The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Donate
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Site Map
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Member Map
Recent Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side
New Theories
Is the past annihilating?
« previous
next »
Print
Pages:
1
[
2
]
Go Down
Is the past annihilating?
20 Replies
10130 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
mirormimic
Full Member
52
Activity:
0%
Phonetics= picture owing idios
Re: Is the past annihilating?
«
Reply #20 on:
16/09/2012 00:34:02 »
With regard to wave-particle duality.
The particle originates with the ultimate source of energy found at every point in infinity. Particles represent small bits of energy in relation to the whole of energy. Particles can either be invisible or can represent themselves visibly. When particles are invisible they represent the innate nature of Light. Light is the same as the energy source. Or : The ultimate source of energy is described as Light exactly proportional to be described as energy. We could say that the entity Light is that which is comprised of particles. The sum of all particles represents the full embodiment of Light.
When Light does not reflect itself it remains invisible. When light reflects itself it represents its invisible nature to visible geometric forms. Matter! Some people confine the definition of matter to anything which has “mass and volume. “ If we do not ignore Einstein we will equate matter with energy. Thus in the strictest sense Light is the invisible mass or volume of everything. Thus light is the invisible matter from which all things originate and are comprised of. In this we see that as light is matter so to all things that materialize inherit this energy matter. The only difference would be that Light is the bulk matter of all that is…everything else NOT innately Light would represent plane matter of bulk matter. The plane would be the Higgs Field and would represent the reflective medium that represents part of the quality of bulk light: at that point. In this we realize that “mirror matter” represents emergent, reflective, visible images of a certain volume of energy of light. No material body represents the whole of Light or the whole of energy. In fact all of the matter in all universes and every point combined would not wholey represent the energy matter of Light. If we consider that all of this material mass is reflective of Light then in the fullest sense …all of the matter in finite space is merely reflecting thus has NO true weight or heaviness.
Illustration. If we adopt the mass mentality then I have a question: If I stand in front of a mirror what weighs more my real body or the reflected image of my body. If a relative observer is watching and is not aware of that one of us is a mirror reflection what would he conclude? No doubt he would conclude that we both weigh about the same. Reflections have no mass! However reflections can and often do reflect a volume of space, reflect speed, reflect spin, reflect revolution, reflect motion, acceleration and reflect energy processes. Actually reflective surfaces can reflect about anything that does can or will happen.
I favor Newton in describing Light as particle(s). I do not agree with Huygens that INNATE light is a wave. Rather inherited light (reflected light) is that which results in the wave phenomenon. I believe that all innate particles CAN be represented as a wave. Yet as soon as the particle is reflected as a wave the resultant anti-particle it is no longer truly a particle. Rather! It becomes a reflected anti-particle. Where “Anti” represents emergent mass geometries; and occurs due to the relativity of a; or the Higgs field. This conversion of true particle to wave particle occurs on the surface of the Higgs field..and all formerly un-reflected particles are now transferred to reflected particles or Higgs Bosons. It will be hard if not impossible to discern the Higgs boson because they are not part of the material world rather creating the relativity of the material bodies to the immaterial body. In a sense I would say that in order to see the Higgs field as differentiated from the particle representations one must realize that the Higgs boson (verses the “field”) is merely the product of particles reflecting. Thus discovering the Higgs boson may be possible if we realize that all anti-particles are reflections occurring in a field. I believe the key to discovering the field is to discern patterns of palindrome as found throughout nature and the universe then approach the study of these patterns as representing continual symmetries reflected from a surface or horizon. If we could arrive at a way of discerning any and all differences between a real body and a reflected body we may be able to perceive these phenomenon’s. I have studied this for 10 years utilizing mirrors, lights, measurements and still have yet to discover the decisive differences. These differences (bosons) are occurring in a neutral field (Higgs) relative to a bulk charged mass entity called light.
Perhaps a good start would be in more closely examining the neutron. Or possibly the free neutron. Perhaps studying silver or mercury may prove beneficial. iI will be speaking more on the subject of wave and particle relative to my own thread.( so as not to clutter this one or usurp the intent of the author of this thread. I am enjoying this thread.
Logged
A picture is worth........!
Print
Pages:
1
[
2
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...