The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What is the first law of Universe ?  (Read 17237 times)

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« on: 04/04/2007 12:54:49 »
What is the first law of Universe ?
=========   
The Physics is first of all Vacuum.
Vacuum is :T=0K.
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”.
The answer is :
 EMPTINESS- NOTHING….!!!
 Ok!
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 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  T=0K.
Therefore it is necessary to begin to think from T=0K.
=================== 
 About the theory of the “Big Bang”
 is written  the thick (very thick) books.
But anywhere do not write about the reason of the “Big Bang”.
Anybody does not know it.
I know.
Action, when the God opens his palm,
have named the “Big Bang”.
And action, when the God compresses his palm,
have named " a  single point”.
===========================   
   
 What is the second law of Universe ?

 To answer of this question we must ask:
 " What geometrical and physical parameters
have  the particles in Vacuum T=0K? "
a).
The Classical physics says, that when we reach
the temperature T=0K all moving of particles
 stops, and the Energy of this space is equal to zero.
 It means that the space T=0K is died one.
Therefore it is impossible something to say about T=0K.
b)
But Quantum physics says that the Energy of this space
 is not equal to zero. Quantum physics says that in T=0K
 “ virtual” particles exist. Why does nobody recognize the
geometrical and physical parameters of “ virtual” particles?
For example: “ Can they have volume?”
No.
Because according to  J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
 temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears. The particles become flat figures.
From them the most optimal is circle: C/D=pi.
c)
According to SRT quantum of light flies
with speed c = 1. And in this moving it cannot
have volume. It means that quantum of light
has a geometrical form of circle: C/D = 3,14….
d)
A quantum of light is a privileged particle.
Only a light quantum has  the absolute speed: c=1.
No other particle can travel with the speed: c = 1.
Other particle can travel only with the speed: s=d/t.
And I was taught at school from the first class:
that the incommensurable quantities cannot be compared.
To connect  incommensurable quantities it
 is similar to the decision of a problem:
"What will be if the whale will attacks the elephant?"
========
If quantum of light flies always only rectilinearly
with speed c=1, it is a mad one.
No.
 Quantum of light have  two kinds of spins ,
as a result of which the particle attains motion.
1)
Under the action of  Planck,s spin (impulse),
which is equal to the unit ( h =1)
a quantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed (c = 1).
The geometrical form of a circle: (C/D = 3,14).
A quantum of light behaves as a particle.
2)
 Under the action of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck's spin ,
( h = h / 2pi)  a quantum of light rotates around of its diameter
with the speed more of light quanta : c>1
 and is known as electron.
The geometrical form of a circle is transformed into a sphere.
This kind of movement is described by Lorentz's  transformations .
In this action the wave properties of light quantum are shown.
The dualism of a particle becomes clear.
 The paradox of dualism disappears completely.
===================


 

Offline tony6789

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1127
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #1 on: 04/04/2007 16:51:57 »
holy cow thats a big post...god job mr.lol i havent even posted something as big as that jeez...beat even me...i wont have that
 

Offline tony6789

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1127
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #2 on: 04/04/2007 16:52:37 »
                 




































































































































































































































































































































































































































































hahahahahha mines bigger!!

 

Offline Ben6789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
  • And then there were none.
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #3 on: 04/04/2007 16:52:52 »
ooooookay, i hardly understood that..I feel so stupid for not being able to.. :(
 

Offline Ben6789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
  • And then there were none.
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #4 on: 04/04/2007 16:54:28 »
It doesn't matter how long it is, it matters in content. That post is as full as your head.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #5 on: 04/04/2007 20:49:34 »
Name:  tony6789
Posts:  571 (1.319 per day)
Position:  Hero Member
Date Registered:  26/01/2006 15:56:57
Last Active:  Today at 17:09:59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Gender:  Male
Age: 14
Country: USA
Local Time: 04/04/2007 19:47:16
 

Offline dedaNoe

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
    • Dedanoe -- Unileversal TAODotology
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #6 on: 07/04/2007 10:46:21 »
the first law of the universe dating from 550BCE is TAO = NEUTRAL (YIN UNION YANG). then came the law of lever by Archimedes in 250BCE but that didn't change a thing: magnitudes are in balance on distances reciprocal to their weights. if anti-weight is Yin and the pro-weight is Yang then the lever is equally in balance like TAO is NEUTRAL. at the beginning physics was unified because the single law of lever (lever is system of weights wehre every weight is global representor of its own lever) covered every thing as on the ground so both underground and skyhigh.

the unity of physics breaks with the appearance of Newton on the scene. when Newton declared his mechanics in 1650AD - entire 19 centuries from the leverlaw - it had four different laws (not one as before him) each with different domain of validity. the physics from newton till now is a complete miss: http://dedanoe.googlepages.com/knigata.pdf [nofollow] and that's why armageddon comes in year or two when i complete my excessive turbo generator at: http://dedanoe.googlepages.com/etg.html [nofollow]
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #7 on: 08/04/2007 12:07:10 »
Vacuum , “ideal gas “and particles.
===========================
To solve some difficult problem the physicists
 create a simple abstract model.
Beginning from this simple model they learned
to solve practical and difficult tasks.
In that time it was the right way to solve that problem.
 Take, for example, the theory of “ideal gas “.
The " ideal gas " represents one theoretical model of gas
and the physicists say it does not exist in nature.
It was found, that properties of real gases are very close 
to “ideal gas”. The result “ very close “ was quite satisfied
for physicists. But from time of creation the theory of
" ideal gas " about 100 years have passed and the
quantum theory  was created. And from the quantum theory
 we know that to use the expression "very close" it is impossible.
Why?
Because very small (insignificant) changes in the microworld
is a cause of radical transformation in system.
We must be very cautious, using words
"very close …, almost equally”.
=========…
I offer to consider model "ideal gas" as real model of the vacuum.
Why?
Because the temperature of " ideal gas " is equal to -273 degrees.
And temperature of pure vacuum is the same.
Now it is considered that the Universe,
as an absolute frame of reference is  in a condition of  T = 2,7K
  (rests of relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
 But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change
and decrease down to Т=0К, isn’t it?
Now everyone knows, that absolute temperature T=0K
cannot be reached. But is it enough reason to think
that space T=0K doesn't exist?
If Columbus did not discover America,
there was not America, was it?
We have all theoretical and logical rights to investigate
the vacuum T=0K.
 ==========   
Einstein said,
"… we have not proven that the Aether does not exist, we
have merely proven that we do not need it (for computations)"
It is correct.
Vacuum does not have influence on behaviour of particles.
Therefore we will say nothing about vacuum.
But...
What is it possible to say about particles in vacuum?
1.
The first question: “ Can they have volume?”
No.
Because according to  J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
 temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears. The physicists say, if the particle
 has completely lost its volume then:
a)
the substance, matter disappears
b)
the physical parameters of particles becomes infinite.
But such statement  contradicts the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy".
And then we must understand what the sense of the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy" is,
we should understand and accept that
when volume of the particles disappear
 they become  "indefinitely flat figures ".
What do "indefinitely flat figures " mean?
They mean, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we also cannot reach density of the particle in the T=0K.
The “ Charles law” was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac ( 1802), W. Nernst ( 1910), A. Einstein ( 1925) .
These "indefinitely flat figures " have the geometrical form
of a circle,  as from all flat figures  the circle has the most
optimal form:  C/D=pi= 3,14.
P.S.
We can see the same situation in quantum theory too,
when electron interacts with vacuum, its physical parameters
 become infinite. We see the “relay race” of misunderstanding
 in the physics, which goes from one  generation to another one,
only because at the beginning the " ideal gas " wasn’t understood.
2.
Let us take some area of Vacuum and mark it with letter R.
The number of particles in this area we will mark with letter N.
Then every particle of this area has gravity/ mass of rest: R/N= k.
3.
Classic physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K the motion
 of particles stops, and the energy of Vacuum is equal to zero.
The quantum physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K there is
 motion of particles, and the energy of Vacuum is not zero.
Therefore, let us take some energy area of Vacuum and
mark it with letter E.
The mass of this energy area of Vacuum we will
 mark with letter M.
Then every particle of this area has energy/mass of rest:
 E/M= c^2,  ( E=Mc^2,  M=Ec^2.)
4.
As these particles are in the state of rest condition
 their impulse is equal to zero ( h=0).
5.
Mathematical point.
In mathematics, such condition of the particles in Vacuum
 is characterized with the imaginary quantity : i^2 = -1.
============================== 
Now we have the whole bouquet of formulas to begin
to paint the picture of creating the Existence.
P.S.
The quantum physics approves that “virtual particles”
 exist in Vacuum
Astrophysics approve that “ latent mass, invisible
particles, dark matter ”  exist  in Vacuum.
Everything was created from them.
But nobody knows what they are.
Now maybe somebody will understand these
“virtual,  invisible, latent particles”.
=====================
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #8 on: 12/04/2007 13:44:31 »
When I read the articles and comments
about basic problemes in physics
(quantum of light, electron, dark matter,
vacuum and etc....) when I think,
how clever all these authors are .
I am surprised, reading that clever answers
everyone gives , protecting his correctness.
They give various examples (sometimes very practical,
sometimes abstract) to prove their truth
It is nice, it is wonderful.
But...
But when the speech goes about vacuum T=0K
in the physicists brains the screen flashes
" It is forbidden to think " and brains of these
clever people stop to work.
Why?
Maybe the interdiction of Official church of Physics works.
Maybe the law of ethics works:
" Good bourgeois families don't speak about it ".
Maybe our school, education can be guilty in it.
For some historian of science it will be interesting
to analyze, how in the brains of modern physicists
and philosophers this taboo was arisen.
===============
 

Offline Seany

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4209
  • Live your life to the full!
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #9 on: 12/04/2007 14:09:02 »
                 




































































































































































































































































































































































































































































hahahahahha mines bigger!!



Tony, you stupid boy. Now mine is longer, Hah :P
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #10 on: 12/04/2007 19:55:25 »
"All truth passes through three stages.
 First.
It is ridiculed.
Second
It is violently opposed.
Third.
It is accepted as being self-evident."
/ Schopenhauer./

 

paul.fr

  • Guest
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #11 on: 12/04/2007 20:04:08 »
i know the second law is not to ask what the first is, if that helps
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #12 on: 13/04/2007 05:20:56 »
i know the second law is not to ask what the first is, if that helps
======================
i know the second law is not to ask what the first is, if that helps
====================
You should just learn what others have spent  their lives researching.
 Knowledge is based on the knowledge of our ancestors.
You don't need to demand proof for these theories;
just trust them and learn it. ( ?)
???


 

Offline Seany

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4209
  • Live your life to the full!
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #13 on: 13/04/2007 11:47:48 »
The First Law is .. :o Erm,.. That what goes up, must come down. :o
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #14 on: 14/04/2007 18:12:00 »
The First Law is .. :o Erm,.. That what goes up, must come down. :o
==============
And that what goes left, must come to the right,...
......etc
The Bohr’s principle of complementarity .
/ Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics./
==================


 

Offline Seany

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4209
  • Live your life to the full!
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #15 on: 14/04/2007 23:18:38 »
And.... What goes diagonally to right, goes diagonally to the left. ;D
 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #16 on: 15/04/2007 00:23:54 »
In the beginning were the words and the
words were of socratus.
They were poetic and structured
and the patterns repeated and echoed throughout the web
Socratus wished us to read them and gain insight into ...
Nothing
which is precisely what those who read them and thought about them realised
IT WAS GENUINE!
They were really worth nothing.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #17 on: 15/04/2007 05:48:16 »
In the beginning were the words and the
words were of socratus.
They were poetic and structured
and the patterns repeated and echoed throughout the web
Socratus wished us to read them and gain insight into ...
Nothing
which is precisely what those who read them and thought about them realised
IT WAS GENUINE!
They were really worth nothing.
===================
 There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
 than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
/Shakespeare, Hamlet./
======================

 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #18 on: 05/05/2007 00:32:36 »
We have many kinds of dimension spaces: 3D, 4D and etc.
Is it hard to see the three dimension. . .???
No.
1.
 There are an independent space and independent time:
We notice it on our planet - Earth. It is a 3D space.
The space (Newtonian) around us is 3D,
 and our eyes  allow us to see this 3D.
If we take Descartes coordinates plus time,
when it is possible to say:
4D = 3D space + 1D time.
We live in this 4D and are aware of it.
 2.
Is it  hard to see the fourth dimension. . .???
No.
There is simultaneous union of space and time
(negative four-dimensional / Minkowski / space).
Herman Minkowski :
" Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself,
are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
 and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent
reality."
Question.
What  is the "a kind of union of the two "?
The answer.
It is Vacuum. T=0K.
It is the “empty” space between milliards of billions Galaxies.
=====================.
Why we say :
" that it is impossible to see the fourth dimension.. ."
Maybe because: we are in a "special kind of intelligence
 is variably called  schizophrenia. "
What is the reason of this illness?
The reason is hidden in abstract thinking about :
abstract ideal gas, abstract black body,
abstract inertial systems, abstract " virtual" particles,
abstract zoo of antiparticles, abstract 
Schrödinger’s cat in a dark matter ,
abstract  4D, 5D, 11D, 27D and etc......
And this abstract viewpoint the physicists try
to solve by Bohr principle of complementarity.
But "The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory
 starts from a paradox."
/Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, pg. 44./
==========   
Is there a medicine for this illness?
Of course.
On the one recipe is written " Vacuum: T=0K",
On the other recipe is written " Light quanta".
If we don’t take this medicine our human society
will remain in the state of "schizophrenia". Save us God.
=======================.
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #19 on: 06/05/2007 11:40:50 »
 Max Planck. "Scientific Autobiography".
===============.
I have reread the Planck’s article "Scientific Autobiography".
It is a small article of 10 pages, but how honesty and modest,
wise and beautiful it is.
I cannot give a whole deep explanation of this article,
therefore  I will concentrate attention on a small part of it.
1.
In the beginning Planck wrote, that " From young years....
the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute,
 seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist’s life."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
" the search for something absolute seemed to me the
most wonderful task for a researcher."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
“ the most wonderful scientific task for me was
 searching of something absolute."
2.
And as for the relation between “relativity and absolute”
Planck wrote, that the fact of "relativity assumes the
existence of something absolute" ;
 "the relativity  has sense when something absolute resists it.”
Planck wrote that the phrase " all is relative " misleads us,
 because  it is nonsense, because there is something
 absolute in SRT.
And the most attractive thing in SRT was for Planck
 “to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation.”
3.
And than Planck explained what there is absolute
 in the physics:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
b)  The  negative 4D continuum.
c) The speed of light quanta.
d) The maximum entropy which is possible
       at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K.
4.
My conclusion.
Dear Planck, if you live now many scientists
will consider you are a crazy man.
Many of them will not give you a hand.
Many of them will laugh at you.
Why?
Because you were convinced in existing of something Absolute.
Because you searched for Absolute all your life long.
And now it is forbidden to think about Absolute .
Now the search for absolute laws and objects
 in Nature disappeared from the scientist’s brain.
Now the scientists say : " There isn't an absolute frame,
There isn't an absolute speed. There is nothing Absolute.
Everything is relativity. All is comparatively."
 You wrote:
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing
 its opponents  and making them see the light, but rather
because its opponents eventually die, and
 a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
How pity it is.
I want to hope that this sentence isn’t absolutely correct. 
=====================.
P.S.
Does anybody know the website with
Max Planck’s "Scientific Autobiography"?
Thank you.
 

jolly

  • Guest
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #20 on: 06/05/2007 14:36:51 »
What is the first law of Universe ?
=========  
The Physics is first of all Vacuum.
Vacuum is :T=0K.
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”.
The answer is :
 EMPTINESS- NOTHING….!!!
 Ok!
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.

Well enery cannot be destroyed so all the energy in the universe has to of come from some where!
Hume stated: "any supposition which can be formed is equally possible....was it nothing? but that could never produce anything".
With the 11 dimemsions and the multi-verse theory, two universes hitting would create the BIG BANG and explain where all the energy in our universe came from!

        What is the second law of Universe ?

 To answer of this question we must ask:
 " What geometrical and physical parameters
have  the particles in Vacuum T=0K? "
a).
The Classical physics says, that when we reach
the temperature T=0K all moving of particles
 stops, and the Energy of this space is equal to zero.
 It means that the space T=0K is died one.
Therefore it is impossible something to say about T=0K.
b)
But Quantum physics says that the Energy of this space
 is not equal to zero. Quantum physics says that in T=0K
 “ virtual” particles exist. Why does nobody recognize the
geometrical and physical parameters of “ virtual” particles?
For example: “ Can they have volume?”
No.
Because according to  J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
 temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears. The particles become flat figures.
From them the most optimal is circle: C/D=pi.
c)
According to SRT quantum of light flies
with speed c = 1. And in this moving it cannot
have volume. It means that quantum of light
has a geometrical form of circle: C/D = 3,14….
d)
A quantum of light is a privileged particle.
Only a light quantum has  the absolute speed: c=1.
No other particle can travel with the speed: c = 1.
Other particle can travel only with the speed: s=d/t.
And I was taught at school from the first class:
that the incommensurable quantities cannot be compared.
To connect  incommensurable quantities it
 is similar to the decision of a problem:
"What will be if the whale will attacks the elephant?"
========
If quantum of light flies always only rectilinearly
with speed c=1, it is a mad one.
No.
 Quantum of light have  two kinds of spins ,
as a result of which the particle attains motion.

Yeah absolutly the question really is do they know why?

1)
Under the action of  Planck,s spin (impulse),
which is equal to the unit ( h =1)
a quantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed (c = 1).
The geometrical form of a circle: (C/D = 3,14).
A quantum of light behaves as a particle.
2)
 Under the action of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck's spin ,
( h = h / 2pi)  a quantum of light rotates around of its diameter
with the speed more of light quanta : c>1
 and is known as electron.
The geometrical form of a circle is transformed into a sphere.
This kind of movement is described by Lorentz's  transformations .
In this action the wave properties of light quantum are shown.
The dualism of a particle becomes clear.
 The paradox of dualism disappears completely.
===================

Well with regards to the speed of light being c-1, we really dont know the actual speed of light! As everytime we test it we get a different figure- because our methods of testing it affect the results!

Vacuum , “ideal gas “and particles.
===========================
To solve some difficult problem the physicists
 create a simple abstract model.
Beginning from this simple model they learned
to solve practical and difficult tasks.
In that time it was the right way to solve that problem.
 Take, for example, the theory of “ideal gas “.
The " ideal gas " represents one theoretical model of gas
and the physicists say it does not exist in nature.
It was found, that properties of real gases are very close 
to “ideal gas”. The result “ very close “ was quite satisfied
for physicists. But from time of creation the theory of
" ideal gas " about 100 years have passed and the
quantum theory  was created. And from the quantum theory
 we know that to use the expression "very close" it is impossible.
Why?
Because very small (insignificant) changes in the microworld
is a cause of radical transformation in system.
We must be very cautious, using words
"very close …, almost equally”.
=========…

Yes it is clearly the case that anything will affect that enviroment!

I offer to consider model "ideal gas" as real model of the vacuum.
Why?
Because the temperature of " ideal gas " is equal to -273 degrees.
And temperature of pure vacuum is the same.
Now it is considered that the Universe,
as an absolute frame of reference is  in a condition of  T = 2,7K
  (rests of relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
 But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change
and decrease down to Т=0К, isn’t it?
Now everyone knows, that absolute temperature T=0K
cannot be reached. But is it enough reason to think
that space T=0K doesn't exist?
If Columbus did not discover America,
there was not America, was it?
We have all theoretical and logical rights to investigate
the vacuum T=0K.
 ========== 

In reference to what you believe: 'How do you study Nothing?'


Einstein said,
"… we have not proven that the Aether does not exist, we
have merely proven that we do not need it (for computations)"
It is correct.
Vacuum does not have influence on behaviour of particles.
Therefore we will say nothing about vacuum.
But...
What is it possible to say about particles in vacuum?
1.
The first question: “ Can they have volume?”
No.
Because according to  J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
 temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears. The physicists say, if the particle
 has completely lost its volume then:
a)
the substance, matter disappears
b)
the physical parameters of particles becomes infinite.
But such statement  contradicts the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy".
And then we must understand what the sense of the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy" is,
we should understand and accept that
when volume of the particles disappear
 they become  "indefinitely flat figures ".
What do "indefinitely flat figures " mean?
They mean, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we also cannot reach density of the particle in the T=0K.

I would argue that really when creating a vaccum you remove so much that the particals left expand to fill the space- as you cannot have a space with T=OK.

The “ Charles law” was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac ( 1802), W. Nernst ( 1910), A. Einstein ( 1925) .
These "indefinitely flat figures " have the geometrical form
of a circle,  as from all flat figures  the circle has the most
optimal form:  C/D=pi= 3,14.
P.S.
We can see the same situation in quantum theory too,
when electron interacts with vacuum, its physical parameters
 become infinite. We see the “relay race” of misunderstanding
 in the physics, which goes from one  generation to another one,
only because at the beginning the " ideal gas " wasn’t understood.
2.
Let us take some area of Vacuum and mark it with letter R.
The number of particles in this area we will mark with letter N.
Then every particle of this area has gravity/ mass of rest: R/N= k.

Right because you can count them acurately? I take it!

3.
Classic physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K the motion
 of particles stops, and the energy of Vacuum is equal to zero.
The quantum physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K there is
 motion of particles, and the energy of Vacuum is not zero.
Therefore, let us take some energy area of Vacuum and
mark it with letter E.
The mass of this energy area of Vacuum we will
 mark with letter M.
Then every particle of this area has energy/mass of rest:
 E/M= c^2,  ( E=Mc^2,  M=Ec^2.)

Thats rediculas as all atoms and particals have some form of energy, you maybe reading the reality that as they fill the gap created by the vaccum- it becomes harder to read there energy content! 

4.
As these particles are in the state of rest condition
 their impulse is equal to zero ( h=0).
5.
Mathematical point.
In mathematics, such condition of the particles in Vacuum
 is characterized with the imaginary quantity : i^2 = -1.
============================== 
Now we have the whole bouquet of formulas to begin
to paint the picture of creating the Existence.
P.S.
The quantum physics approves that “virtual particles”
 exist in Vacuum
Astrophysics approve that “ latent mass, invisible
particles, dark matter ”  exist  in Vacuum.
Everything was created from them.
But nobody knows what they are.
Now maybe somebody will understand these
“virtual,  invisible, latent particles”.
=====================

If they exsist at all! The fact that they are invisable could suggest that they dont exist- and this is all just speculation! At such distance without actually being in the area how can you say whats there?
It could just be filled with lots of different paticals, until we actually go look properly how can you know?
What you are engaged in here is- oh there a gap well whats in it? probably the same stuff inbetween jupiter and the earth- whatever!
Dont forget your eyes use light to see! some things do not reflect light, some light pases through and over times it bounces off in another direction!

We have many kinds of dimension spaces: 3D, 4D and etc.
Is it hard to see the three dimension. . .???
No.
1.
 There are an independent space and independent time:
We notice it on our planet - Earth. It is a 3D space.
The space (Newtonian) around us is 3D,
 and our eyes  allow us to see this 3D.
If we take Descartes coordinates plus time,
when it is possible to say:
4D = 3D space + 1D time.
We live in this 4D and are aware of it.
 2.
Is it  hard to see the fourth dimension. . .???
No.
There is simultaneous union of space and time
(negative four-dimensional / Minkowski / space).
Herman Minkowski :
" Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself,
are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
 and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent
reality."

Here your getting into worm holes etc but ive already posted that I believe there are 11.

Question.
What  is the "a kind of union of the two "?
The answer.
It is Vacuum. T=0K.
It is the “empty” space between milliards of billions Galaxies.
=====================.

ANYWAY...


Why we say :
" that it is impossible to see the fourth dimension.. ."
Maybe because: we are in a "special kind of intelligence
 is variably called  schizophrenia. "
What is the reason of this illness?
The reason is hidden in abstract thinking about :
abstract ideal gas, abstract black body,
abstract inertial systems, abstract " virtual" particles,
abstract zoo of antiparticles, abstract 
Schrödinger’s cat in a dark matter ,
abstract  4D, 5D, 11D, 27D and etc......
And this abstract viewpoint the physicists try
to solve by Bohr principle of complementarity.
But "The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory
 starts from a paradox."
/Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, pg. 44./
========== 

I completely agree.lol

  Is there a medicine for this illness?
Of course.
On the one recipe is written " Vacuum: T=0K",
On the other recipe is written " Light quanta".
If we don’t take this medicine our human society
will remain in the state of "schizophrenia". Save us God.
=======================.

Have some faith little brother!

Max Planck. "Scientific Autobiography".
===============.
I have reread the Planck’s article "Scientific Autobiography".
It is a small article of 10 pages, but how honesty and modest,
wise and beautiful it is.
I cannot give a whole deep explanation of this article,
therefore  I will concentrate attention on a small part of it.
1.
In the beginning Planck wrote, that " From young years....
the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute,
 seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist’s life."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
" the search for something absolute seemed to me the
most wonderful task for a researcher."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
“ the most wonderful scientific task for me was
 searching of something absolute."
2.
And as for the relation between “relativity and absolute”
Planck wrote, that the fact of "relativity assumes the
existence of something absolute" ;
 "the relativity  has sense when something absolute resists it.”
Planck wrote that the phrase " all is relative " misleads us,
 because  it is nonsense, because there is something
 absolute in SRT.
And the most attractive thing in SRT was for Planck
 “to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation.”
3.
And than Planck explained what there is absolute
 in the physics:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
b)  The  negative 4D continuum.
c) The speed of light quanta.
d) The maximum entropy which is possible
       at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K.
4.
My conclusion.
Dear Planck, if you live now many scientists
will consider you are a crazy man.
Many of them will not give you a hand.
Many of them will laugh at you.
Why?
Because you were convinced in existing of something Absolute.
Because you searched for Absolute all your life long.
And now it is forbidden to think about Absolute .
Now the search for absolute laws and objects
 in Nature disappeared from the scientist’s brain.
Now the scientists say : " There isn't an absolute frame,
There isn't an absolute speed. There is nothing Absolute.
Everything is relativity. All is comparatively."
 You wrote:
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing
 its opponents  and making them see the light, but rather
because its opponents eventually die, and
 a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
How pity it is.
I want to hope that this sentence isn’t absolutely correct. 
=====================.

To a degree, I agree with Max planck, science is very realitive to each scientist, but in a sense this is because of motivation- many scientist dont care about the truth- and just want fame or money, and so sacrifice the truth!
But there are laws which if written correctly would be absoulte- We today- sadly dont understand enought about anything to really do it properly-
but when you have men of science who spend all day ingnorantly defending their rubbish theories- what do you expect?
You see these 'scientist' dont really care about science, they are just thinking about themselves!

In responce to you actual question-What is the first Law of the universe- How about- ITS THERE!...lol




P.S- I think, I certainly deserve the biggest post award!lol
« Last Edit: 06/05/2007 14:51:43 by jolly »
 

jolly

  • Guest
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #21 on: 06/05/2007 15:34:33 »
Another-someone... May I ask why you have moved this into new theories?
Because until I posted you were happy to leave it where it was- And by moving it you are bassically saying that Socratus is posting a new theory! Not me!
Afterall this is his forum not mine!
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #22 on: 10/05/2007 16:57:07 »
To jolly.
1.
Thank you for comments.
2.
Another-someone...
 May I ask why you have moved this into new theories?
=========
 this is his forum not mine!
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #23 on: 05/06/2007 06:23:49 »
About i^2= -1, pi=3,14…, e=2,71…
=============.
My question is :
Can "imaginary and transcendental quantities"
belong to a real particle?
1.
Take, for example, Dirac,s sea.
The particles in this sea are negative, virtual, imaginary.
2.
The Dirac,s sea is not warm place, but very cold one.
In this cold space there are own laws.
For example.
According to  J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
 temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears and  particles become  "flat figures ".
The " Charles law" was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac, Planck, Nernst, Einstein .
These " flat figures " have the geometrical form of a circle,
 as from all flat figures  the circle has the most
optimal form:  C/D=pi= 3,14.
This is  one of condition of " imaginary" particles.
3.
Can these " imaginary" particles become "real" ?
Of course.
How?
To use Goudsmit - Uhlenbeck's impulse / spin  (h = h/ 2pi).
And as result  they acquire volume.
With volume they acquire also mass, charge, energy.
4.
Quantum theory says:
when electron interacts with vacuum, its physical parameters
 become infinite. But such statement  contradicts the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy".
And then we should understand and accept that when the
 physical parameters of electron disappear (become infinite)
 it  become  " flat figure ".
We don’t need to dream of "a method of renormalization".
5.
The " imaginary" particle is a "real " particle.
The numbers; i^2= -1, pi=3,14…, e=2,71…
belong to the " imaginary" particle.
6.
Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
 The numbers do not exist only for itself.
The "real" numbers exist in connection with "real" particles.
 And the "imaginary " numbers also exist in connection with
"imaginary " particles.
The "imaginary " particles are not hard, steel particles.
Their geometrical form can change.
This change is explained with Lobachevsky/ Bolyai geometry.
This change is explained with the Lorentz transformations.
==================..
Some quotations.
"A mathematician is a blind man in a dark room
looking for a black cat which isn't there"
/ Charles R. Darwin./
=================.   
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain,
and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
 / Albert Einstein./
===========.
 

Offline Ashtari

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • The truth will set you free
    • View Profile
What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #24 on: 05/06/2007 11:33:15 »
Sacrates

This is true:
 "All truth passes through three stages.
 First.
It is ridiculed.
Second
It is violently opposed.
Third.
It is accepted as being self-evident."
/ Schopenhauer./

May I invite you to visit my post about "Alien or Mutants from other dimensions" because I seem to have some pertinant answers to questions here posed.

I am busy reading the whole of your post and its replies to get to the bottom of what is being discussed and views about that.  Seems to be full of very interesting gems.

Only have a problem with the wasted spaces of folk trying to write a longer post.

I notice you are still a young person and salute your interest in Life the Universe and Everything as stated on your post.  [8D] I hope I meet many intelligent young people like you on this Discussion Forum.

Pleased to meet you.



Wisewomen Ashtari  [^]
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

What is the first law of Universe ?
« Reply #24 on: 05/06/2007 11:33:15 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length