The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Two views of the Vacuum  (Read 7914 times)

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Two views of the Vacuum
« on: 04/12/2005 19:34:39 »
Two views of the Vacuum
In modern science there are two mutually exclusive points of view
 on the behaviour of particles in a Vacuum. One point of view is
 the position of classical physics which says that:
In the vacuum at T=0K any movement of a particle stops.
And if in the Empire of Cold there is no movement, it is a dead empire.
But another point of view completely rejects this formulation.
This point of view is expressed in the quantum theory. In 1911, M. Planck
 stated that energy does not become zero at the approach T=0K.
 He declared this on the 1st Solvay congress. So " Energy at T=0K" became
 the main problem in physics because " Physics is first of all the vacuum".
 Gradually it began to appear that Vacuum at T=0K is not empty dead space.
 There live the "virtual" particles. These particles originally have negative and
 imaginary mass, and then make a virtual transition � to positive mass,
 becoming real particles. But the apparently mystical "virtual particles"
 as they make "virtual transitions". explains little.
Let's rethink these "virtual" particles. Let's ask a question:
 What is the geometrical form of "virtual" particles in the Vacuum at T=0K?
 The answer is:
According to the laws of physics :
 J. Charles ( 1787), Gay-Lussac ( 1802),  V. Nernst ( 1910), A. Einstein ( 1925)  
 particles in a Vacuum cannot have volume and consequently should be flat figures.
 This means, particles have the geometrical form of a circle, as from all flat figures
 the circle has the most optimum form: C/D=pi.
What are these "virtual" circles in the vacuum?
The answer is given in the theory of radiation of absolute black bodies.
 The theory considers an area of the space which are in absolute thermal balance.
 It is possible only at T=0K. But it is known, that such a condition is a
 "thermal death " and is not observed in nature. Therefore Planck, studying this area,
 came to  the conclusion that condition T=0K has changed. In this space there should be
 a radiation of a quantum of light, possessing an internal impulse h=Et=1.
So, � the virtual circle � is transformed to quantum of light.
This quantum of light has an impulse h=Et=1 and travels with constant speed, c=1.
 From this assumption Quantum theory was born.
Therefore the Quantum theory is a theory only about a quantum of light and its various transformations.  
 And classical theory considers all other particles.
 These particles have  mass much greater than a quantum of light and
move with much smaller speeds. If we understand the difference between
 a quantum of light and all other particles,
 then all contradictions in the physics disappear, and all of physics becomes a
 harmoniously integral science.

The Vacuum and the Electron
All know, that an electron is not a firm sphere. All know, that its form can be changed.
 But nobody understands the borders of the change of the geometrical form of the electron.
So, what are the borders of this change? Quantum theory gives an answer to this question.
It says that at the interaction of the electron with the vacuum, the energy and mass of the
 electron become infinite. Physics does not understand what to do with infinite sizes
and therefore have thought up "a method of renormalization", a method
 "to sweep the dust under the carpet" / Feynman./
 But the situation can be understood another way. Electrons, having the geometrical form
of a sphere, lose their volume and turn into an indefinitely flat circle. In this is the reason
for the occurrence of infinite sizes for the electron. But in physics we know
only one particle which has the form of a flat circle. It is a quantum of light
 which flies rectilinearly   with  speed c= 1.
Hence, the electron turns into a quantum of light. Hence, the electron and a quantum of light
 is the same particle in different states.
In the books it is written, that electrons interact among themselves with the help of
a quantum of light. In the books it is written that an electron in an atom passing from
one orbit to another radiates a quantum of light. It should be understood as follows.
 The electron has a quantum of light in a pocket or under a "shirt" which from time to time
 is freed. Interesting. But why is it necessary for it to hide?

The Vacuum and SRT.
SRT examines the behaviour of a quantum of light in the vacuum.
1) The First law of SRT - the speed of a quantum of light in vacuum has
 a maximal magnitude (constant, absolute) of c=1.
2) SRT is not considered a gravitational field.
 For this reason, Einstein created General Relativity Theory in 1915.
 The field in which there is no gravitation is a vacuum.
3) This asserts that action in SRT occurs with particles in
 negative four-dimensional (Minkowski) space. This space is absolute.
Mathematicians have constructed its model and speak
of this negative space as completely abstract.
 Nobody sees that it has no connection to real existence.
 This is similar to a sad joke.
For 100 years everyone has admired SRT.
 Millions of articles, reviews and books have been written
 and the United Nations has decided to establish 2005 as the centennial year of SRT.
 Consider that all that is clear in this theory
 is that negative four-dimensional space is abstract and has no real existence.
My God!  There does not appear to be anyone to laugh at this joke!
Everyone searches for complex models of four-dimensional space, but truth lies in simplicity. All is very simple.
We meet the negative characteristic of space only in the vacuum, and in the vacuum,
 space is merged with time (negative four-dimensional space).
 According to the first law, the speed of light is absolute and movement occurs
 in the absolute vacuum. So why does everyone speak and write that there is no
 absolute movement; that only relative movement v =s/t is real?
 Why does everyone say that there is no absolute reference system,
if the absolute speed can be only in absolute space?
Here we have one of the paradoxes in human intelligence.
*             *            *
If you have time and desire, I ask you to visit my site
« Last Edit: 27/03/2006 00:12:49 by daveshorts »


Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Re: Two views of the Vacuum
« Reply #1 on: 04/12/2005 19:36:18 »
About Reference Systems: Vacuum and Space.
From times of Newton in classical physics the principle worked:
" Until the reference system is specified, any conversations on movement
 are completely deprived the contents."
Newton, first of all physicists realized, what a main role a reference system has.
 The choice of reference system is a central, basic question at the commencement of any task
 But the founders of the Big Bang theory have forgotten this.
 Nowhere do they write in what reference system the "Big Bang" took place,
 and in what reference system the substance of the "single point " is distributed.
 And consequently, the theory of the "Big Bang" is constructed on a sand.
*        *       *
The astronomers have established the fact of galaxy rotation
but nobody speaks of the reference system in which they rotate.
 Without the inclusion of a reference system the rotation of galaxies
 is deprived of any content. To avoid this problem, write:
Each Galaxy is surrounded by an "accompanying reference system",
and the "accompanying reference system" is extended.
/ The Physics of Space. is a small Soviet encyclopedia published in 1986./
 This is a joke!
 For example, I am at home and I am surrounded by an "accompanying reference system";
 my house. Then I go to work surrounded by an "accompanying reference system";
 And when I have arrived on the job, I am surrounded by an
"accompanying reference system", the university.
But if we do not understand that we work in the reference system of the Earth,
 and the astronomers do not understand in what reference system
 the billions of galaxies rotate, any statement is meaningless.
Only when the reference system is specified, then the words "galaxies rotate"
and "Big Bang" make sense.
The first problem in the discussion of the laws of motion is to answer the question,
  "In what reference system does this motion occur?
 In what reference system are the laws of motion formulated?"
 This question is most unpleasant for the amateurs in abstract reasoning and conjecture.
 God teaches man to think particularly and logically.
The Devil teaches man to speak with beautiful, general and abstract phrases.
 By such method he easily hides the truth from the people.
*       *       *
The main paradox in physics is not understanding reference systems.
Einstein and Infeld wrote:
We have the laws, but are not aware what the body of reference system they belong to,
and all our physical construction appears erected on sand.
They are right. The essence is that now there is no precise border
which divides two different frame of reference:
1) System of Vacuum and
2) Gravitational frame of reference.
Now these two systems are considered as though they were common.
 But they are completely different systems.
 There, where there is a vacuum - there is no gravitation.
 In the vacuum, one set of laws - the laws of the vacuum work
 ( not taking into account external influences).
Where there is gravitation, there is no vacuum.
In a gravitational reference system
 a complete set of other laws apply.
These laws are connected and take into account external influences.
 How these two systems cooperate between themselves is explained on the following site.
 *        *        *
Best regards.

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Re: Two views of the Vacuum
« Reply #2 on: 05/12/2005 00:28:23 »
The most important clear and truthful statement that occurs in both these lengthy tirades is  "this is a joke".

Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!

Offline ukmicky

  • Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3011
    • View Profile
Re: Two views of the Vacuum
« Reply #3 on: 05/12/2005 03:16:28 »
You did ask for two views of a vacuum

Firstly we have the obligatory bum shot, a bit cheeky but that's me I'm afraid.

And next we have the shot from below, a bit dirty this one so be prepared:)

Anything else i can help you with then just let me know.;)


Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Re: Two views of the Vacuum
« Reply #4 on: 05/12/2005 11:27:25 »
Michael - you appear not to be taking this thread seriously [}:)]

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Re: Two views of the Vacuum
« Reply #5 on: 06/12/2005 13:48:19 »
The Structure of Nothing . According to my peasant logic: 1 + 1 = 2.
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.    
It is interesting to think about what had surrounded the single point.
But why does everyone speak about EMPTINESS- NOTHING in
 common phrases rather than in specific, concrete terms?
 I wonder why nobody has written down this EMPTINESS- NOTHING in
the form of a physical formula ? You see, every schoolboy knows that
 is possible to express the EMPTINESS- NOTHING condition
by the formula  T=0K.
*       *       *
Once there was a Big Bang.
 But in what space had the Big Bang taken place
 and in what space was the matter of the Big Bang distributed?
Not in  T=0K?
It is clear, that there is only EMPTINESS, NOTHING, in  T=0K.
Now consider that the Universe, as an absolute frame of reference is
 in a condition  of  T = 2,7K  (rests in relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
 But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change and decrease.
What temperature can this radiation reach?
Not  T=0K?
Hence, if we go into the past or into the present or into the future,
 we can not escape from EMPTINESS- NOTHING .
Everyone knows about the singular point, but nobody knows that it is
EMPTINESS- NOTHING! To understand it, it is necessary to ask a question:
What geometric and physical parameters can particles have in  T=0K?
Can they have a volume?
Then they must have the geometrical form of a flat circle: C/D =p= 3,14.
 But what these particles do ?
They are in a condition of rest: h = 0. So, maybe they are dead?
In order to answer of this question, it is necessary to more clearly understand
*       *       *
Has this EMPTINESS- NOTHING a border? No! It has no borders.
EMPTINESS- NOTHING is indefinite. Let's identify it by the formula: T=0K = #8734;  
And what about time in the EMPTINESS- NOTHING ?
Independent time is absent.
Time in EMPTINESS- NOTHING is indissolubly merged with infinite space.
But you see, such space is described by Einstein in Special Relativity Theory.
In SRT, space also has a negative characteristic and there also,
 time is indissolubly merged with space.
 Only in SRT, this EMPTINESS- NOTHING has another name:
Negative four-dimensional (Minkowski) space.
Then it is possible to conclude that SRT describes the behaviour
of the circle-particles in T=0K.
*       *       *
In agreement with SRT, these circle-particles can be in two conditions of movement:
To fly rectilinearly with a speed of  c =1.
 In this kind of movement , it is named a quantum of light, photon.
2) To rotate around its own diameter and then its form and
 physical parameters will change according to the Lorentz transformation.
 In this kind of movement, it is named the electron.
*       *       *
But what is the reason for the movement of circle-particles?
In the EMPTINESS- NOTHING, nothing can influence the condition of rest.
Quantum theory gives the answer to this question.
1)      The rectilinear movement of the circle-particles depends
on Planck's spin :h = 1.
2) The rotary movement of the circle-particles depends on the spin
 of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck: #295; = h/2pi.
*       *       *
Very strange particles surround the "singular point ".
 These circle-particles can be in three conditions:
1) h = 0 ,
2) h = 1,
3) ) #295; = h/2pi  
And they can independently decide what action to take.
So it can work only with particles  that have their own consciousness,
 which is not static but can develop.
The development of consciousness scale goes " from vague wishes up to a clear thought ".
*        *        *
Best regards.
"If consciousness is in fact defined (and different) at every moment of time,
 it should also be related to points in space:
 the truly subjective observer system should be related to space-time points."
 from "Quantum Theory and Time Asymmetry", Zeh (1979).

Offline A Big Mug

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: Two views of the Vacuum
« Reply #6 on: 10/12/2005 06:10:13 »
Sorry, I was on vacation.  Are you talking about the bagless vacuum?  I heard that when you empty the dust collector you stir up quite a cloud of junk into the air around you.  I don't like buying the bags though.  I really missed you folks.

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Two views of the Vacuum
« Reply #6 on: 10/12/2005 06:10:13 »


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