter _ one has in QCD: ¯_ ≈ 0.48/_MS ≃ 0.35 fm, ¯R ≈ 1.35/_MS ≃ 0.95 fm, if one uses _MS = 280MeV as it follows from the DIS data.
Summing up instanton-induced quark interactions in baryons leads to the Chiral Quark–Soliton Model where baryons appear to be bound states of constituent quarks pulled together by the chiral field. The model enables one to compute numerous parton distributions, as well as ‘static’ characteristics of baryons – with no fitting parameters.

Numerous parton distributions have been computed in the CQSM, mainly by the Bochum group. 27,28,29 There have been a number of mysteries from naive quark models’ point of view: the large number of antiquarks already at a low virtuality, the ‘spin crisis’, the large flavor asymmetry of antiquarks, etc.
The CQSM explains all those ‘mysteries’ in a natural way as it incorporates, together with valence quarks bound by the isospin-1 pion field, the negativeenergy Dirac sea. Furthermore, the CQSM predicts nontrivial phenomena that have not been observed so far: large flavor asymmetry of the polarized antiquarks 29, transversity dictributions 30, peculiar shapes of the so-called skewed
parton distributions 31 and other phenomena in hard exclusive reactions. 32
Baryon dynamics is rich and far from naive “three quarks” expectations.
-------------------
What is the popularity of the Chiral Quark–Soliton Model (CQSM)?
Has the addition of the INSTANTONS to explain the “quark sea” been received as a positive step?
Has anyone been able to make the connection with the Chiral Quark–Soliton Model (CQSM) and spinfoam?
---------------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0706/0706.1534v1.pdf
Coupling gauge theory to spinfoam 3d quantum gravity
Simone Speziale∗
Perimeter Institute, 31 Caroline St. N, Waterloo, ON N2L 2Y5, Canada.
June 11, 2007
-----------------
If you got trouble understanding this paper then go look at my simple presentation in my blog and the spinning double tetra.
-------------------
Previous papers

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0606/0606074v2.pdf
A semiclassical tetrahedron
Carlo Rovelli and Simone Speziale_
CPT†, CNRS Case 907, Universit´e de la M´editerran´ee, F-13288 Marseille
Perimeter Institute, 31 Caroline St.N, Waterloo, ON-N2L-2Y5, Canada
March 31, 2007

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0611/0611097v1.pdf
Grasping rules and semiclassical limit of the geometry
in the Ponzano–Regge model
Jonathan Hackett and Simone Speziale
17 Nov 2006
---------------

jal. I thought you had some interest in this forum. You don't. You have no interest in debating with anyone here but are just filling pages up with posts full of nonsense.

Alain Connes is working on a new book
http://www.alainconnes.org/downloads.html
Noncommutative Geometry, Quantum Fields and Motives (with Matilde Marcolli) NEW BOOK! (warning: preliminary version still under revision) [PDF] 3.8 MB
It's long (639 page) and heavy reading (it's for the "math kids") but it does explain what the physic community is doing and how it can be linked with quantum geometry.