[DoctorBeaver]

The two are kept separate probably because physicists like to think of velocities within the universe as distinct from the expansion of the universe, but the effect will be similar, as you say.

You mean I was right!? Sort of? Ish? Kinda?

[Vern]

He is interesting
And it seems as he have worked on his paper quite a while.
What did you mean by a 'three dimensional bell curve'?
That it would express itself as a 'particle'?

Here's that graphic I said I would make for you. It is a little distorted and not exactly right but maybe you can get the drift of it.

The surrounding grid represents the field; the displacement from the normal plane represents electric and magnetic amplitude; one polarity up; the other polarity down; it doesn't matter which.

The point I was trying to make is that with this model, you see both a particle and a wave.

[ichatfilipina]

planet size will not expand anymore, but the galaxy or asteroid it does. We knows only our universe or the 9 planets. Then NASA discovered the newest planet which is planet Nibiru or Planet Eris it was not align the 9 planets and no direction.. What if the newest planet will collide the other planet. We dont know what will happen to be but it is possible the collision of the planets. We knows already that planet Nibiru has no direction, it was far from our universe then went near to planet pluto and planet Jupiter. Planet Nibiru has no direction and no alignment of rings.

[DoctorBeaver]

planet size will not expand anymore, but the galaxy or asteroid it does. We knows only our universe or the 9 planets. Then NASA discovered the newest planet which is planet Nibiru or Planet Eris it was not align the 9 planets and no direction.. What if the newest planet will collide the other planet. We dont know what will happen to be but it is possible the collision of the planets. We knows already that planet Nibiru has no direction, it was far from our universe then went near to planet pluto and planet Jupiter. Planet Nibiru has no direction and no alignment of rings.

OK, if you say so. Now would you care to explain how it is relevant to the expansion of the universe and the Red Shift?

[DoctorBeaver]

Don - that's a nice graphic but I'm not sure I understand exactly what it's meant to represent. I can see the wave but which part of the graphic is the particle?

[Vern]

Don - that's a nice graphic but I'm not sure I understand exactly what it's meant to represent. I can see the wave but which part of the graphic is the particle?

The points up and down represent the positive and negative electromagnetic amplitude swings, which occur sinusoidally but extend outwardly in amplitude as the inverse squared. When I applied the outward extension, the sine wave was distorted, so the graphic isn't quite correct.

The centre of the bumps up and down are saturated electrically and magnetically. By saturated I mean the maximum possible that space can support. The transition from the flat plane to the top of the bump interacts as if it is a particle. The spacial area around the peak-amplitude bumps interact as if it is a wave.

Here's another copy for quick reference.

[yor_on]

Nice image Vern.
You seem to be quite handy with C
(more than one way:)

This 'saturation maximum' of a photon that you are referring too.
Is that how you see it acting as a 'particle' then?

And would 'matter' then be constituted of 'saturation maxima' bound together, how?

-------

To me it seems that you can't differ between the expansion pace's redshift, if it's there, and Doppler redshift?
It will be a guess, however educated it might be.

Or?

[DoctorBeaver]

Vern - I apologise for having credited Don with that graphic instead of you.

Thank you for the explanation. I think I understand.

[Vern]

This 'saturation maximum' of a photon that you are referring too.
Is that how you see it acting as a 'particle' then?

Yes; I thought of the saturated points as appearing to be particles; however; Dr. Kemp convinced me that it was the transition from zero amplitude to the maximum amplitude that would interact as a particle. According to Kemp, mass is electromagnetic change. So it is the change that makes the difference. The saturated amplitude simply gives us the quantum phenomena.

The state of energy called matter would be composed of these things locked in resonant patterns.

[Vern]

Vern - I apologise for having credited Don with that graphic instead of you.

Thank you for the explanation. I think I understand.

Hey; no problem; I'm sure Don_1 could have done it; but I suspect Don_1 has a different view of the composition of matter. []

[DoctorBeaver]

This 'saturation maximum' of a photon that you are referring too.
Is that how you see it acting as a 'particle' then?

Yes; I thought of the saturated points as appearing to be particles; however; Dr. Kemp convinced me that it was the transition from zero amplitude to the maximum amplitude that would interact as a particle. According to Kemp, mass is electromagnetic change. So it is the change that makes the difference. The saturated amplitude simply gives us the quantum phenomena.

The state of energy called matter would be composed of these things locked in resonant patterns.

I'm unsure about that. There are many types of particle with different mass, different charge, and that are affected by different forces. How does that theory account for that? Does it just apply to fermions?

Does it mean that different amplitude accounts for the difference in the mass of particles? How do you get different particle types? What about spin?

[Vern]

To me it seems that you can't differ between the expansion pace's redshift, if it's there, and Doppler redshift?
It will be a guess, however educated it might be.

Or?

Yes; there does seem to be a problem there. In the past I've noticed that when this kind of speculation runs rampant in a previously accepted theory, it is usually the prelude to a more profound change in the theory.

[Vern]

I'm unsure about that. There are many types of particle with different mass, different charge, and that are affected by different forces. How does that theory account for that? Does it just apply to fermions?

Dr. Kemp and I worked out all the elementary particles as well as gravity and the strong forces. But I don't want to hijack this thread. I have a thread in the New Theories forum that would probably be more appropriate if we want to discuss this more.

[DoctorBeaver]

Thanks, Vern.

[yor_on]

In Einstein’s theory, gravity is as an attractive force so, in general relativity, the expansion should slow down depending on the density of matter and energy in spacetime. As it doesn't seem to do so, we will have to look at the possibility of other forms of energy producing a repulsive gravity.

Jack Sarfatti see that 'energy' as being 'dark energy', this apparently is allowed by General relativity, even though belonging to 'special cases'. To explain the effects of dark energy he then look at vacuum energy, as it seems mathematically equivalent to the 'cosmological constant' (Einstein 1917). The idea behind this is a so called “vacuum coherence” which then would be a inflation field in 'disguise'. And the idea behind that is then based on Dirac’s theory of the electron, and would then be a similar effect to how a normal metal becomes a superconductor.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0602022 (2006) and http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.0032 (2009)

This is kind of scary in fact
Reading you Chris I commented almost the same as this idea with the exception that it then might be similar to 'virtual particles' as it would give an effect without 'materialising'. Reminds me of an earlier post in where I mentioned the 'unreal' significance of 'best guesses' when done in good faith

Yep, spooky stuff indeed

----------

"take all of the red shift and leave none for Doppler. happy It reminds me of the government."

Ah Vern, you redneck you

[Vern]

The emergence of gravity as a retro-causal post-inflation macro-quantum-coherent holographic vacuum Higgs-Goldstone field

Authors: Jack Sarfatti, Creon Levit

The title is certainly an exercise in mental gymnastics []

Edit: Maybe I should say verbal gymnastics.

[DoctorBeaver]

The emergence of gravity as a retro-causal post-inflation macro-quantum-coherent holographic vacuum Higgs-Goldstone field

What the hell does that mean? Is it even English?

[yor_on]

I took the liberty to translate it into proper english with the help of a synonym wordbook.
It should be so much clearer now...

Original
"The emergence of gravity as a retro-causal post-inflation macro-quantum-coherent holographic vacuum Higgs-Goldstone field"

And the final definition.

"The outgrowth of solemnity as a ex post facto-causative postal service-splashiness  mega-measure-tenacious holographic vacuity Higgs-Goldstone theatre."

[Vern]

Aaah; much better []

[DoctorBeaver]

Yes, I understand it now too.