Need another rabbit hole to fall down? Read Bell's paper "ON THE EINSTEIN PODOLSKY ROSEN PARADOX*", and see if you can spot the bait-and-switch. The entire premise is based upon the straw man argument that sine waves are not identical to triangle waves. Which, of course, no one has ever argued. No sigh as you realize last year's Nobel Prize in physics was awarded to teams of researchers who spent decades proving the obvious. And sigh again as you realize this paper is the basis by which Bohmian mechanics is denigrated and ignored.
He's a link to the paper. Read it yourself. It's only 6 pages long. (pdf warning)
Thank you so much for sharing "Energy Velocity and Reactive Fields". It was a fascinating, enlightening, and easy read. It makes perfect sense, a clear light in an environment otherwise beset by fog generators. I admire the simplicity and clarity of The Great Circle of Electromagnetism.
Complexity is easy. Simplicity is devilishly difficult. Bravo, sir!
I have been thinking about picking up the UWB book for a while, but I've been wondering: would the book be useful (or at least approachable) for the lowly radio amateur?
The late great James P Hogan was the author of "Kicking The Sacred Cow" - a genuine thinking skeptic's compendium of modern boondoggles masquerading as the triumph of Science!™
I was blessed to share a long email correspondence with him before he died and to call him Friend.
In his book he describes how the big bang advocates and the steady state advocates posted their predictions for the cosmic microwave background temperature, and how the big bangers got it exactly wrong while the steady staters were bang in the bucket, but lost to superior marketing.
I highly recommend it, if only for the reminder of all that flesh is heir to, even when one has a degree in one of the hard sciences.
Special relativity is nothing more (and certainly nothing less) than a very careful application of the Pythagorean Theorem to the transmission of light, with profound repercussions. Space is Euclidean. Time is imaginary. Spacetime is, therefore, hyperbolic, because Pythagoras always wins.
Spacetime can be more profitably considered to be a combined field of potential energy (scalar = proper time) and kinetic energy (vector = motion). (The secrets of the universe were modeled for you in first semester physics class, disguised as "action".) When you do this, you see that time (potential energy) has both a maximal value (Planck energy density) and a minimal (zero). You then see that it has a sign, which in our universe is positive, associated with left-handedness in particle spin. You then see that this sign (or handedness, same difference, take your pick) defines matter and antimatter, along with the difference between positive (aligned) and negative (contrary) charges. You then see that the neutrino is the carrier of the time (chrono charge?), and balances out decay interactions. You then see that chrono charge is more fundamental than parity or lepton number, and makes conservation laws actually make sense and balance. You then see that the timeless photon (carrier of the electromagnetic force) is devoid of this chrono charge. This combines electromagnetism, the weak force, and potential energy (AKA time, AKA gravity). And that all this is elastic fields acting on a backdrop of objective, Euclidean space and linear time. There are no infinities, no singularities, and no contradictions.
We call the gradient in potential energy, along with the vectors of kinetic energy (and their gradients), "gravity". Therefore this field, when acting upon a particle, alters not only the particle, but itself.
As always, the fundamental questions of physics remain: What is motion? What is spin? What is energy? Not how are they mathematically modeled - what are they in and of themselves?
Something else to keep in mind is that fields are elastic. You can't poke holes in them, they deform to accommodate charges, changes, and waves. The speed at which they deform is the speed of causation, "c", the universal constant. The shape of the deformation is the inverse square law.
This is in the simplest form, ignoring motion. When things move, the waves pile up in front and stretch out behind. That's where and when things get complicated and the math gets ugly. But conceptually, you can mimic the workings of the universe by playing with a rubber ducky in the bath tub.
I don't know your background, so I'll begin at the beginning. Please note that we're always talking about "proper time", which is subjective time, the source of all potential energy. (I am not creating new science here, but I am correlating things and changing some terms to clarify relationships.)
The imaginary number, "i", is the square root of -1. Geometrically, it represents spin. It is plotted at right angles to the real number line, forming the complex plane (used extensively in electronics to describe phase shifts for inductance and reactance). Positive i is motion in a counterclockwise, or left-handed, direction. See also Euler's famous identity.
Time is the 4th dimension, at right angles to all three dimensions of space. Just exactly like "i". You can't see it. You can't touch it. You can't even point in its direction. Yet you always feel its effects. For our purposes here, it's a scalar, a number to multiply things by, *not* a vector. All matter has positive i time spin. Antimatter has negative i time spin. (It's not really going backwards in time, but it thinks it is.) This is what causes charge-parity symmetry breaking, by the way, and is why only left-handed neutrinos interact with matter.
The Minkowski spacetime tensor has signs - + + +, because the numbers represent time and 3D space. Note that the figure plugged in for time is actually "ict", so when squared, it becomes negative (and the units balance out to distance squared). So then when you apply the Pythagorean Theorem, spacetime is hyperbolic, because it is the difference of squares equaling a constant. (Electromagnetism is the difference of squares equaling zero.)
To have some more fun, look up "action", as it is used in physics. For extra bonus credit fun, look up "geometric algebra". The videos by "sudgylacmoe" are entertaining and informative.
One simple consequence of this is that a black hole is a shell of maximal energy density surrounding a space of zero potential energy, which is absolute nothingness. Thus, there is no information loss, and black holes are free to spin, grow, and move about the universe. Again, there are no infinities, no singularities, and no contradictions.
Another is that the complementary and opposing potential and kinetic energy fields are the root cause of inertia. To slow down, potential energy must be increased. To speed up, kinetic energy must be increased. This energy must come from somewhere else.
I suspect that the strong force has some association with kinetic energy. I'm still pondering this weak (hah!) relationship, and am not yet sure if it it real or wishful thinking.
Excellent questions, and I am also eagerly awaiting the rest of Dr. Schantz's book to find out how the story ends! ( I'm not creative enough to invent new physics, and I'm decades out of practice at the math. I just correlate separate bits of information and try to simplify.)
And as always, Copenhagen interpretation delenda est.
I already have a copy. Wouldn't mind getting a 1st ed., so I can read the preface.
Need another rabbit hole to fall down? Read Bell's paper "ON THE EINSTEIN PODOLSKY ROSEN PARADOX*", and see if you can spot the bait-and-switch. The entire premise is based upon the straw man argument that sine waves are not identical to triangle waves. Which, of course, no one has ever argued. No sigh as you realize last year's Nobel Prize in physics was awarded to teams of researchers who spent decades proving the obvious. And sigh again as you realize this paper is the basis by which Bohmian mechanics is denigrated and ignored.
He's a link to the paper. Read it yourself. It's only 6 pages long. (pdf warning)
https://cds.cern.ch/record/111654/files/vol1p195-200_001.pdf
Thank you so much for sharing "Energy Velocity and Reactive Fields". It was a fascinating, enlightening, and easy read. It makes perfect sense, a clear light in an environment otherwise beset by fog generators. I admire the simplicity and clarity of The Great Circle of Electromagnetism.
Complexity is easy. Simplicity is devilishly difficult. Bravo, sir!
I'm sold! Thanks.
I have been thinking about picking up the UWB book for a while, but I've been wondering: would the book be useful (or at least approachable) for the lowly radio amateur?
I would have sworn I'd answered you. The short answer is "yes." I'll take the time to write a bit more detailed post on that, soon.
You did here: https://substack.com/@aetherczar/note/c-76973730
I'm a fellow lowly radio amateur, I have a copy of UWB, and I assure you that it's both useful and approachable.
The late great James P Hogan was the author of "Kicking The Sacred Cow" - a genuine thinking skeptic's compendium of modern boondoggles masquerading as the triumph of Science!™
I was blessed to share a long email correspondence with him before he died and to call him Friend.
In his book he describes how the big bang advocates and the steady state advocates posted their predictions for the cosmic microwave background temperature, and how the big bangers got it exactly wrong while the steady staters were bang in the bucket, but lost to superior marketing.
I highly recommend it, if only for the reminder of all that flesh is heir to, even when one has a degree in one of the hard sciences.
https://www.amazon.com/Kicking-Sacred-Cow-Impermissible-Thoughts/dp/1416520732
Special relativity is nothing more (and certainly nothing less) than a very careful application of the Pythagorean Theorem to the transmission of light, with profound repercussions. Space is Euclidean. Time is imaginary. Spacetime is, therefore, hyperbolic, because Pythagoras always wins.
Spacetime can be more profitably considered to be a combined field of potential energy (scalar = proper time) and kinetic energy (vector = motion). (The secrets of the universe were modeled for you in first semester physics class, disguised as "action".) When you do this, you see that time (potential energy) has both a maximal value (Planck energy density) and a minimal (zero). You then see that it has a sign, which in our universe is positive, associated with left-handedness in particle spin. You then see that this sign (or handedness, same difference, take your pick) defines matter and antimatter, along with the difference between positive (aligned) and negative (contrary) charges. You then see that the neutrino is the carrier of the time (chrono charge?), and balances out decay interactions. You then see that chrono charge is more fundamental than parity or lepton number, and makes conservation laws actually make sense and balance. You then see that the timeless photon (carrier of the electromagnetic force) is devoid of this chrono charge. This combines electromagnetism, the weak force, and potential energy (AKA time, AKA gravity). And that all this is elastic fields acting on a backdrop of objective, Euclidean space and linear time. There are no infinities, no singularities, and no contradictions.
We call the gradient in potential energy, along with the vectors of kinetic energy (and their gradients), "gravity". Therefore this field, when acting upon a particle, alters not only the particle, but itself.
As always, the fundamental questions of physics remain: What is motion? What is spin? What is energy? Not how are they mathematically modeled - what are they in and of themselves?
Time is imaginary?
Would you mind expanding on this statement, please?
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minkowski_space#Complex_Minkowski_spacetime
Something else to keep in mind is that fields are elastic. You can't poke holes in them, they deform to accommodate charges, changes, and waves. The speed at which they deform is the speed of causation, "c", the universal constant. The shape of the deformation is the inverse square law.
This is in the simplest form, ignoring motion. When things move, the waves pile up in front and stretch out behind. That's where and when things get complicated and the math gets ugly. But conceptually, you can mimic the workings of the universe by playing with a rubber ducky in the bath tub.
I don't know your background, so I'll begin at the beginning. Please note that we're always talking about "proper time", which is subjective time, the source of all potential energy. (I am not creating new science here, but I am correlating things and changing some terms to clarify relationships.)
The imaginary number, "i", is the square root of -1. Geometrically, it represents spin. It is plotted at right angles to the real number line, forming the complex plane (used extensively in electronics to describe phase shifts for inductance and reactance). Positive i is motion in a counterclockwise, or left-handed, direction. See also Euler's famous identity.
Time is the 4th dimension, at right angles to all three dimensions of space. Just exactly like "i". You can't see it. You can't touch it. You can't even point in its direction. Yet you always feel its effects. For our purposes here, it's a scalar, a number to multiply things by, *not* a vector. All matter has positive i time spin. Antimatter has negative i time spin. (It's not really going backwards in time, but it thinks it is.) This is what causes charge-parity symmetry breaking, by the way, and is why only left-handed neutrinos interact with matter.
The Minkowski spacetime tensor has signs - + + +, because the numbers represent time and 3D space. Note that the figure plugged in for time is actually "ict", so when squared, it becomes negative (and the units balance out to distance squared). So then when you apply the Pythagorean Theorem, spacetime is hyperbolic, because it is the difference of squares equaling a constant. (Electromagnetism is the difference of squares equaling zero.)
To have some more fun, look up "action", as it is used in physics. For extra bonus credit fun, look up "geometric algebra". The videos by "sudgylacmoe" are entertaining and informative.
One simple consequence of this is that a black hole is a shell of maximal energy density surrounding a space of zero potential energy, which is absolute nothingness. Thus, there is no information loss, and black holes are free to spin, grow, and move about the universe. Again, there are no infinities, no singularities, and no contradictions.
Another is that the complementary and opposing potential and kinetic energy fields are the root cause of inertia. To slow down, potential energy must be increased. To speed up, kinetic energy must be increased. This energy must come from somewhere else.
I suspect that the strong force has some association with kinetic energy. I'm still pondering this weak (hah!) relationship, and am not yet sure if it it real or wishful thinking.
Excellent questions, and I am also eagerly awaiting the rest of Dr. Schantz's book to find out how the story ends! ( I'm not creative enough to invent new physics, and I'm decades out of practice at the math. I just correlate separate bits of information and try to simplify.)
And as always, Copenhagen interpretation delenda est.