tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post8083657909430445837..comments2023-10-21T08:48:37.363-07:00Comments on Zone-Reflex: On the background of matter.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post-37678520117381505782010-11-03T12:27:09.270-07:002010-11-03T12:27:09.270-07:00Kea has published a summary of her research, 24 pp...Kea has published a summary of her research, 24 pp. It is maybe better to read directly from her.<br /><br />http://www.scribd.com/doc/40042690/Mass-Ribbon-PaperUllahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16634036177244152897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post-18214462197112279482010-10-27T00:29:29.459-07:002010-10-27T00:29:29.459-07:00I think it is not only one 'coordinate'. I...I think it is not only one 'coordinate'. It is an oscillation. Like the electron would be a vibrating string with 'ends'. The vibrations can then be described in a 3x3x3 matrix?<br /> <br />http://www.2physics.com/2010/08/watching-atoms-electrons-move-in-real.html<br /><br />Golden ratio is difficult, but highly interesting. It would be the missing link. Maybe it comes from the total Universe from BB, not from the small parts of Universe?<br /><br />The twistor approach is one way to get past Feynman, but there are other ways too. It must be done in a more simple way. I have often thought of Lisis E8 presentation, and his rotations, how they might be presented in Keas braidings.<br /><br />The mass gap in the braidings is also very important.Ullahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16634036177244152897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post-273588430500019212010-10-26T14:44:08.807-07:002010-10-26T14:44:08.807-07:00Ulla, I just found this blog lately also. I have ...Ulla, I just found this blog lately also. I have to come back here to read your long post today.<br /><br />But I do find that Koide formula interesting- only one might consider the coordinates other than (111) to the angles of the electrons... For the geometry we might expect (ttt) or (t00) where t is = 1.6180339 golden ratio. and this embedded in four space. My comment to her on the 24 cell may have been suggested by others- but I doubt before I saw it long ago. So many think this just an analog to the octahedron- not very good 4 space thinking!<br /><br />We have to get past Feynman too, and enter into the hint of a wider and freer view of things as he seems to have pointed a way.<br /><br />The PeSlaL. Edgar Ottohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00525169618204198073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post-48649665841063636902010-10-26T13:37:35.509-07:002010-10-26T13:37:35.509-07:00A lengthy discussion of the topic on
http://www.s...A lengthy discussion of the topic on <br />http://www.science20.com/hammock_physicist/big_bang_big_bewildermentUllahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16634036177244152897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post-39447890448386516362010-10-26T12:38:43.195-07:002010-10-26T12:38:43.195-07:00cont.
There's no mention of what we have learn...cont.<br />There's no mention of what we have learnt from particle physics, matter and antimatter ( the latter that appears as matter moving backwards in time but that is antimatter with opposite charges moving forwards in time from interaction vertices, absorbing or emitting carrier particles. Particles whose antiparticles are always of identical mass, or was so from conventional data prior to Minos results).<br /><br />Since, cryptically , I know there are 6 different low mass lepton particles with non identical mass energies that respond conventionally(conventionally there are three with their antipaticles identical in mass) only via the electroweak force and gravity with no electric charge, and that we know the interaction mechanisms viz a viz muon decay and neutrino scattering and oscillation/interference we can calculate the attractive and repulsive forces for each of the 26interactions. At extremely high temperature all are in equilibrium absorbing and emitting via their carrier bosons, the W-, its anticharged W+ partner and the neutral current Z0 that carries some of the photon B0. The limit to G increase is theoretically +/-64 fold ( 62.4 and 63.4 fold from current Minos mass energy difference, the 63.4 fold is a repulsive force ). When the repulsive force was 64 fold G the c velocity is +/-8c (the - equates with neutrinos apparently moving backwards in time but are LH antineutrinos moving forward in time ; the number of tau antineutrinos was then ca. > 3.3 *109 fold greater than all other particles except its equiabundant generational partners. Sounds complicated, but it's straightforward really. By giving mass differences to the most abundant particles in the universe, which are known to exhibit chirality or parity, an all or nothing left or right even or odd, it means that when you apply energy conservation to the emitter and absorber vertices or hubs of the Feynman spacetime diagrams these verices are given a jolt , a net impulse that is positive or negative, and not zero which would be appropriate for conventional exactly equal mass charges for particles and antiparticles.<br /><br />I didn't appreciate the significance of Shu's idea is that his G/c2 would be constant at all times. I wouldn't care to say that Einstein was wrong re- general relativity; it's a new way of interpretation. There are 6 new particles , Shu's dust in essence, but 12 parity particles in the false vacuum and 6 oppositely parity particles in what we call ordinary matter ( and DM? I don't know yet). The neutrinos interactions are electroweak SU(2), and gravity and antigravity appear as a residual force of these total of 64 interactions at high temperature and energy. At low temperatures applicable to the present universe only 4 interactions are significant between the electron lepton generations and their u and d quark partners.Ullahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16634036177244152897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post-88067927933845630452010-10-26T12:38:25.475-07:002010-10-26T12:38:25.475-07:00cont. with comment
It's not that G and c vary ...cont. with comment<br />It's not that G and c vary but that G/c2 is constant at all t. Now we do know that alpha and c haven't varied by more than several ppm during the last several billion years. However, the 7/8 ths of the 13.8 billion yrs of universal history puts the first 1/7th of time beyond empirical presently.<br /><br />It's dated too in addressing a dust and/or radiation scenario. Without doubt the early history is very hot and is better modelled as a radiative phase where the kinetic energies of particles vastly outweigh their particle rest mass energies. It's currently topiccal in that who wouldn't like to get rid of ie. zero dark energy or vacuum energy for that matter abd the flatnes problem to boot.<br /><br />What is relevant is the great increase in c velocity in the early phase of history. The greater c the less relativistic the universe becomes. Also, Shu gets wrapped up energy conservation so knowing full well that space stretches, and hence photon wavelengths stretch, so he keeps frequency constant and ends up having to admit that Planck's constant h must increase. As h increases the universe becomes more quantum like. For some reason he doesn't address the obvious, a possible periodicity or cyclicity of the universe that arises naturally from his three conversions of space, mass and time.<br /><br />+/-G/(+/-c)2 equals a constant at all times for a cyclic universe.Ullahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16634036177244152897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3904639295706642486.post-1534194836822655862010-10-26T12:36:51.287-07:002010-10-26T12:36:51.287-07:00http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.1750 Wun-Yi Shu 11 Jul 2...http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.1750 Wun-Yi Shu 11 Jul 2010.<br />Cosmological Models with No Big Bang<br /><br />In the late 1990s, observations of Type Ia supernovae led to the astounding discovery that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. The explanation of this anomalous acceleration has been one of the great problems in physics since that discovery. In this article we propose cosmological models that can explain the cosmic acceleration without introducing a cosmological constant into the standard Einstein field equation, negating the necessity for the existence of dark energy. There are four distinguishing features of these models: 1) the speed of light and the gravitational "constant" are not constant, but vary with the evolution of the universe, 2) time has no beginning and no end, 3) the spatial section of the universe is a 3-sphere, and 4) the universe experiences phases of both acceleration and deceleration. One of these models is selected and tested against current cosmological observations of Type Ia supernovae, and is found to fit the redshift-luminosity distance data quite well.<br /><br />Comment at http://www.galaxyzooforum.org/index.php?topic=278072.msg483063#msg483063<br /><br />they postulate that both c and G are variable over the evolution of the Universe.Ullahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16634036177244152897noreply@blogger.com