The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: God and Photon.  (Read 12389 times)

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« on: 21/12/2008 18:13:18 »
God and Photon.

Absolute God is doing only One Thing.
God creates virtual particles as Quantum theory says.

And then He gives to these virtual particles spin/ impulse ,
Magic Constant of speed. The speed of  these virtual particles
 is constant:  c=1, no matter how  the source or the observer moves.
/ Michelson’s  experiment. 1881.  SRT. 1905. /
The Magic Constant of speed c =1 the Particles can have
only from God.
We called these virtual particles Light Quanta / Photons.
So, It is right when God said:
Let be Quantum of light and there was Light Quanta.

Only  the Quantum of Light has  a maximal, constant,
absolute quantity of movement: c=1. No other particle
can travel with the speed c = 1.
It is very strange.
Thinking about Light Quanta we can forget about a " source" .
It means that every Light Quanta is an independent particle.
It is very strange.
When Light Quanta moves with constant speed c=1
its  time is frozen, its time stops and its own clock shows zero.
It is very strange.
But the Particle Light Quanta can be a WAVE (simultaneously) .
Can the conception of Dualism be equal to Idealism?
Isn’t it sound unusually?

The Photon no doubt is a Special Particle.
The Quantum of Light is a privileged particle.
That is the reason that a Photon- Light Quanta
 is God’s Creation, God’s particle. 
=========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.


 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #1 on: 21/12/2008 19:19:37 »
"God creates virtual particles as Quantum theory says."
No it doesn't.

 

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 119
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #2 on: 22/12/2008 05:17:10 »
What is this c=1 gibberish? c is a constant, not a variable, and it doesn't equal 1 unless you want to work in a very strange number base...
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #3 on: 22/12/2008 05:51:10 »
"God creates virtual particles as Quantum theory says."
No it doesn't.

======================================
============ . .
“ Bored chemist” is right. God doesn't creates virtual particles.
Quantum theory says that virtual particles were created by
Vacuum,  Aether, Nothingness, . . . .by . . . Word.
 
1.
In the beginning it was One Word.
And the Word was written down
by the formula: T=0K.
This Word was not died, as Quantum Theory says,
 but It was Alive One.
2.
In the beginning it was One Word and than became Second.
The Second One was written by another formulas:
    C/D = pi ,  E = Mc^2, R/N = k ,  h = 0 , i^2 = -1.
3.
And then the First Word said to the Second One:
' Enough to rest. Be Light quanta.’
And It became the Light quanta.
( According to Planck’s spin / impulse h =1.)
This Light quanta had the absolute speed of motion:
c=1. ( Michelson’s experiment.) It flew all over the
Universe amazing its beauty, and having a careless life.
4.
But one day the First Word said to the Second One:
'It is not possible to have a careless life all the time.
You must work'.
5.
And then the Light quanta began to work as an Electron.
( According to Goudsmit - Uhlenbeck's impulse / spin:
( h = h/ 2pi) and Lorentz transformations.)

6.
' Well' , said the First Word, 'now you can create
 all The Beings ( stars, planets, atoms, . . .etc) yourself '.
7.
And the long period of Evolution began.
============.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #4 on: 24/12/2008 06:18:49 »
“ Rebis “ wrote to me:

Following so called "physics" the whole paragraph (God and Photon)
becomes UTTERLY wrong, question of God aside.

c IS NOT CONSTANT. Moreover, c IS NOT SPEED at all.
 And THAT IS the MAGIC.

God bless
==================== . .
S.
Many years M. Planck  was attracted with the
absolutely black body problem.
If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls
in area of absolutely black body (Kirchhoff’s Vacuum
 radiation /Max Laue / )  and does not radiate back,
then “ terminal dead “ comes. In order to save the
quantum of light from death Planck decided that
 it is possible that quantum of light will radiate this
quantum of light back with quantum unit h=Et.
Physicists say, that  Planck’s unit is one: h=1.
 Having this unit h=1 photon flies with speed c=1.
This unit doesn’t come from formulas or equations.
Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling.
Sorry.
I must write: Planck introduced this unit intuitively,
Planck introduced this unit phenomenologically   .
========= .
S.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #5 on: 23/05/2009 12:46:10 »
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.
========================== . . .
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?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Display&id=1372
===================== . .
#
'Quantum of Light' is the Subject, not the Object!
http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab0=Abstracts&tab1=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/full/news.2008.1038.html
===================== . .
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
God and Photon.
« Reply #6 on: 23/05/2009 14:34:22 »
You seem to have it all figured out. Have you figured out why it is that light exists in quantum chunks?
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #7 on: 24/05/2009 05:10:45 »
You seem to have it all figured out. Have you figured out why it is that light exists in quantum chunks?
===========================================================
According to the Quantum Theory the Vacuum is some kind
of Energetic Space which can create quantum  chunks –
virtual particles - energetic particles - frozen light quanta.

The ‘chunks –  virtual particles - energetic particles –
frozen light quanta ‘is not a “ pure philosophical concept “
 that is never observed in practice.
The Quantum Theory says that :
“ Its effects can be observed in various phenomena
(such as spontaneous emission, the Casimir effect, the
van der Waals bonds, or the Lamb shift), and it is thought
to have consequences for the behavior of the Universe
on cosmological scales. “

/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy /.
=================== . .
Without Aether/ Vacuum physics makes no sense.
=========
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #8 on: 24/05/2009 05:15:50 »
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:09 PM,
David Rountree
ghost_hunter_ 01@comcast. net  wrote:
>>
 Frequency is the key to everything.

 It can be said a resonance at a frequency mediates momentum exchange
 in our kinetic universe. We can say infrared photon pairs exchange
 kinetic energy between molecules of a substance and its environment
 exhibiting what we call heat, a tiny portion of the total frequency
 ranges comprising the energy of the object . If you tell me the
 average frequency of photons exchanging momentum between molecules and
 radiating from a body, is no different than telling me the temperature
 except in the units of measure.
>
 All frequencies together give the total energy or mass of an object
 An electron changes momentum only by sending and receiving photons at
 particular frequencies unifying the electric and kinetic into a
 singular mechanism. It is that a frequency is equivalent to a
 momentum (p=h*f/c) on the bottom layer that frequency can be
 everything in a world that is fundamentally kinetic. Even when we
 push on something, it is resonance by exclusion of common frequencies
 in common quantum state, exchanging photons that does the pushing, we
 never actually touch the object, photons exhibit momentum exchange and
 all momentum exchange is by photon exchange ultimately.
>
 The notion that frequency tells us how often something happens is
 wrong. Each photon exchange happens independently, perhaps just once,
 it need not be frequent. The photon momentum is exchanged laterally
 and transversely (angular) in the exhibition of a space time interval
 having a specific time period, t=1/f, and distance, x=c*t. It is the
 time delay exhibited not how frequent it is that exhibits the energy,
 the space, and of course time itself.
>
 In the unification time is exhibited inversely to energy. High energy
 is big and slow, low energy is small and fast. The resonance of
 common frequencies becomes frequencies becoming distinct relatively by
 momentum exchange obeying Mead's law that the universe conspires to
 prevent there from being two equal frequencies. But what is manifest
 is time delay, and space by x=c*t, and seemingly solid matter not
 penetrable at wide ranges of occupied frequencies. The time delay
 equivalence of energy, e/h, by discrete action locally constructs a
 fabric of orderings, serially as time, and in parallel as space.
>
 The frequency tells us the dimension of the space time manifold
 exhibited by each event. It does not repeat. It exhibits a single
 delay element relatively. It exhibits a lateral and transverse
 (angular) right handed or left handed twist in quantum state by
 cooperative equal and opposite logical action. A delay element alone
 is insufficient for logical action. And, or and not operations plus
 a delay. We can expect the universe to be logical, and find the
 apparent quantum logical action is universal general purpose logic.
 Physically, two one half dimensions are exhibited to one bit of
 precision each having one way arrows of a length determines by the
 momentum exchanged frequency equivalent. This physical construct
 proves general enough to build any conceivable information system and
 the universe is not distinct from an information system as far as it
 is comprehensible.
>
 Given that quantum systems are information systems, without local
 hidden variables, that the quantum logical description is complete,
 as both experiment and theory suggest, the logical nature of the
 universe is unrestricted. No simple model, restricting logic, as say
 only frequency in some fixed dimensions, can be complete. A quantum
 system can be constructed to contradict any limited logical system due
 to in universal general purpose nature.
>
 In the objective information model, no human ideal is allowed, only
 the logical action and associated relative delays are allowed in the
 model. anything else is considered fantasy. All quantum
 interpretations become superfluous. All that matters is the manifolds
 of space time interval exhibited by delays by perspective. The notion
 of the policing of information in physical systems has recently been
 formalized in the notion of Information Causality,
 http://arxiv. org/abs/0905. 2292
===================== . .
#
Socratus.
In his book " Isaac Newton " Soviet academician
 S. I. Vavilov wrote:
"  . . photons with extremely fast frequency . . .
in the experience was observed . . . .
the remarkable phenomenon of transformation
 them in … … …electron.
Undoubtedly,  reverse process is also possible. "
======== . .
Questions:
Can photon and electron be one and the same particle
 in different conditions ?
Can the difference between photon and electron depends
 only from  frequency ?
============ . .
#
May 23, 2009.
I think not just frequency, but phasing and polarity will differ.

David M. Rountree, AES
Scientific Paranormal Investigative
Research Information and Technology

www.spinvestigations.org
=========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
===================== . .
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
God and Photon.
« Reply #9 on: 24/05/2009 13:05:03 »
Quote from: socratus
According to the Quantum Theory the Vacuum is some kind
of Energetic Space which can create quantum  chunks –
virtual particles - energetic particles - frozen light quanta.
I think that Quantum theory does not provide the solution to the problem of Howcome The Quantum. It is strange that the whole foundation of quantum theory is based upon that phenomenon yet does not provide an answer for why light exists in quantum chunks.

I have trouble following your reasoning. Also, it is difficult for me to determine what part of your post is your current thinking and what part is pasted from somewhere else.

Quote
In the unification time is exhibited inversely to energy. High energy
 is big and slow, low energy is small and fast.
I think that a fast transition time equates to high energy. Slow transition time equates to low energy.
« Last Edit: 24/05/2009 13:13:41 by Vern »
 

witsend

  • Guest
God and Photon.
« Reply #10 on: 24/05/2009 18:50:14 »
Socratus - what are you trying to say?  I've struggled through your posts with increasing frustration.  Surely you can tell us your problem in simple english.  Alternatively, if you've got an idea - let us know.  As it is, the object of your oblique references is impossibly difficult to understand and apparently somewhat pointless. It may serve as proof of the range of your knowledge - but it does nothing to show its depth. If you're simply suffering from angst, as is apparent, then say it. I'm with you there.  But tell us what's on your mind - please.  This endless cryptic monologue entirely defeats me. And it's not from want of trying.  I love grappling with new ideas.  I just can't find any here. 
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #11 on: 25/05/2009 10:22:56 »
" I've struggled through your posts with increasing frustration. "
Many of us pretty much gave up a while ago.
 

witsend

  • Guest
God and Photon.
« Reply #12 on: 25/05/2009 10:44:24 »
Socratus, I obviously can't speak for everyone, but I would really like to understand your writing.  I hope sincerely that you'll give us something to go on.  It's just that your writing is turgid and rather difficult to follow.  Too many random references - or am I missing something?
« Last Edit: 25/05/2009 11:23:44 by witsend »
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #13 on: 25/05/2009 13:08:40 »
Socratus - what are you trying to say? 
 
But tell us what's on your mind - please. 
========================================
1.
Vacuum: T=0K.
2.
Virtual particles = frozen Light Quanta.
3.
Photon.
4.
Electron.
5.
Star, gravitation.
6.
Proton.
7.
Evolution of interaction between Electron and Proton.
============== . .
Best wishes.
S.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #14 on: 25/05/2009 19:23:39 »
Socratus,
Do you actually think that helped in any way?
 

witsend

  • Guest
God and Photon.
« Reply #15 on: 25/05/2009 20:23:47 »
Bored chemist - I've been giggling over this post for the last half hour.  I had no idea that a forum could be this entertaining.  I have a theory about Socratus.  He is'nt a person at all.  It's a machine.  Programmed to write near sentences from a very limited frame of reference.  The object being to see see if it can reach the challenging optimum condition of actual communication.  The experiment is failing.  But who knows? A few articles introduced to real sentences - proper syntax - appropriate nouns and verbs - and - the sky's the limit.  But whoever designed that software needs to tweak it a little.

I'm doubly amused at the good will of the machine.  So hopelessly optimistic.  I feel a bit shy about saying this - but Cheers, Socratus.  I am about to enjoy a glass of wine and will toast you as the most entirely free and independent thinker on the planet with a courageous reach at communication coupled with a remarkable and unabashed lack of logic or reason.       
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #16 on: 26/05/2009 04:52:13 »
Bored chemist - I've been giggling over this post for
the last half hour. 
I had no idea that a forum could be this entertaining. 

I'm doubly amused at the good will of the machine. 
 So hopelessly optimistic. 
I feel a bit shy about saying this - but Cheers, Socratus. 
 I am about to enjoy a glass of wine and will toast you
as the most entirely free and independent thinker on the planet
 with a courageous reach at communication coupled with a
remarkable and unabashed lack of logic or reason.      
=============================== .
I drink with you for my : ‘Hopelessly optimistic business’.
S.
=================== .
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #17 on: 26/05/2009 10:15:58 »
At least one of my colleagues does a worse job of passing the Turing test than Socratus's posts.
I think you may be right about the machine generated text.
 

witsend

  • Guest
God and Photon.
« Reply #18 on: 26/05/2009 11:10:39 »
Bored Chemist.  Had to look up 'Turing test'.  How bored are you?  I've been trying to get someone to post my paper on this site - somewhere?  Sort of undertook to do this.  Can you help? Or give advice?  I thought that 'Chris - in charge of this forum - would assist.  But he doesn't answer emails.  I'd quite like the feed back.  At lest its contentious.  Or should I just describe the circuit and leave out the paper.  Any advice gratefully received.  Witsend
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #19 on: 26/05/2009 12:18:57 »
Is there some reason that you can't just open a thread and post your "theroy" (no offense but if it's new it probabaly doesn't qualify as a scientific theory)?

Be warned that if the idea doesn't hold water it will get ridiculed and ripped to shreds but, if it's right then this is as good a place as any to put it forward.
 

witsend

  • Guest
God and Photon.
« Reply #20 on: 26/05/2009 12:48:47 »


I've never claimed a 'theory'.  Cannot say if it's wrong or right.  The only thing I can say is that about 30 odd qualified engineers can't fault the protocol or the numbers.  I can't get it past the IET to get it reviewed.  And I can't get it onto academic desks for a demo.  But the prize would be if others would replicate.  Not exactly delighted at the prospect of 'being ridiculed' but I'd rather get to the bottom of this than not.  Perhaps a new thread and just the circuit description?  Or how about reference to the paper posted  in a separate blog site?  Is that permitted?  Trouble is that I then disclose my identity Not sure if I want that. I'll give it some more thought.  Thanks for the warning about certain attack.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
God and Photon.
« Reply #21 on: 26/05/2009 13:49:28 »
Quote from: witsend
I've never claimed a 'theory'.  Cannot say if it's wrong or right.  The only thing I can say is that about 30 odd qualified engineers can't fault the protocol or the numbers.  I can't get it past the IET to get it reviewed.
Why is it important to get it reviewed? Who is the reviewer? If you have something that has merit, we will recognize it immediately. If it has no merit, we will try and explain why it doesn't. Your reluctance to disclose what it is that you are thinking about may be an indicator of your own lack of confidence in the idea.
 

witsend

  • Guest
God and Photon.
« Reply #22 on: 26/05/2009 14:02:45 »
Vern - already attacking?  I've just posted it. My son is going to append the paper as a PDF file? - during the course of the day.  But you're right.  I'm nervous.  At least I'm out there.
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
God and Photon.
« Reply #23 on: 26/05/2009 16:58:51 »
Witsend - we've had some aggressive 'over unity' posters here, who refuse to listen to other people, and resultantly become very frustrating.  This just makes people weary of these sorts of ideas.

Try not to be scared off and people will quickly warm to you if you're reasonable and listen to their comments - I suspect you are not one of the frustrating ones!
 

witsend

  • Guest
God and Photon.
« Reply #24 on: 26/05/2009 17:20:54 »
thanks for the advice BenV.  It's posted under a new thread on overunity.  My son added a link so that you can download the actual paper.  It seemed easiest. 
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

God and Photon.
« Reply #24 on: 26/05/2009 17:20:54 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums