- Thank you received: 0
Quantized redshift anomaly
16 years 9 months ago #20661
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
I wonder if sometimes we can be too smart. I remember what brought me to the conclusion that there was something inside of empty space, the details are not important, but those details convinced be that there was something more, something that was not ordinary physicality, and because I had no idea at that time of any of the research which was going on, I called it the Inside of space, not in space, but inside of space. Today, I can name a dozen different names of this inside of space. But none of them are fully accepted or if they are they apply only in special instances, like Dirac's sea. And if the ZPE does have a wavelength, and therefore is physical, then it is not the inside of space that I have in mind. I have used the term Pure Energy, and defined it as energy not doing anything. But energy doing nothing is nothing. Or is it...Maybe the nothing inside of space is a No-thing. And our attempts to make it some-thing will never be correct. Oh, if you want to hear the details let me just put it into one word - synchronicity. If you have to look it up in a dictionary never mind...
But if you know what I mean, then you will also conclude that the only way it could happen is as if there were an inside of empty space.
And if there is an inside of empty space, then it is entirely reasonable to assume that matter is created in the center of galaxies, and that would explain what we really do observe going on across the board, and why a photon can fly through space for billions and billions of years. My point is that standard science does ot acknowledge this inside of space whateveritis, and not only will cosmology have to be rewritten, but chemistry, biology, well, everything. Because nothing is greater than everything.
But if you know what I mean, then you will also conclude that the only way it could happen is as if there were an inside of empty space.
And if there is an inside of empty space, then it is entirely reasonable to assume that matter is created in the center of galaxies, and that would explain what we really do observe going on across the board, and why a photon can fly through space for billions and billions of years. My point is that standard science does ot acknowledge this inside of space whateveritis, and not only will cosmology have to be rewritten, but chemistry, biology, well, everything. Because nothing is greater than everything.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 9 months ago #20663
by JMB
Replied by JMB on topic Reply from Jacques Moret-Bailly
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br />
<br />
.
So energy is actually a difference of something.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Absolute energy may be obtained by its weight : E=mc2.
Initial Planck's law does not give the energy of the EM field, while Planck-Nernst law (which differs by an addition of hf/2 for a mode) gives the absolute energy.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 9 months ago #20664
by JMB
Replied by JMB on topic Reply from Jacques Moret-Bailly
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br /> And if the ZPE does have a wavelength, and therefore is physical
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
An energy is a scalar, it cannot have a wavelength.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
But if you know what I mean, <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Unhappily not.
<br /> And if the ZPE does have a wavelength, and therefore is physical
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
An energy is a scalar, it cannot have a wavelength.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
But if you know what I mean, <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Unhappily not.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 9 months ago #13460
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
JMB writes:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Absolute energy may be obtained by its weight : E=mc2.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
You like to talk to me using mathematics, but mathematics is only a symbol system. For example, you are telling me that E, the symbol for energy, must have a mass. So those particles having no mass do not have energy? Are not energy? A photon has no mass, therefore E=0c2=0
I think the mathematics we use is descriptive of what energy does, but has little to say about what energy is. Like Maxwell's equations describe electromagnetism but do not tell us what electromagnetism is. or where is comes from. I suppose that energy can be defined as "work done" but what I want to know is what is doing the work. What is making a photon do its thing? It is important that we find out because the answer will tell us a lot about how the universe works the way it does.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Absolute energy may be obtained by its weight : E=mc2.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
You like to talk to me using mathematics, but mathematics is only a symbol system. For example, you are telling me that E, the symbol for energy, must have a mass. So those particles having no mass do not have energy? Are not energy? A photon has no mass, therefore E=0c2=0
I think the mathematics we use is descriptive of what energy does, but has little to say about what energy is. Like Maxwell's equations describe electromagnetism but do not tell us what electromagnetism is. or where is comes from. I suppose that energy can be defined as "work done" but what I want to know is what is doing the work. What is making a photon do its thing? It is important that we find out because the answer will tell us a lot about how the universe works the way it does.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 9 months ago #20530
by ultranerd
Replied by ultranerd on topic Reply from Dale
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br />I wonder if sometimes we can be too smart. I remember what brought me to the conclusion that there was something inside of empty space, [snip]
My point is that standard science does ot acknowledge this inside of space whateveritis, and not only will cosmology have to be rewritten, but chemistry, biology, well, everything. Because nothing is greater than everything.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Well nothing may not be more important but it may be equally important.
It seams like science is much more concerned with the particle than its medium.Thats like studying bubbles in the ocean but ignoring the water and expecting to make progress.
I like you tend to believe that far more will be understood when the quantum vacuum is also better understood.
Dale
Knowledge of a question is Knowledge.Knowledge of an original question is original Knowledge.
<br />I wonder if sometimes we can be too smart. I remember what brought me to the conclusion that there was something inside of empty space, [snip]
My point is that standard science does ot acknowledge this inside of space whateveritis, and not only will cosmology have to be rewritten, but chemistry, biology, well, everything. Because nothing is greater than everything.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Well nothing may not be more important but it may be equally important.
It seams like science is much more concerned with the particle than its medium.Thats like studying bubbles in the ocean but ignoring the water and expecting to make progress.
I like you tend to believe that far more will be understood when the quantum vacuum is also better understood.
Dale
Knowledge of a question is Knowledge.Knowledge of an original question is original Knowledge.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
16 years 9 months ago #14264
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And if the ZPE does have a wavelength, and therefore is physical
(JMB) An energy is a scalar, it cannot have a wavelength.
quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
SO why do they tell me that the casimir experiment wrks because
the gap is smaller that the wavelength? Interesting, scalar is what Maxwell called his ether, and which was removed from the equations by Heaviside because it was too "Mystical."
(JMB) An energy is a scalar, it cannot have a wavelength.
quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
SO why do they tell me that the casimir experiment wrks because
the gap is smaller that the wavelength? Interesting, scalar is what Maxwell called his ether, and which was removed from the equations by Heaviside because it was too "Mystical."
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.613 seconds