[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

To be continued ...

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #104 (revised)


This post is important because the variable rate that wave-particles function in different energy density environments, and correspondingly, the variable rate that clocks measure the passing of time in different energy density environments has implications about the rate that quantum gravity functions in those different environments.

That rate that quantum gravity functions (the strength of QG) is governed by the gravitational wave energy density (G-wave) profile of the local environment. As objects move from one G-wave environment to another, the changing environment affects the force of quantum gravity in that environment. A trite example is that you can jump higher on the moon, because the force of gravity is lower on the moon, but the cause of the difference in the strength of quantum gravity on the Moon vs on Earth (higher G-wave at the surface of the earth than on the moon) is explained by the mechanics of the quantum gravity solution of the ISU model.
So why make such a big deal about the concept of “time delay” in the ISU model?

Here is why …

Time delay is a variable, and the variance is dependent on the local gravitational wave energy density (G-wave) profile of space. That local g-wed includes both the wave energy density of the local medium of space, and the matter density of the objects composed of wave-particles that occupy that space.

As a result, the gravitational wave energy density (G-wave) profile of the local space is the “exchange agent”. The ever-changing G-wave profile is continually being refreshed by receiving the out flowing gravitational wave energy component from the wave-particles, and at the same time, the local profile of space is supplying the inflowing gravitational wave energy component to those same wave-particles in order to maintain their mass.

The variables that change the local G-wave value are the same variables that affect the local time delay, i.e., the presence and relative motion of wave-particles and objects through the ever-changing local profile of space accounts directly for the number of local wave convergences occurring in that space, and as the number of local wave convergences changes, there is a series of related effects.

That sequence of related effects highlights why I make such a big deal about understanding the nature and cause of time delay in the ISU. It is like this: The number of wave convergences that are responsible for changes in time delay relate to the change in the rate that wave particles function, which relates the differing clock rates, which all are associated with the local strength of the force of quantum gravity.


But importantly, because that sequence includes the clock effect, we have observable evidence that can easily be explained by the process of quantum action. It is the ISU process called “quantum action” that orchestrates the sequence of related g-wed effects. The rate that clocks measure the passing of time in different g-wed environments is factual, and supports the ISU explanation that the process of quantum gravity ties all of those causes and effects together.


To be continued …

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #105


So let’s get into the observable evidence. There are two particular observations that support the premise that different energy density profiles cause clocks to measure the passing of time at different rates. We are talking about the difference in the rates that clocks in different energy density environments measure the passing of time under different gravitational/acceleration conditions:

1) A clock at the top of a mountain will run slower than an identical clock placed at sea level.

2) A clock accelerated on board a rocket ship (or even an airplane) will run slower, relative to an unaccelerated clock left behind (at rest).

The explanation for the observed variable rates that those clocks measure the passing of time is based on the difference in the number of gravitational wave convergences encountered by the wave-particles in the space involved, i.e., the density of wave front convergences occurring in the local space, as well as within the wave-particles making up the objects in that space, including the clocks.

In both cases cited above, there is a significant difference in the density (number) of the converging wave fronts in the medium of space involved, and thus in the gravitational wave energy density profile of that local space. Correspondingly, in both cases, there is a remarkable different in the wave energy density within the wave-particles that make up the objects, including the clocks. Let me describe the differences:


1) It isn’t the altitude above sea level that causes there to be a difference in the rate that clocks on a mountain top measure the passing of time, relative to clocks at sea level. It is the difference in the accumulated matter density of the substances in the space between the mountain top and the center of the Earth’s gravity, vs the accumulated matter density of the substances in the space between the sea level clock and the center of Earth. The gravitational wave out flow is more wave intensive at the top of the mountain.

Gravitational waves passing through the matter in rocks and earth will advance more slowly, i.e., objects composed of rocks and earth are composed of wave-particles that are more wave-energy dense than the wave-particles encountered in air (go figure, lol). The explanation for that phenomena is all about the particular contained energy density of the individual wave-particles that make up substances like rocks and earth, vs the density of wave particles that make up air.

The slower rate that the clock on the mountain top measures the passing of time is caused by the greater wave density of the out flowing waves from the high density substances like rocks and earth, over a greater distance up through to the top of mountain, vs. the density of the out flowing waves reaching the sea level clock. The effect of the density of the intervening substances is accumulative, and so the high density out flow reaching the mountain top clock creates more wave convergences in the wave-particles that make up the mountain top clock, and so the wave-particles in the clock function slower, and therefore the clock functions slower, causing less time to appear to be passing than on the sea level clock. Thus, taking the liberty to mix analogies, if there was a twin on the mountain top, that twin would appear to be aging slower, and will appear younger than the twin lingering at sea level twin.

2) And now the twins analogy. A clock accelerated on board a rocket ship (or even an airplane) will measure the passing of time at a slower rate than an identical clock that has remained at rest back at the spaceport. It is the difference in the relative acceleration profile of the two clocks that causes the observed difference in the time measurement rate of the two identical clocks.

It is an observed fact that the rate that clocks measure the passing of time varies, not only relative to changes in the local force of gravity as in the mountain top example, but also relative to changes in the rate that they are physically accelerated relative to an identical clock “at rest” as in the rocket ship example where the rest clocks stays put.

The explanation for the observed effects in the rocket ship example is due to the fact that the gravitational wave energy density (G-wave) profile of the space through which a clock on the rocket ship is being accelerated changes relative to the space where the rest clock quietly sits. Motion in any direction from the rest position changes the wave energy density of the waves encountered in that direction by the moving clock, or twin.

Remember, in the ISU, at any point in the profile of space there are gravitational waves coming and going in all directions, at all times, at the local speed of light. Directional motion therefore has an effect on the number of individual tiny wave convergences that will be encountered in that specific direction, relative to the number of wave convergences encountered when at rest relative to the local profile, because the moving object is moving into the on-coming waves and thus encounters more waves, and is moving away (at least to some extent) from waves from other directions. Keep that directional acceleration up long enough, and there will be a remarkable slowing in rate of time measured to have passed on the accelerated clock; more time will be shown to have passed on the rest clock than on the accelerated clock. That is the explanation for why the traveling twin ages slower than the stay at home twin in the “twins” thought experiment.

To put the “twins” experiment in terms of the contained energy density of the wave-particles involved, like we did in the mountain top example, we will have to consider the amount of time delay that is in play within the wave-particles that make up the composition of the two clocks. At the point of measurement on board the rocket ship, the accelerated clock reflects a directional increase in the presence of high energy density spots within the core of the wave-particles in motion because acceleration means there will be more on-coming wave convergences in that direction than there will be in the wave-particles that make up the composition of the clock at rest. More high energy density spots in the wave particles of the clock in motion causes a greater time delay measured by the clock, and also by the twin on the rocket ship. That clock and that twin will experience a greater time delay due to the slower rate that an accelerated object (clock or twin) measures the passing of time, relative to the rest clock, and that greater time delay converts to a slower rate that time is measured to be passing, and a slower rate of aging of the accelerated twin.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

To be continued ...

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #107

So now, since we understand the concepts of time delay, and the effect that acceleration (relative motion) has on mass, we also understand that wave-particles contain energy based on the number of quanta (high energy density spots) contained in their core.

We understand that generally, when relative motion exists between two wave-particles or objects, relative acceleration exists between them as well. However, take note that one of the objects can be at rest relative to the G-wave profile of space while the other has relative motion to that rest position, for talking purposes.


Such a rest position, relative to the G-wave profile, can exist in the ISU, given the definition of the gravitational wave energy density profile of space, i.e., when the inflowing G-wave density at a position in the medium of space is equal in all directions, that can be referred to literally as a rest position in space, akin to a
https://www.space.com/30302-lagrange-points.html
Lagrange point, but in deepest space, which we call the inter-arena corridors.

If two objects sit together at such a rest position in deepest space in the ISU model, and then one gets accelerated by any means, technically we can determine which of those two objects remains at rest and which is accelerated by measuring the frequency of inflowing gravitational wave energy component in all direction. If the object is at rest, the inflow will be equal from all directions, and if the object is accelerated relative to the rest position, there will be a net directional imbalance in the frequency of the inflowing gravitational waves.

We mention the scenario of “one at rest and one in motion” as a round about way to get to the point of addressing the fact that any acceleration causes more wave convergences to occur within the core arrangement of quanta in the wave-particle, and the net addition of quanta occurs in the forward direction of the physical layout of quanta in the core because of the increase in G-wave frequency from that direction in the G-wave profile of space.


Images

The following image was used earlier to depict the wave/particle duality which which is incorporate in all particles in the ISU model, and that structure solves the “mystery” and “weirdness” of the quantum effects where single particle, two slit, delayed choice set up produce interference patterns on the detector screens when ever there is any path to the detector from both slits.

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_26_07_17_1_52_40.jpeg


Let’s go to the next image which simply adds a depiction of some inflowing gravitational waves coming from all directions to replace the spherically out flowing wave energy component of the wave particle at rest:

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_26_07_17_4_41_02.jpeg


If you notice, in that image there are many wave intersections surrounding the wave-particle structure, and the occurrence of wave convergences are equally distributed around the high density core of the wave particle, further indication that this is a depiction of a wave-particle are rest in the G-wave profile of space.



In the following image there is a clear imbalance in the directional inflowing wave energy, indicating a massive source of out flowing gravitational wave energy in that direction. The light spots represent meaningful wave convergences that are forming predominantly in the direction of the distant massive source of wave energy:



https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_26_07_17_4_42_23.jpeg






This is where we address the affect that acceleration has on the number of quanta that occupy the high density core of the wave-particle in motion. Note the following image depicts a wave-particle that is being accelerated, and that during acceleration, there is a resulting higher number of high energy density spots (quanta) in the advance position in the arrangement of quanta in the core. Because the directionally inflowing gravitational wave energy is more than sufficient to replace the number of quanta that leave the core in the form of the spherically out flowing gravitational wave energy component of the wave-particle, the result is a net gain in the number of quanta, and that represents an increase in the mass of the wave-particle as it accelerates:

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_26_07_17_4_43_25.jpeg


The location of the wave-particle in the G-wave profile is always being refreshed as a result of the net inflowing and out flowing gravitational wave energy. The resulting shift of quanta is always in the direction the net highest source of inflowing gravitational wave energy, and so with each instance of a forward rearrangement of the quanta making up the high density core of the wave-particle, the position of the wave-particle changes in that direction in the G-wave profile . That change in position is the result of quantum gravity in the ISU model of cosmology.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #108

… You may know that the wave-particle concept of matter comes out of a new way of thinking about the universe that I call the Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) model. The ISU is a model of the universe that I have been expounding on since I showed up here eighteen months ago (May 2017). I am a self-proclaimed quantum thinker with no credentials to speak of, and so undertaking the task of presenting what I will portray as the new paradigm may go relatively unnoticed. That will give me the space and time it will take me to present the idea of quantum gravity as best I can, and I will eventually reach a point where I say, “There it is, what do you think?”.

I have reached the point in the thread where I have described what I portray as a layman level model of the universe that I call the Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) model. The reading I have done, and discussed here, about what is being said about quantum gravity points to the need for a new paradigm, and the ISU model is a version of what a new paradigm might look like in the raw. It is not being presented as a scientific model; that is left for the professionals to do.

However, while we wait, the solution to quantum gravity that I describe here will contain enough interesting ideas to be worth reading about by fellow TheNakedScientist members.

If you want to tackle it, I suggest you save some time and start from reply #88 through reply #107, and see what you think. I would be happy to defend it from a layman science enthusiast standpoint, so comment, criticize, and question it freely.

[guest46746]

Light passing through an obstatcle produces a diffraction, a Wave,  eg a spectum, a slit. As a photon enters into a slit it may or may not diffract. If the the photon diffracts, it creates an interference pattern. If a another photon follows directly after the diffracting photon and doesnot diffract, and instead immerses itself into the wave interference pattern of the preceeding photon while maintaining zero disturbance, it will registers itself on the screen as an intact photon traveling in a dispersed photon's diffraction pattern. The double slit in this experiment is not a valid blind. A single slit will also create an interference pattern, although not as intense as a double slit pattern. The double slit's produces a more intense pattern with additional interference fringes, but the fact remains that both register photon hits in an interference pattern over time

Why would one photon diffract and another would not passing through the same slit? Ask David Cooper about two particles sharing light information between themselves and it's effect on their acceleration. La Repteux also has an interesting theory on the particles having a push pull relationship particle in regards to mutual acceleration. Maybe they're both right! lol

My apologies. I do admire your conscientious work. 

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Light passing through an obstatcle produces a diffraction, a Wave,  eg a spectum, a slit.

Agreed, there are various effects produced, depending on the obstacle, and if the we are observing the wave state, the particle state, or the combination of both. The wave state has the ability to go through both slits, while the particle state can only go through just one slit, but it may go through neither slit if it is fully stopped by hitting the obstacle.

The ISU model’s wave-particle can display both states, and that is why it can explain interference patterns on the screen in the single particle/double slit set up. The broadened, flattened, curved plane wave, i.e., the wave state, goes through both slits, and it interferes with itself causing a disturbance in the space between the slits and the screen.

——————————————————————————————————————

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_19_11_18_3_08_29.jpeg


Image note: This drawing could be better, but the idea is that the wave portion of the photon wave-particle (the wave fronts) go through both slits, and interfer with each other between the slits and the detector screen creating preferred paths (convergence of the valleys of wave energy density) that the particle portion follows. The particle portions strike the detector screen and the interference between the slits and the screen is revealed by the image that accumulates on the screen after multiple single wave-particles are sent through the apparatus.


————————————————————————————————————-

However, the wave-particle structure of the photon creates two possible scenarios with different circumstances: 1) the wave portion goes through both slits, and the dense core portion goes through only one, producing a “hit” on the detector screen. 2) the wave portion goes through both slits and the dense core goes through neither slit, and no “hit” is recorded on the detector screen.



Given those two circumstances, when the core does not go through either slit, i.e., case 2, there is no “hit” registered on the screen. There logically is still disturbed space occurring between the slits and the screen caused by the wave portion that went through both slits and interfered with itself. We just don’t detect the disturbance because there was no successful core portion pass-through, and no “hit” on the detector screen.

However, case 1 represents the case where the flattened/broadened wave front potion of the wave-particle goes through both slits, while the dense core portion goes trough one or the other slit, registering a hit on the detector screen.

As a photon enters into a slit it may or may not diffract.

True.

If the the photon diffracts, it creates an interference pattern.

Yes, but let’s clarify that I am detailing the single particle/two slit set up, where only one particle is sent through the apparatus at a time. The “mystery” has always been about how the interference patten can form when particles are sent through one at a time, because in experiments where one slit is closed off, no interference pattern builds up, even after many particles are sent through.

I’m proposing that the ISU wave-particle structure explains the mystery because the wave portion of the wave-particle goes through both slits, interferes with itself causing a disturbance pattern between the slits, and that disturbance pattern causes the wave-particle’s dense core portion to get diffracted into an interference pattern when it is registered as a “hit” on the detector screen.

So getting back to your statement about the cases where the photon diffracts, it may be diffracted by partially hitting the edge of the slit, in which case it still finds its way through the slit and hits the screen. In those cases the hit on the screen isn’t in a direct line from the slit because of the “edge” diffraction. It is that diffraction that causes the fringes on the edge of the pattern on the screen.

There would also be cases where the photon doesn’t hit the edge of the slit, but instead passes through without being diffracted by the edge of the slit.

In those cases, the disturbance caused between the slits and the detector screen as the wave portion interferes with itself, also interferes with the path of the core portion, and keeps it from going straight through to the detector screen. In that case it is the disturbance between the slits and the screen that causes the core “hit” on the screen to be diffracted.

If a another photon follows directly after the diffracting photon and doesnot diffract, and instead immerses itself into the wave interference pattern of the preceeding photon while maintaining zero disturbance, it will registers itself on the screen as an intact photon traveling in a dispersed photon's diffraction pattern. The double slit in this experiment is not a valid blind. A single slit will also create an interference pattern, although not as intense as a double slit pattern. The double slit's produces a more intense pattern with additional interference fringes, but the fact remains that both register photon hits in an interference pattern over time.


Why would one photon diffract and another would not passing through the same slit? Ask David Cooper about two particles sharing light information between themselves and it's effect on their acceleration. La Repteux also has an interesting theory on the particles having a push pull relationship particle in regards to mutual acceleration. Maybe they're both right! lol.

Either that or the ISU wave-particle structure is sufficient to explain the observations.

My apologies. I do admire your conscientious work.

You are kind to say so. 

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

It has been an experience in quantum thinking to get this close to a reasonable point in describing the main mechanics involved in the ISU solution to quantum gravity. After a couple of days of being here at this point though, I miss the mental activity of being in the “quantum thinking” mode, and working on expanding the ISU/QG scenarios.

No problem though, because quantum thinking never ends for me, it just builds on itself, with the two-steps forward, one step back experience that you are familiar with if you have ever climbed a sand-dune or trudged through a rising snow drift, lol.

I’ll feel better if I add some thinking here that will clarify some concepts included in the thread, and then next time I update the ISU model, and/or its proposed solution to quantum gravity, these details will be in the baseline, and hopefully new and clearer words will be put together at that time.

The one quantum thought important to quantum gravity that could stand to be emphasized and elaborated on to start with is this:

There are no solid objects in the ISU, meaning that nothing has infinite density. Even in the tiniest increment of matter, there are no little hard pieces that are solid through and through. The tiniest bit of matter, the smallest increment of mass that we call a high energy density spot in the nomenclature of the ISU model, is composed of the convergence of a huge number of tiny gravitational wave fronts. A wave front carries energy through space, and its presence is indicated by a differential in the energy density in front of and behind the advancing wave front, but there is nothing solid in a physical sense to a tiny individual wave front at the foundational level referred to as the oscillating wave energy background of space. Those wave fronts are not individually substantial features in regard to the presence of the mass that is composed of them because they don’t qualify as “massive” in the ISU model until the convergence that is composed of them reaches the status of a standing wave pattern whose presence is maintained within the gravitational wave energy density profile of space by an interplay of the two components of mass, synchronized inflowing and out flowing gravitational wave fronts that give the particular convergence the status of a high energy density spot, which means that their density will slow down the pass-through gravitational wave fronts long enough, i.e., with a sufficient “time delay” associated with it to allow for the directional inflow from the profile of space to supply replacement wave energy equal to the spherically out flowing gravitational wave energy component during the time delay interval that is characteristic of the standing wave pattern that represents a qualified quantum of energy, i.e., to establish a high energy density spot that adds to the mass of a particle or object.

Image: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_26_07_17_2_22_44.jpeg



This is an image of a space that contains a huge number of converging gravitational wave fronts in which exists a hypothetical wave-particle, a standing wave pattern with four quanta, moving through the profile of space in the direction of the red arrow, as a result of the net highest directional inflow of gravitational wave energy from the direction of the yellow arrow; quantum gravity in action. This particular wave-particle may itself even have a history of having been established as a result of the natural laws of physics that relate to the decay of more massive exotic particles that reach stability during the natural decay process of the massive hot dense ball of energy that emerges from the collapse/bang of a big crunch; keep in mind that the formation of big crunches out the convergences of multiple expanding big bang arena waves are common place events across the infinite and eternal big bang arena landscape of the greater universe.

I purposefully wrote that without taking a breath, so if anyone wants to contemplate that audacious “chunk” of text, or wonder enough to judge it, feel free to intervene, but I feel better having just written it, lol. I’ll come back and break it down into more acceptable word bites later, and maybe go back and fold it into the thread in a way that no one will remember it in this form.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Another quantum thought, worthy of special mention in regard to the ISU model, and the solution to quantum gravity described in this thread (and that I may take the time to fold into the earlier posts to make it more detailed and complete), is this:

Wave-Particles and objects composed of wave-particles are quantized in the ISU, meaning that the amount of wave energy in a single quantum is dependent on the various meaningful levels of gravitational wave energy density referred to in the model, like 1) referring back to images - the foundational oscillating background at the lowest level of gravitational wave energy where each convergence produces a tiny quantized Huygens wavelet or third wave, 2) image - high density spot, like the high energy density gravitational wave energy convergences that represent the quantum increments that wave-particles are composed of, and 3) image - big bang arena landscape of the greater universe, like the big crunches that reach critical capacity and collapse/bang into hot dense balls of wave energy that expand, cool, and decay into the more stable (less exotic) wave-particles that we know to exist and that make up everything in the presently expanded state our observable big bang arena (the observable known universe).

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_25_07_17_11_46_46.jpeg


Are there greater and lessor levels of order where quanta of greater or lessor increments of energy come into play? Not necessarily, according to the ISU model, which directly addresses just those three levels. But then, who is to say that there aren’t levels of order made up of multiple big bang arenas that naturally clump together into some quantum increment at a much more massive level than the big crunch/big bang level (maybe a SuperCrunch/SuperBang level), or at the lower energy end, maybe micro-density level spots that organize into quantum increments at even tinier level of order, and that in turn make up the high energy density spots that wave-particles are composed of (maybe a quantum mini-spot that occurs in the quantum action process preceding the formation of the meaningful high energy density spots).

I say those added levels are “not necessary” because the three known, and or speculated levels of order are sufficient, based on the scientific observations associated with the ISU model. The ISU is governed by the thresholds and limits associated with the quantum increments (quanta) of which known particles and objects are composed, and the necessary increments, smaller and larger, that are logical axiomatic necessities, like the high energy density convergences of the oscillating background, and the big bang arenas that populate the landscape of the greater universe.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #113


My last post pointed out that in my quantum gravity model, quantization takes place at various levels of gravitational wave energy density. The most obvious level of quantization is at the wave-particle level, where wave-particles are composed of gravitational wave energy in quantum increments, and where the process of quantum action orchestrates quantization and quantum gravity; wave-particles make up all of the objects we see, all massive objects are composed of wave-particles.


There are two other major levels that I focus on and that I discuss in the ISU model to highlight where gravitational wave convergences group and form meaningful quanta. For this post, the one under discussion is the foundational level of the oscillating gravitational wave energy background, whose primary wave action serves to assist the advance of wave energy through space; it is akin to Christian Huygens’ concept of pinhole wave propagation (see reply #99 for a nice recap). The tiny wave convergences oscillate at the foundational level and the oscillations interact with the more meaningful wave fronts that pass through, and each pinhole point along the advancing wave front is advanced by “third wave” action. Don’t tell me you don’t recall what I mean by third wave action, lol; that just means you need a refresher, and didn’t go back to reply #99 yet.



After having written about the ISU for years, little things come to mind that would be logical questions for members to have, if you read my musings over time. So even though no one really is paid enough to think too hard about the volumes of word salad that I toss up, I do continue to speculate .


First, think empty space, and don’t get the idea that there is even an iota of empty space anywhere in the entire greater universe; there are just variances in the energy density brought to each point by multiple passing gravitational wave fronts. Remember the saying that there is no empty space in the ISU (not between arenas, not between wave-particles, not between quanta within wave-particles, and not separating wave fronts within the quanta that form the high energy density spots within the complex standing wave-patterns that make up wave-particles).


In the ISU, all there is, is gravitational wave energy traversing space, and in order to advance through space, propagation of every gravitational wave front requires point by point advance, via the tiniest third wave action, and that is made possible by the oscillating wave energy background. Wave convergences entail tiny time delays in the advance of the wave fronts, point by point, and the duration of the tiniest of those delays is sufficient to allow a brief period of energy density equalization to occur behind the advancing wave front, that allows for a synchronization between wave front advance, and point by point changes in the gravitational wave energy density profile of space. But that is getting into Advanced ISU Speculation.


After having thought about it for some time, a point in space contains the cumulative amount of energy brought there by all of the gravitational wave fronts passing that point from all directions.


Given that the energy carried by directional gravitational wave fronts net out in terms of the accumulated amount of energy at any point, arriving from all spherical directions, there is an extremely high probability that there will be an imbalance in the net directional amount of wave energy accumulated at each point in space, at any point in time.


Those point by point imbalances, all taken together, constitute the whole of space, and the “whole of space” perfectly describes the gravitational wave energy density profile of space.


It is worth mentioning from that these gravitational wave fronts are always in constant action, advancing through the oscillating foundational background at the speed of light and gravity, one oscillation at time. [humor]Wow, poke your finger into space anywhere, and you might expect all of that fast action to inflict pain, lol.[/humor ]


The new content though, is simply that multiple wave fronts, each carrying energy through space, are converging at every point in space, and so the hints of mass that form as a result of each gravitational wave front convergence produce an imbalance of inflowing wave energy at each point in space, and the directional imbalance has all of the information necessary for the gravitational wave energy density profile of space to orchestrate the motion of all objects in space.


The process of quantum gravity accounts for that motion, and I have tried to described in this thread, point by point, how high energy density spots that I continually refer to as quanta, form and disburse in the local space within and surrounding wave-particle-standing-wave-patterns, and that quantum action causes those pattens to move through space.


This means that complex standing wave patterns that represent the momentary position of mass, and the instant by instant motion of the mass, can be seen in terms of an incremental formation and reformation of the mass of an object, quantum by quantum, wave-particle by wave-particle, as it traverses the foundational medium of space, in the ISU model.


Would you say that is continuous motion or discrete motion? Is quantum gravity causing continuous motion of mass through space, or does the tiny quantum “third wave” action of wave convergence by wave convergence, qualify as discrete increments of motion of mass through space?


Any decision on that question should take into consideration that the foundational oscillating action that is making everything move through the medium of space supports variable levels of density produced by many multiple wave front convergences at each point, as meaningful wave fronts advance through it. But is the oscillating background itself moving, or simply accommodating the motion of more substantial groupings of wave convergences?

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #114

Given that the energy carried by directional gravitational wave fronts net out in terms of the accumulated amount of energy at any point, arriving from all spherical directions, there is an extremely high probability that there will be an imbalance in the net directional amount of wave energy accumulated at each point in space, at any point in time.


Those point by point imbalances, all taken together, constitute the whole of space, and the “whole of space” perfectly describes the gravitational wave energy density profile of space.

If you think about natural forces applicable to the “whole of space” and, considering that the oscillating/foundational level of order fills the whole of space, then at the foundational level is where I expect to see the fundamental forces arise; there should be an explanation for the fundamental forces right there along with the explanation of quantum gravity at I am speculating about at that level.

Along that line of reasoning, the quantum action we are talking about in the ISU model suggests that when two (or more) wave fronts converge, they generate a third wave in the overlap space that continues to accumulate wave energy until the overlap space itself reaches a quantum of energy (relative to the local energy density environment). The third wave then, continues to expand spherically as its wave front advances at the local speed of light and gravity, following behind the advancing wave fronts of its “parent” waves.

Following that thought, the action is strikingly similar at each level of quantization, the big bang arena level, the wave particle level, and right down at the oscillating background level that fills all space; a “sameness” in the action processes across all scales.

That makes the role that the wave fronts play in the quantization process one of the common denominators among those levels. Conceptually, the wave front is a spherically expanding differential between the energy density behind the wave front, and the energy density in front of the wave front. The differential at the front marks where the meaningful pinhole action of wave advance is taking place.

Therefore, a new pinhole wave is a third wave occurring at the level of the oscillating background, and the occurrence of that new third wave involves the motion of the wave front as it advances through the space in front of the front.

The energy density behind the front is continually trending toward a state of equalization between the higher wave energy density behind the wave front, and the lower wave energy density in front of the wave front. As the spherical wave front advances, it is incorporating more lower density wave oscillations into the expanding volume of the advancing wave front, and the wave energy density behind that advancing wave front is therefore continually in a process of wave energy density equalization. That means that there is equalization going on behind the advancing front, while there is interruption of the equalization going on in front of the advancing wave front (and therefore behind the front of the other parent wave). It is at that line of differential between the two opposing fronts that the pinhole third wave action is occurring. The existence of a process of equalization behind the font, and the third wave action at the front, establishes the location of the advancing wave front and characterizes the conditions in effect at the point of the advancing front.

 What point is being made with this post?


I'm suggesting the presence of an electric force along the spherical wave front as it advances, and the presence of a magnetic force perpendicular to the advancing wave front, i.e., the question of whether a moving wave front produces electromagnetism as third waves are produced by the convergence of two or more “parent waves”.

Is that idea worthy of being considered as a foundational explanation for particle charge, and the fundamental explanation for electromagnetism? I say that rhetorically to indicate that it is a topic under consideration, that could fill a gap in the details of what I call the ISU model. It is not intended to imply that there is anything wrong with the generally accepted explanations of the physics of electric currents or the magnetic fields that they produce, as described in trusted sources, but it does bug me that I have not yet found the generally accepted explanation for the cause of particle charge in my layman level review of some of those sources.














5/20/20 14000 views

[phil_mansell]

Consider this, Sun is a big Particle, with electron floating around in its orbit (One of them is Earth).

Why ?

It has been theorized that energy at sub-atomic level can be released and absorbed in discreet indivisible units called Quanta (which is what all objects emits). However, when the electrons get excited or de-excited they absorb or emit a specific quanta of energy which would mean they leap from one orbit to another (Big-Bang can be explained through this).

Now consider this in the 'big canvas', the energy coming out from the Sun to entire Solar System. Since the energy level hasnt variated a lot (which needs to be in the hugest amounts) the planets and other bodies remain in its orbit as electrons without inhibiting the space in between.

Considering the Energy Convergance law, its likely to be that earth also gives out energy to space, but its very less and hence 'long-wave radiation'.

We know that Neutrino carry mass and when they hit the earth, they should replace out electron which comes out as an electromagnetic wave. This is supported by earth's core which is made of iron and hence loosing electron efficiently causing the electromagnetic force to blurt out through virtual photons.

Everyone knows that gravity acts upon anything with mass. Consider this, if we are made up of neutrino's we shall exert our presence towards the electron, and hence are pulled towards the core of the mass object.

This would lead to Quantum Gravity.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

...

Everyone knows that gravity acts upon anything with mass. Consider this, if we are made up of neutrino's we shall exert our presence towards the electron, and hence are pulled towards the core of the mass object.

This would lead to Quantum Gravity.

Perhaps so. To get a better grasp of your scenario, are you envisioning a universe that has always existed, or one with a beginning?


















17131, 17260, 17450, 18681, 19219,20603,

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

...

Everyone knows that gravity acts upon anything with mass. Consider this, if we are made up of neutrino's we shall exert our presence towards the electron, and hence are pulled towards the core of the mass object.

This would lead to Quantum Gravity.

Perhaps so. To get a better grasp of your scenario, are you envisioning a universe that has always existed, or one with a beginning?

17131, 17260, 17450, 18681, 19219,20603,

That conversation with Phil went nowhere, but it appears he went elsewhere. Too bad because I think he was about to disclose the nature of quantum gravity.

My response to the question I asked Phil is that the universe has always existed, i.e., there was no beginning. And I feel comfortable adding that space and time are infinite and eternal. Anyone disagree?

20608,20615,20628,

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

That conversation with Phil went nowhere, but it appears he went elsewhere. Too bad because I think he was about to disclose the nature of quantum gravity.

My response to the question I asked Phil is that the universe has always existed, i.e., there was no beginning. And I feel comfortable adding that space and time are infinite and eternal. Anyone disagree?

It is hard to disagree with those conclusions, because any alternative, such as "something from nothing", or the Supernatural cannot be supported by evidence, but lets take the Issue of a beginning from another perspective. If, as I speculate, the universe is infinite and eternal, and given that the expansion of the observable universe is evident, logic seems to demand an event marking the origin of the expansion of the observable universe. So there would be a difference between the universe as a whole with no beginning, and the observable universe starting with an initial event. The part we observe indicates a local Big Bang, and so we come to a point of looking for the cause of a local Big Bang within an infinite and eternal universe.


20685,

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

At this point, I'm tempted to say, "You have to think Big", lol. But I have to fall back on my earlier statement, that anything finite is almost nothing, almost never, almost nowhere, relative to the Infinite. And I capitalize the word Infinite since it is a name I give to one of the most significant characteristics of the universe as I see it. I think I could apply the same logic to the word Eternal as well, when describing the universe; Infinite and Eternal are equals.


20696,21190,21328,

[Origin]

At this point, I'm tempted to say, "You have to think Big"

I am tempted to say, "why don't you start a blog and stop posting drivel and wasting space in this forum".

[ambertcarrero]

Awesome discussions!

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/699462-you-can-please-some-of-the-people-all-of-the


“You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.”

Sort of like, "Is the cat dead or alive?".

Schrödinger's cat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrodinger%27s_cat



22205,