[Vern]

Measured reality is the final arbiter. I hope I don't deviate from that.

[witsend (OP)]

OK, guys, I'm trying this from an entirely new tangent.  Dark matter is proven.  It accounts for approximately 90% of the mass of all galaxies.  It has been proven and revealed through gravitational lensing.  It's authority is pretty absolute - being Michio Kaku, Sean Carroll, and somebody? Ellis and an experimentalist - from Fermilab - Bauer.  I think he's Don Bauer?  In any event.  Easily googled.  It was first seen in the 1920's and again measured in the 60's by some woman.  Sorry forget her name too.  It can only be accounted for by the identification of some particle that emits no light.  Gravitational lensing was the final measured proof.  This was done with the advent of Hubble telescopes.

It definitely creates a gravitational field so it has mass.  But it has no properties consistent with any known particles.  It may, however, be a wimp - weakly interacting massive particle, or a MACHO which is more like an imploded star and can be seen as dark spaces in some galaxies.  It causes effects that fly in the face of classical physics. It is the thing that holds galaxies together where the outer boundaries, the outskirts, so to speak, have a constant velocity in defiance of classical requirement.  In other words the entire galaxy spins at a constant velocity - unlike the Newtonian, or Einsteinian requirement for slower velocities from Pluto - on the outskirts of our solar system, compared to Mercury - at its centre?

This specifically does not fit in within a classical framework.  I could go into this with a bit of research - I've got a lot on it.  But would this be enough of an exception for you guys to consider that the electromagnetic force does not explain all?

EDIT Measured reality the final arbiter - Vern?  This is measured.

[jerrygg38]

Measured reality is the final arbiter. I hope I don't deviate from that.

The energy level of the dot-waves is too low to be measured. Therefore in this instance we cannot use measurements alone to define reality.

[jerrygg38]

OK, guys, I'm trying this from an entirely new tangent.  Dark matter is proven.  It accounts for approximately 90% of the mass of all galaxies.  It has been proven and revealed through gravitational lensing.  It's authority is pretty absolute - being Michio Kaku, Sean Carroll, and somebody? Ellis and an experimentalist - from Fermilab - Bauer.  I think he's Don Bauer?  In any event.  Easily googled.  It was first seen in the 1920's and again measured in the 60's by some woman.  Sorry forget her name too.  It can only be accounted for by the identification of some particle that emits no light.  Gravitational lensing was the final measured proof.  This was done with the advent of Hubble telescopes.

It definitely creates a gravitational field so it has mass.  But it has no properties consistent with any known particles.  It may, however, be a wimp - weakly interacting massive particle, or a MACHO which is more like an imploded star and can be seen as dark spaces in some galaxies.  It causes effects that fly in the face of classical physics. It is the thing that holds galaxies together where the outer boundaries, the outskirts, so to speak, have a constant velocity in defiance of classical requirement.  In other words the entire galaxy spins at a constant velocity - unlike the Newtonian, or Einsteinian requirement for slower velocities from Pluto - on the outskirts of our solar system, compared to Mercury - at its centre?

This specifically does not fit in within a classical framework.  I could go into this with a bit of research - I've got a lot on it.  But would this be enough of an exception for you guys to consider that the electromagnetic force does not explain all?

EDIT Measured reality the final arbiter - Vern.  This is measured.

What time is it where you are? I thought you packed it in for the night.
In any event the universe is full of my dot-waves. Therefore it is full of huge amounts of mass. I have no problem with the dark matter measurements. They indicate huge amounts of mass due to subparticles which have energy levels too small to be readily detected.

[witsend (OP)]

It's 2.24 am. by the computer clock.  I'm a cat napper and a chronic insomniac.  I usually spend my late nights chatting to a whole lot of science friends in the States.  Sometimes I chat to guys in Australia.  This intercontinental link has filled my nights for the last 10 years.  It's only now that I've found a forum. 

Jerry - your dot waves are too general.  They do anything and everything to fit in everywhere.  It's like saying - wind is a dot wave and so is that mountain.  It does not explain how the wind may have structured the mountain.  Edit.  And nor does it fit in with your requirement for Maxwell explaining all that is manifest.

[jerrygg38]

It's 2.24 am. by the computer clock.  I'm a cat napper and a chronic insomniac.  I usually spend my late nights chatting to a whole lot of science friends in the States.  Sometimes I chat to guys in Australia.  This intercontinental link has filled my nights for the last 10 years.  It's only now that I've found a forum. 

Jerry - your dot waves are too general.  They do anything and everything to fit in everywhere.  It's like saying - wind is a dot wave and so is that mountain.  It does not explain how the wind may have structured the mountain.  Edit.  And nor does it fit in with your requirement for Maxwell explaining all that is manifest.

Yes. They fit in everywhere because the entire universe is composed of dot-waves. They fit maxwells equations. They fit the dark matter. They fit gravity.

[witsend (OP)]

Sorry Jerrygg3 - I did'nt explain what I meant.  Firstly regarding your dot waves.  I have no trouble with the concepts.  I like it.  As I understand it there is a separation of the two monopoles into different time dimensions with matter structured as an interplay between the two.  There's nothing wrong with this. It's a really elegant conception.  It suits you ideally, because it satisfies your mathematical skills and it ALSO describes an infinite potential.  But then.  Come that interplay, matter seems to follow nature's rules, as you and Vern point out.  And both you and Vern, also as I understand it, state that Maxwell's Laws now kick in to explain that interaction.  In other words, presumeably, the interaction between these dimensions is described by the electromagnetic dynamic. NO PROBLEMS with this, conceptually.  And no quarrel with the electromagnetic dynamic.  Nor can I argue your equations.  So I can't comment on the feasibility of your dot waves except to say that it's a stunning concept.

But where I can comment is this.  How does the interplay between those two time dimensions also encourage the interplay, in whatever time dimension, to produce the strong and weak nuclear force, gravity and the electromagnetic force.  If the background is structured with dots, but Maxwell explains everything needed in this dimension - why bother with the dots? EDIT - Except to be loosely applied when Maxwell's theory doesn't explain all. They do not have relevance outside of that construct of a dualistic universe.

My object, which is hugely presumptuous given my lack of training, is to propose that LINK.  And my universal background is not divided between plus and minus.  It is cohesive - smooth.  Really, really smooth.  Again, the difference is that I'm actually trying to point to an interplay between this background and the manifest so that I can account for the strong and weak forces et al.

EDIT - I've just seen that I've now changed your birthdate year to 1903.  I'm doing good.  I've made you Father Time itself.  Sorry Jerry.  I didn't change it because I thought you'd be amused.  Did you see the previous post?  I made it 1939.  I didn't change that either, and suggested I could keep it up with each consecutive post until I'd given back your youth. [] 

[witsend (OP)]

I can split the electric and magnetic field into different dimensions. That is okay with me. I cannot split the interactions between the fields because we have not seen such occurrences.Jerrygg38

If you can split the electric and magnetic field into different dimensions, then why can't I?  That's exactly what I'm trying to point to.  Here's the concept - yet again.

First is the primary magnetic field.  Magnetic dipoles, 2c.  Zipons.  It shapes the known universe into a toroid.  Lots and lots of really thin strings. Very smooth field -  perfect distribution of charge so balance is absolute.  A neutral particle making a perfectly neutral field.  In fact the zipon's velocity is 2c and the field's velocity is 2c.  It just seems to be unmoving smooth empty space.  The flexible lattice structure behind the manifest universe.  Then.  A singularity.  One of the strings break.  The string unravels and collapses onto itself.  It forms a nebulus.  It seems to appear out of nowhere.  The nebulus still comprises these dipoles.  But they've changed.  They've either become TOO BIG - because their energy/momentum is changed into mass.  Or they've become TOO SMALL - because their mass is changed into energy/momentum.

That part of the nebulus flux that is now evident - we can photograph it - belongs to our dimensions of visible matter.  Definitely within our own measurable dimensions.  BUT the primary magnetic field cannot even see it.  It goes back to the BOUNDARY CONSTRAINT.  The primary magnetic field just closes ranks and IGNORES the nebulus.  The nebulus and the primary field operate in different dimensions.  They only share the same space dimensions.

But. The particles in that nebulus' flux, are actually just BIG zipons.  I've called them truants.  They're magnets and cluster like all magnets do.  But magnets always move to find a REST STATE.  Some condition of balance.  The whole of the structure in that first string is lost.  So they move in small steps to try and get back some structure.

Here's what happens.  Some truants can't find anything to attach to.  When the energy that was introduced when the string was broken, is finally expended, then the truant simply loses mass, regains velocity until it is the same mass/size as the zipons in the field.  It slots in.  Lost forever. A nuance - that has disappeared from our own measureable dimensions.

Some truants are lucky enough to find a partner in the smaller faster truant.  They move together.  But while the one gains velocity and loses mass, the other gains mass and loses velocity.  They meet.  But they meet when they're in the boundary constraints of the field.  They have an opposing charge to the field.  The field repels them.  The one truant again becomes big, the other again becomes small and they move forward again, at half the speed of the field, being the speed of light.  This accommodates an infinite variety of frequencies but ensures that photons then only ever move at precisely light speed.  We still see it doing what you, Vern, Maxwell, and everybody knows it to be doing.  It still conforms to measured evidence.  The ultimate arbiter.  BUT.  This model proposes that the actual propulsion of the photon is due to an interaction with the field.  The actual energy between the two truants only allow for an orbit with each other.  Lots of energy in the former.  Not much in the latter.

Please, please, please, Jerrygg38.  Try and read this. It's almost the entire foundational basis of the field model.

[Vern]

I try to avoid multiple dimensions, virtual anything, and periods in which the laws of nature did not hold. I suspect those are just crutches used by advocates to avoid otherwise falsifying situations. If I have a premise and find that it can not possibly fit in this dimension, I could either accept the fact as falsification; or I could invent another dimension to save the day.

Then if I have a premise about particles as the medium of force conveyance and find impossible situations for that scenario, I can invent virtual particles to save the day.

Then if I have a premise about the birth of the universe and find that it can not work within the present laws of nature, I can invent a period of time in which the laws of nature did not hold and save the day.


Edit: And if you become adept at saving the day like this you may even be awarded the Nobel prize, as happened in the cases cited [] Second edit: I don't know about multiple dimensions; I don't recall a Nobel for that.

[witsend (OP)]

Hi Vern,  I missed this.  Actually it's not been posted long.  Speak your mind. Do you think that the introduction of more dimensions is simply nonsense - some sort of unncessary pomposity?  It actually IS critical.  I'm very aware of your positings throughout - even in discussion with Jerrygg38 - where you express your objections.  But it is necessay.  I thought the way I described it made it too simple for anyone to accuse it of some form of exotic abstractions.  I CANNOT work out your objection to it.   

[jerrygg38]

I can split the electric and magnetic field into different dimensions. That is okay with me. I cannot split the interactions between the fields because we have not seen such occurrences.Jerrygg38

If you can split the electric and magnetic field into different dimensions, then why can't I?  That's exactly what I'm trying to point to.  Here's the concept - yet again.
Please, please, please, Jerrygg38.  Try and read this. It's almost the entire foundational basis of the field model.

Yes I read it. You can certainly say that your theory drives the universe. Many others can say that their theory drives the universe. The actual driving force of the universe can be so complex that no-one can really think of it.
  Once in a dream I saw a very unusual multi-dimensional shape. My mind could see it. It was the most beautiful thing I ever saw. In my dream I was able to grasp something unusual. When I awoke I tried to make a sculpture of the multi-dimensional sculpture. I could not. My mind could see more than three dimensions but my hands could not produce it. It was impossible to sculpture.
  That tells me that we are really multi-dimensional creatures. However except by math we cannot visualize such things. Therefore we are limited by our minds and our senses.
  What you propose is beyond our ability to visualize. You produce a theory of possibilities. One thing I have found over 28 years is that I can always find multiple possibilities for anything I write.
  Thus I must rely upon the experimental data. For example the magnetic moment of the proton and neutron has been measured. No one has been able to calculate it. Therefore in my theory I calculate it. The theory could be wrong but at least I have a tangeable result.
   Your struggle to understand beyond our abilities does not relate to anything we can measure. It does not explain the physical world any different than what is already known. You have embarked upon a difficult task.
  I do not attempt to produce any multi-dim3ensional analysis. I merely state that there are differential dimensions. It is the same dimensions but merely back slightly in time or forward in time. I do not try to go beyond that simple concept.
  My multi light speed universe merely coexists with our universe. In general the further out you go the higher the light speed.
  However that could also be explained by a density of dot-waves. The higher the density, the slower the light speed. The lower the density the faster the reaction travels between dots.
  Thus I do not attempt an actual multi-dimensional analysis as do the string theorists. They have produced fancy math but to what avail?
   The problem with your theory is:
  What practical application do you have for your theory?

   It is my hope for my theory that we will undersand the proton better and produce a proton energy source.

[jerrygg38]

I try to avoid multiple dimensions, virtual anything, and periods in which the laws of nature did not hold. I suspect those are just crutches used by advocates to avoid otherwise falsifying situations. If I have a premise and find that it can not possibly fit in this dimension, I could either accept the fact as falsification; or I could invent another dimension to save the day.

Then if I have a premise about particles as the medium of force conveyance and find impossible situations for that scenario, I can invent virtual particles to save the day.

Then if I have a premise about the birth of the universe and find that it can not work within the present laws of nature, I can invent a period of time in which the laws of nature did not hold and save the day.

Yes Vern, the practical engineer is showing in you. It is an advantage since we are used to buiding things which work.

[witsend (OP)]

Vern.  Where do you think nebulae came from - if not from the 'void'?  Do you see it as exploded galaxies, or something like that.  Do you know that they have actually seen star systems move out of them - the birth of suns.  I have never understood the big bang and never seen the need for it.  But there's got to be a 'start' to matter.  Or do you see it as forever recombining into different forms from a set amount of matter? Like different recipes using the same ingredients?

I am so INTRIGUED.  I cannot think how anyone can imagine that everything we see always was.  Like a good book I need a beginning, middle and end.  But my universe needs boundaries because I CANNOT imagine infinity.

EDIT BTW - Did you read the post of dark matter?  Is this what you're referring to?  What do you do with actual physical measurement that defies known laws?  Please answer this.  I'm just so interested in your answer.

 [] [] [] 

[Vern]

No need to imagine infinity, it is just that we exist in a spacial area that we can observe. Outside this observable area, we can only guess, but we can suspect that it is much like what we can observe.

My notion of how the universe works is simple. Galaxies churn matter into pure energy, some by star action, some by a massive gravitational action at galactic centres. The energy spews out from galaxies and combines into matter in the deep reaches of space. The newly combined matter congregates into giant nebula and begins the process anew.

It is a continuous process of destruction and rebirth.

[jerrygg38]

W:  But where I can comment is this. How does the interplay between those two time dimensions also encourage the interplay, in whatever time dimension, to produce the strong and weak nuclear force, gravity and the electromagnetic force. If the background is structured with dots, but Maxwell explains everything needed in this dimension - why bother with the dots? EDIT - Except to be loosely applied when Maxwell's theory doesn't explain all. They do not have relevance outside of that construct of a dualistic universe.

JG: My dimensions are no different that our usual three dimensions and time. I merely point out that our three dimensions are dynamic. The universe today will be gone in a split second. It will be rewired and reproduced a split second from now. Yesterday does not exist except in photonic waves traveling through space time. Thus the dynamic memory of yesterday exists but yesterday is long gone.
   This differential time allows a differential distance. It allows a positive universe and a negative universe as well. I do not have separate dimensions. I cannot travel in another dimension and do amazing things. All my dimensions are part of the same sandwich. Therefore when Vern denies that other dimensions are necessary, I agree with him. I have not fancy other dimensions. The disagreement is a space time hysteresis loop. The universe we live in is not a single universe but a sandwich.

W: My object, which is hugely presumptuous given my lack of training, is to propose that LINK. And my universal background is not divided between plus and minus. It is cohesive - smooth. Really, really smooth. Again, the difference is that I'm actually trying to point to an interplay between this background and the manifest so that I can account for the strong and weak forces et al.JG: My strong forces is merely gravity at the Plank radius. I do not have all the answers. I call it a dot-wave because the dot by itself will not work. The minute I make it a dot-wave it is a more complex entity. I do not really visualize it very well. It is just a word which enables my dots to oscillate and spin. I look at Vern pictures and they look pretty good to me.

   The actual structure of the universe is most likely beyond my ability to grasp it. My dot-waves gives me a little concept by which I can add them and produce electric and magnetic fields in my mind to a degree. It is very tough.
My ability to visualize things is not very good

  The universe could be like an oscillating bowl of jello. The dot-waves are points of maximum vibration which is similar to Vern concepts.

W:EDIT - I've just seen that I've now changed your birthdate year to 1903. I'm doing good. I've made you Father Time itself. Sorry Jerry. I didn't change it because I thought you'd be amused. Did you see the previous post? I made it 1939. I didn't change that either, and suggested I could keep it up with each consecutive post until I'd given back your youth.

JG: Born 12/24/38.

[witsend (OP)]

Vern.  Sorry I'm answering you here.  Posts come in so quick.  It's great But I see the need to identify the post.  sorry for the omission.

The newly combined matter congregates into giant nebula and begins the process anew.Vern

OK  I sort of agree with that.  Do you see the reconstituded mass - the nebulae  coming out of a worm hole? something like that - from black holes?  Why should matter cluster together.  Why not scattered evenly throughout space?

I LOVE this subject.  

 [] []  [] [:X]

[Vern]

Hi Vern,  I missed this.  Actually it's not been posted long.  Speak your mind. Do you think that the introduction of more dimensions is simply nonsense - some sort of unncessary pomposity?  It actually IS critical.  I'm very aware of your positings throughout - even in discussion with Jerrygg38 - where you express your objections.  But it is necessay.  I thought the way I described it made it too simple for anyone to accuse it of some form of exotic abstractions.  I CANNOT work out your objection to it.

I don't object to the notion of multiple dimensions; I just don't see the necessity for them in the real world. I have no problem at all about speculation along those lines.  

[Vern]

OK  I sort of agree with that.  Do you see the reconstituded mass - the nebulae  coming out of a worm hole? something like that - from black holes?  Why should matter cluster together.  Why not scattered evenly throughout space?

The matter clusters together because of gravity. Everything that exists exudes and responds to gravity. So everything naturally tries to get in the same place.

Edit: I suspect that worm holes, black holes, and white holes do not exist. There may be a not-yet-discovered natural mechanism that prevents matter from compressing to a singularity. For example; if gravity is affected by gravity as is light, that would limit the compression and prevent the singularity.

And in my speculation, gravity is made of light, so no black holes; no big bang. []

[Vern]

Yes Vern, the practical engineer is showing in you. It is an advantage since we are used to buiding things which work.

Exactly ! We build using the tried and true; we keep our speculation out of our building process. []

[witsend (OP)]

Jerrygg38, I really am not questioning your right to see your universe in any way you want.  I've said it and say it again, I think that your solutions are really, really amazing.  They're elegant and poetic and really quite beautiful.  A gyroscopic action in three dimensions.  It's geometrically truly fascinating. And I LOVE patterns.  Especially moving patterns.  What's not to like?   I am ABSOLUTELY not in a position to criticise it.  On the contrary.  I think the concepts are wonderful.

My only hope was that you could follow my own concepts.  Not because they're important - but because I'd like to explain how I sort of try to piece the forces together.  Like I say.  It's not that only one of us can be right. Let me assure you - there is very little chance that I can even be half way right.  But I do have a compelling explanation for how I see the forces reconciled.  But you don't have to read it or understand it.  It would be just be so nice if you did.

And we are DEFINITELY not in competition.  I can't compete.  It's like marathan runner competing with child.  It just would not be fair.  I need a handicap allowance.