[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Relative to an infinite space, every object including planets and stars and even a solar system, have 0 dimensions unless quite close up.
It's a bit weird .

It is weird in a sense, but everything is relative, and everything has a scientific explanation; even unknowns have scientific explanations that we just don't yet understand, IMHO.

[guest39538]

Relative to an infinite space, every object including planets and stars and even a solar system, have 0 dimensions unless quite close up.
It's a bit weird .

It is weird in a sense, but everything is relative, and everything has a scientific explanation; even unknowns have scientific explanations that we just don't yet understand, IMHO.

A stranger thought, relative to an infinite Universe nothing exists .

added- everything is nothing? hmmmmm

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

A stranger thought, relative to an infinite Universe nothing exists .

added- everything is nothing? hmmmmm

Not in the ISU,

[guest39538]

A stranger thought, relative to an infinite Universe nothing exists .

added- everything is nothing? hmmmmm

Not in the ISU,

LOL


You say about wave energy that bombards from all directions, I do agree as it agrees with Micro-bangs. 


Do you agree that at the centre of all carrier waves origins, that there is an isolated ''dot'' of flat space?

[guest39538]

flat spot.jpg (3.16 kB . 276x183 - viewed 4776 times)

[guest39538]

Because this is why the visual universe is expanding.


expansion.jpg (15.24 kB . 276x183 - viewed 5701 times)

[guest39538]

Because the dark energy they discuss is really good old fashioned electromagnetic radiation and the wave energy emanating from a central position

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Because the dark energy they discuss is really good old fashioned electromagnetic radiation and the wave energy emanating from a central position

I do speculate that EM is the out flowing gravitational wave energy emitted by the photon wave-particle. However, in addition to EM, gravitational wave energy is being emitted by all particles and objects, and combined, they compose the 360º on-slaught of gravitational wave energy converging on every point in space, in the ISU.

[guest39538]

I do speculate that EM is the out flowing gravitational wave energy emitted by the photon wave-particle.

I do not think gravitational force involves waves, it is more linear than wave like. I do not think Photon's themselves emit waves or are a factual existence.  I do not think we can have an out flowing gravitational wave either, we would would have to have expansion waves , gravity of course being a total opposite in direction.

I would explain centrifugal expansion wave theory , where Q.F.S (quantum field solidity) plays a role and the expanding pE (potential energy)   wave has likewise polarity properties to the invert wave.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

I do not think gravitational force involves waves, it is more linear than wave like. I do not think Photon's themselves emit waves or are a factual existence.  I do not think we can have an out flowing gravitational wave either, we would would have to have expansion waves , gravity of course being a total opposite in direction.

I would explain centrifugal expansion wave theory , where Q.F.S (quantum field solidity) plays a role and the expanding pE (potential energy)   wave has likewise polarity properties to the invert wave.

In my recent posts where I mentioned “necessities”, I describe building the ISU model from the bottom up, step by step; known science and axioms lead to steps, and steps lead to “as yet” unknowns. As yet unknowns lead to speculations which are invoked as steps, and the model is derived, step by step.

It has reached the point where, given all of the steps that come before, the speculation that photons are wave-particles is in response to a necessity that all particles are composed of wave energy in quantum increments. The conclusion that all wave-particles are standing waves, with inflowing and out flowing components, is a step. The speculation that the outflowing gravitational wave energy component from the photon wave-particle is light, is a step.

You have to follow the steps from the beginning in order to be aware of the full sequence of my step by step thinking.

You have had your arguments, and have stated them here, and have suggested opposing ideas, and when you do I consider them. I may not invoke them, because all of my steps must, in my mind, be internally consistent, and fit in the step by step sequence of reasoning. That is not a bold claim that I am right, nor an argument that you are wrong.

[guest39538]

t has reached the point where, given all of the steps that come before, the speculation that photons are wave-particles is in response to a necessity that all particles are composed of wave energy in quantum increments. The conclusion that all wave-particles are standing waves, with inflowing and out flowing components, is a step. The speculation that the outflowing gravitational wave energy component from the photon wave-particle is light, is a step.

You have just almost described my N-field, but where particles are not composed of wave-energy but absorb and emit wave energy , stretching and contracting continuous that causes a vibration and a ripple (wave) in the quantum fields.
I describe the N-field as the flat spot (epicentre)  of an n-field (wave energy) , in my model the atom is no more than two opposite signed ''energies'' that have merged to form Q.F.S.
So like yourself, my atomic model is different to the standard model.

[atbsphotography]

Because this is why the visual universe is expanding.


expansion.jpg (15.24 kB . 276x183 - viewed 5701 times)

I would like to point out that such is the case with ripples of water, there wouldn't necessarily be a flat space of origin. The logic in this would be that if X is the centre of the galactic plane and a big bang happened here, then common sense dictates that X would be the point of origin an, therefore, the waves that ripple out start as close to the bang as possible, such as when you drop a peble in a puddle, the water forms a ripple at the point where the peble entered the water. therefore I don't believe there would be a flat space until after the wave has passed.

[guest39538]

Because this is why the visual universe is expanding.


expansion.jpg (15.24 kB . 276x183 - viewed 5701 times)

I would like to point out that such is the case with ripples of water, there wouldn't necessarily be a flat space of origin. The logic in this would be that if X is the centre of the galactic plane and a big bang happened here, then common sense dictates that X would be the point of origin an, therefore, the waves that ripple out start as close to the bang as possible, such as when you drop a peble in a puddle, the water forms a ripple at the point where the peble entered the water. therefore I don't believe there would be a flat space until after the wave has passed.

Where the stone enters the water, the stones mass displaces the water , the stone takes up the space where the water is displaced although this a continuous action until the stone rests.

I disagree, the stone represents a flat spot.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

You have just almost described my N-field, but where particles are not composed of wave-energy but absorb and emit wave energy , stretching and contracting continuous that causes a vibration and a ripple (wave) in the quantum fields.
I describe the N-field as the flat spot (epicentre)  of an n-field (wave energy) , in my model the atom is no more than two opposite signed ''energies'' that have merged to form Q.F.S.
So like yourself, my atomic model is different to the standard model.

Perhaps that is some more commonality between our models:

Let me point out an important aspect of the ISU gravitational wave energy density profile of space, form Reply #105 … Quote from Reply #105 https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=70348.msg523443#msg523443: “The standing wave pattern of the hydrogen atom’s proton has a surface or boundary that (according to the ISU model) has an equal amount of out flowing wave energy at all points because the out flow is spherical. We can think of that out flow as a positive energy out flow, supplying [positive] wave energy into space, i.e., as the local source of energy added to the energy density profile of space. Then we can think of the directionally inflowing wave energy component of that proton as the replacement energy for that out flow, maintaining the established mass and energy of the proton wave-particle. I would label the inflowing component the negative energy inflow [to the particle to replace the positive energy out flow].”

In the ISU, both the positively charged proton, and the negatively charged electron, in regard to the charge of the Coulomb force, are simply composed of gravitational wave energy. “Negative” and “positive” are simply labels to distinguish between the way particles react; like charged particles repel, and oppositely charged particles attract. In that context, we are talking their polarity.

In regard to the energy content of space, it is positive wave energy. The labels, “positive” and “negative” energy, is just a way to distinguish the inflowing gravitational wave energy component of the standing wave particle, from the out flowing gravitational wave energy component, which comes from space. And conversely, a way to distinguish between the energy flow to space from wave-particles vs. the wave energy flow from space to wave-particles. Therefore, the “contained” energy in the wave-particle can be labeled positive energy. In the same fashion, the energy in the gravitational wave energy density profile of space can be labeled positive energy as well.

[guest39538]

“The standing wave pattern of the hydrogen atom’s proton has a surface or boundary that (according to the ISU model) has an equal amount of out flowing wave energy at all points because the out flow is spherical. We can think of that out flow as a positive energy out flow, supplying [positive] wave energy into space,

I consider that the ''surface'' is both positive and negative polarity and there is central void , the void being a product of the repulsive forces of the likewise polarities of the surface.  A sort of spherical shell with an empty inner.  A bit like a football.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #215



You don’t have “nothingness” in even the tiniest space, there are forces and action there, i.e., energy at work.

“The standing wave pattern of the hydrogen atom’s proton has a surface or boundary that (according to the ISU model) has an equal amount of out flowing wave energy at all points because the out flow is spherical. We can think of that out flow as a positive energy out flow, supplying [positive] wave energy into space,

I consider that the ''surface'' is both positive and negative polarity and there is central void , the void being a product of the repulsive forces of the likewise polarities of the surface.  A sort of spherical shell with an empty inner.  A bit like a football.

Not in the ISU. There are no voids; all space is filled with gravitational wave energy density. But that statement does require some explanation if it is going to stand as my argument against the existence of a void. For example, in a wave energy density environment, you have meaningful wave fronts expanding from their “point” origins, so after the first instant of expansion, the point origin has become a spherically expanding energy wave. That brings up the question, what is behind the wave front, between the front and the origin point?

Do you remember the earlier discussion about the oscillating wave energy background of space? I first mentioned it when I defined Wave Energy in Reply #21, and then when I equated the oscillating background and its function, to Wheeler’s Quantum Foam, in Reply #56, and elsewhere.

That is the answer to the question of what is behind the wave front, between the front and the point of origin. It is the oscillating wave energy background. The oscillations are less meaningful gravitational energy waves, less than quantum, and therefore less than the amount of energy necessary to create a high energy density spot that qualifies as a quantum of energy, in the process of quantum action. The convergences at the oscillating foundational level are sub-quantum hints of mass, a necessary part of the process of quantum action that maintains the presence of wave-particles. There is a striking similarity between the wave action at all levels (in accord with the "sameness" principle of the ISU).

There is a finer point of explanation about the mechanism that keeps the oscillating background functioning, and assures there aren’t even the tiniest of voids down there among the oscillations. That explanation is that each oscillation is composed of two of nature’s tiniest parent waves, that are there and gone in an instant, but that instant of time delay is enough time for them to converge and form their hints of mass, the oscillating background's version of a high energy density spot, at a “moment in time”. I discussed this time delay as part of the process of both quantum action and arena action earlier, as reported in reply #56:

“In the wave-particle discussion, each wave convergence has a time delay as the combined energy of the 'parent' waves equalize in the overlap space. In the case of the oscillating background, nature’s tiniest possible size limit of wave action occurs while the energy carried by the individual parent waves merges and equalizes, allowing the lens shaped overlap space to trend toward a spherical shape; it is a mechanical effect that occurs during the time delay and plays out under the influence of the force of energy density equalization that is always present in the ISU. [So you don’t have “nothingness” in that space, there are forces and action there, i.e., energy at work.] The new ‘third wave’ thus emerges from the overlap space, to become a new oscillation in the space being vacated by the parent waves.”

This is another example of the “sameness” principle of the ISU.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #216

An additional point to make when denying the presence of voids (there are energy density fluctuations) in the ISU, and that applies in all the places where I invoke the sameness doctrine, is that the intersection and convergence of two or more parent wave fronts, whether in the oscillating wave energy background, or as part of the process of quantum action at the wave-particle level, or as part of the process of arena action across the landscape of the greater universe, involves a flow of energy from the parent waves, into the overlap space, and equates to an inflation of the overlap space with the energy from the parent waves.

In regard to arena action, that energy takes the form of galactic material and gravitational wave energy that converges in a swirling rendezvous, and eventually forms the new Big Crunch. As part of quantum action, that energy takes the form of the spherically out flowing gravitational wave energy component of quantum wave intersections taking place within the particle space. Down at the foundational level, occupied by the oscillating wave energy background, that energy takes the form of natures tiniest gravitational wave action at nature’s lowest limit on the wave energy scale, described as the final level of the third wave action of the fully aged gravitational waves that represent the potentially infinite history of the universe.

[guest39538]

Not in the ISU. There are no voids;

The thing is , what we do know about energy , it tends to have a polarity.  Now if you are saying that there is no voids, then you would have to prove that likewise polarities do not repulse each other.
Fundamentally a basic thought about energies is that it can not retain a stable state without two opposite polarities.   A single polarity by the laws of physics can not retain form or a stable state.  It would be an impossibility that the laws of physics would not allow.  In short you could not squeeze a polarised energy together and make it stay together,  it would always as in Newtons third law offer an equal and opposing force to the squeeze and push back. Not much dissimilar to a rubber ball except in this situation the rubber ball always wants to expand because of its likewise to itself properties.
Now the laws of likewise polarities being repulsive to each other, I did not write. However these laws are tested and verified in being true.  So there is no way there could not be a void when concerning energy sphericalation.

[guest39538]

, the point origin has become a spherically expanding energy wave. That brings up the question, what is behind the wave front, between the front and the origin point?

That is why at the point of origin is always a void.  The micro bangs I mentioned are an attempt at the manifestation of a ''particle''.  However the attempt turns into a micro bang

spherically expanding energy wave

  Sphericalation

The reason is because the attempt is a single polarity and likewise polarity to itself so has no choice but to  micro bang sphericalation process .

added -

Sphericalation : Isotropic inflation :  spherically expanding wave,field or surface from a central point.

[Bogie_smiles (OP)]

Reply #219
Sphericalization

, the point origin has become a spherically expanding energy wave. That brings up the question, what is behind the wave front, between the front and the origin point?

That is why at the point of origin is always a void.  The micro bangs I mentioned are an attempt at the manifestation of a ''particle''.  However the attempt turns into a micro bang

spherically expanding energy wave

  Sphericalation

The reason is because the attempt is a single polarity and likewise polarity to itself so has no choice but to  micro bang sphericalation process .

added -

Sphericalation : Isotropic inflation :  spherically expanding wave,field or surface from a central point.

This is my attempt at a fun respite from the mind-bending contemplation and rigor involved in evolving the ISU [tongue in cheek]:

Maybe we should submit this to Webster …
How about :Sphericalization or sphericalisation (if you prefer)
The process of becoming a sphere or trending toward the spherical shape.

In the science of logic, a “precising” word is a word coined from an existing word or phrase, to better or more precisely describe meaning. The word “sphericalization” is coined from the words “spherical” and “realization”for the effect that occurs when a lens shaped overlap space forms between two expanding spherical waves as they intersect and overlap, and that trends toward the spherical emission of an out flowing third wave. The word is specifically coined for the Infinite Spongy Universe Model of Cosmology (and N-Theory?).


To be continued deleted, lol …