With a few extra equations and also a few changes.

Luxon Unification Theory
Combining Luxen Theory
With
A Compiled Theory on Primal Forces

Essay One of Two

1.
The Universe Contains Only Energy

In September 1997, physicists created matter out of pure light. This was the verification scientists needed to explain how all matter evolved. Matter is just forms of trapped electromagnetic energy.

What is a Luxen?

A Luxen is a particle that always moves with a velocity with that which is lightspeed (v=c). We have many Luxens in labs today. One that we all know of and see everyday is light. It permeates the sky and we often do not bother ourselves with them. But it is our source of life, and energy - it provides us with heat and light; and as it turns out, provided everything that is physical.

Light is made up of photons. They are the smallest energy units known to us, and move with a velocity of 186,000 miles per sec or 299,792,458 m/s. A photon will travel 65.5 billion billion miles in one year! They are what are called zero-time particles. This means that the photon does not experience any time at all. And if it experiences no time, then the photon spends no 'time' in space either. This is hard to imagine... after all, doesn't the photon move through space? Doesn't a photon take time to get from A to B? Well, this all sounds correct from our point of view, but from a photons point of view it is very different. It is just another bizarre situation in relativity.

The universe, when it expanded from its singular region in space and time, grew quite old before light emerged. In fact, something equivalent to thirty-two years had passed before light emerged. We believe this, because the universe began with a time-scale called the 'first chronon.'

We are made up of many Luxens called gluons. In fact, 98.12% of our bodies are made up of gluon mass. The remaining 1.88% is made up of quarks and electrons, (of course, we are made up of other percentages and types of particles).

Does the photon have mass? The short answer is no.

Some people find it difficult to comprehend a photon as being massless because it can be deflected by the gravity of, let us say a star. One way to explain this is by saying light couples to gravity, because light also generates curvature and curvature is the equivalence of gravity. However, there is too little amount of light to have any major gravitational effects in our universe, except for perhaps 32 years after big bang, when the universe was flooded in light particles. For those who like math, here are some more reasons why the photon does not have mass.

Some people like to say that the photon has mass because the photon has energy >

E=hf

Where (h) is 'Planck’s constant' and (f) is the frequency of the photon. Thus, they tend to assume that because it has energy (E) it must have mass (M) because of Einstien’s mass-energy equivalence equation:

E=Mc2

They also say that the photon has momentum, and momentum is related to mass p = Mv where (v) is velocity and (p) is for momentum. Yet, you cannot justify it having mass using this argument. This is actually 'relativistic mass' - which is nothing but the measure of energy which will change with velocity. It isn't actually mass, even though mass and energy are related. In physics jargon, the mass of an object is called its 'invariant mass,' and the photon has no invariant mass. Now, a massless particle can have energy and it can have momentum, simply because mass is related to these through the equation >

E2 = M2c4 + p2c2

Which is subsequently zero-mass for a photon because >

E = pc

…for massless radiation (remember, c means the speed of light). So yes, the photon has momenta and energy, and can deliver a punch out of it when it hits a surface, but it doesn't have mass.

Frequency is inversely proportional to wavelength, according to the equation:
v = fλ

Now... a strange situation can arise if light is trapped inside a container. If light is trapped inside of a box with mirrors inside of it, so that it cannot escape, (now the mirrors would need to be cold enough so that the mirrors do not absorb the light-energy), the total momentum is said to be zero, but the energy is not - thus, the light can contribute a very small amount of mass to the box! Now, one can say that the light in the box must have mass to even add any mass to begin with - but actually, it is more accurate to say it contributes to the mass - but do not use this as some kind of justification that light indeed has mass. That is simply not true. A photon can decrease the invariant mass value of E/c 2each time a system emits a photon... likewise, a system can increase its invariant mass by a value of E/c2, if it absorbs a photon particle.

The photon is responsible for the 'electromagnetic force' - which was first predicted by physicist James Clerk Maxwell in 1865 which was experimentally proven in 1888 by Heinrich Hertz in his detection of radio waves. Looking at the Feynman diagram shows a virtual photon exchange between a positron (antielectron) and an electron - thus it mediates the electromagnetic force, and comes in many different states; in this sense, light is electromagnetic radiation of absolutely any wavelength, such as radio waves, microwaves, ultraviolet rays, x-rays, gamma rays, infrared light waves and of course, visible light rays. The photon can be slowed down whenever, let's say it is absorbed by other mass or whenever it transfer’s energy and momentum which are both proportional to its frequency.

The photon itself was originally called 'light quantum,' or 'das Lichtquant,' by Sir Albert Einstein. It originated from 'phos' in Greek for 'light'. Like all quanta, the particle of light has both a wave and particle description; more on wave-particle duality later. Einstien's theoretical work on the photon (1905 - 1917) helped with momentous advances in quantum theory; such as lasers and quantum field theory. The photon is probably [one] of the strangest particles in physics.

The first reason is because it experiences zero dimensions. Because it is a zero-time particle, it spends absolutely no time at all to get from A to B. Now, to an observer, let's say, standing on a mountain, for light to reach his zone from the horizon, would take only a fraction of a second, but for a photon, or, from a photons point of view, it didn't even take a fraction of a second. It took no time at all. For this reason, the photon doesn't really exist... One might see this two ways. One way being that the photon is never really born in time, because it doesn't experience time - yet this must also mean it never dies. Another way being is that it is born, but this is simultaneous with its death. For these reasons, the photon seems ethereal, perhaps even 'potential', but essentially mystical and relatively ageless.


2.
Bradyons, Luxen and Tachyons

1.

I am somewhat perplexed to why nature would create two very distinct particles. One of them are these speedy maximal-velocity of energetic particles – and these slow Tardyonic matter.

Why would the universe do this?
There must be a fundamental reason, and this is the aim of this essay of my theory. Luxens seem to have been created so that they would evolve into matter –

Tachyons – particles that have an imaginary mass, which use as little energy at a constant speed at many times the value of ‘’c’’ – and can have an infinite amount of energy at the lowest speed possible, being ‘’c’’… but that’s impossible, for it is like saying the maximal speed for a proton is ‘’c’’, but it would require also an infinity energy and this is forbidden.

They would not work in my plans, because I am trying to show that there isn’t only no need for superluminal particles, but that instead trying to highlight that photons and Bradyons are unique in the design of a ‘’special boundary’’ in nature.

Any particle, even tachyon energy has arrest mass M and mass-energy E has a momentum in energy-units given by:

E2 = P2 + M2

For tardyons (normal particles) it should be clear from this equation that E cannot be less than M and is always greater than P. This is why there is so much energy contained in a thing. A standard marble has about 1093 grams of energy. That’s a lot of energy indeed. But a tachyon would contain M2 that would be negative. This makes the energy equation:

E2 = P2 - |M|2 or P2 = E2 + |M|2

This means that E can be as small as zero (when P = |M|) and that P is always greater than E and cannot be less than |M|. These quantities are related to the relativistic velocity ß by the equation

ß = P/E

This informs us that when a tachyon has its least amount of momentum

P = |M|

…it will also have its lowest possible mass-energy (E=0) and will have infinite velocity. But even though these equations describe superluminal systems, we are not really predicted by relativity.

We all know that if we could freeze the vacuum (which is -273Kelvin), the energy cannot be frozen. There is a massive amount of energy movement that cannot be quelled. The process of freezing a quantum system, like a group of atomic and subatomic particles will slow it down, but the energy they contain disallows them to ever be totally stationary. There is an interesting connection between the limit at zero Kelvin, and the limit of the speed of light.

If an object with a rest mass reaches c, then the equation says that:

ß = v/c = 1

Which leads to having the system with an infinite mass and energy. This is of course relativistic mass, which is a gain of energy –

g = 1/(1 - ß2)1/2

We are informed that if it reached ß=1, then all the energy the universe has would not be sufficient to allow it to travel at this speed. This limit brings a superior link with what we know as fast and slow particles… a limit of infinite movement at lowest speeds, and a limit of infinite energy required at the fastest speeds --- apart from Luxens.

The equations describing the velocity of matter is always measured against luxen energy: ''c'' the light of speed.

t' = t_0√1 - v²/c²

m'= m_0/√1 - v²/c²

l'=l_0√1 - v²/c²

2.

The electric force is carried by a particle known as a virtual photon.

Photons do not interact with each other. This is because they tend to fall into the same quantum states called named ‘’Bose-Einstein Statistics,’’ and is caused fundamentally because they have no electric charge, so they cannot interact with electrically charged vrtual photons.
A virtual particle does not obey:

m2c4 = E2 − p2c2

A moving photon allows for relativity to give the photon the ability to mediate not only electronic force, but also a magnetic force, given as electromagnetism. The photon has an energy of only 4×10–19 Joules. That’s 0.0000000000000000004 Joules, and the photon can only interact with matter by transferring energy:

E=hc/

Where  is Planck's Constant and has a value of:

h =6.626 068 (33) x 10 -34 J . s = 4.135 667 33(10) x 10 -15 eV . s

3.
Gluon and Luxen Binding

Let us now consider what all the work previously means. It first states that there was an intrinsic reason to why the wave function allowed the probability of two unique particles: The Luxens and Bradyons. The Bradyons have a rest mass, but it can be collided with its antipartner, produces two gamma waves of energy. This is matter reverting to energy:

M = E/c2

And since we have made matter out of Luxen Light Energy, then the theory stands that all matter evolved in this very way. The idea I have developed is how to unify the photon-photon combination, because current theory states that two photons do not interact. If matter-antimatter coherence releases twice as much energy than what it contained giving off two photons, then how did the two photons combine in the first place?

We can make photon-photon collisions in theory, and create new particles however. Two photons have come together to create a new type of matter. This is what happened years after big bang. Light came out of the Aether and somehow joined together creating matter. Some of the Photons that escaped would evolve during the inflationary period, which happened around 10 -33 after big bang. We have also covered that there is no such thing as matter. There is only energy, and even this energy calculates to nothing when added with the negative energy of the vacuum, which still strangely persists an error of 122~ magntitudes.

> More to essey one.

4.
The Energy of the Universe

E=Mc2 alone was enough to indicate that all matter was but forms of trapped Luxen energy. The conversion had written all over it also the antimatter-matter phenomenon. The energy of the universe is in fact massive. If you removed all of the matter and free energy from space and time, you are still left with a massive amount of energy – an infinite amount of energy in fact.

We have been attempting to renormalize all of the energy to some zero value:

(E=Mc2)+(E=-Mc2) = 0

But our equations don’t give this, as we see more energy in the universe than what there should be, so we are, for now left with this non-zero energy. The incongruity might be solved in the future, with new math…

But there is quite a lot of energy we do observe everyday… it’s just in very stable forms. Take a standard marble. It contains around 1093 grams of energy!!! That’s a lot… that is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000
We know this because we can measure it against the equation E=Mc2 and then calculating how much energy in Joules there is. And there is a lot of energy in matter! A dice contains about 10^93 grams of energy.
The earth itself contains about

Not only that, but Approximately 120,000 TW (terrawatts), that is 120,000,000,000,000,000 joules hits our earth every second. More energy hits the sun in one hour that the whole world uses in one year, which is 5.5 x 1024!!! Big statistics here of how to contemplate the amount of energy contained locally.

But there is no way we can measure the energy of the universe, because how can we when we cannot observe it from the outside? – Which is a reserved example because there is no outside to the universe. This energy nonetheless if it where able to calculate would still be photon energy. The universe may as well be seen as one massive superboson with no unique energy.


6.
Spacetime is Just a Physical Vacuum of Electromagnetic Radiation

Now, if physics has it correct, then the first energy to come out of spacetime (I’ve heard a few different times when this happened. I have had arguments that it was more like 180,000 years after spacetime – whilst PhD F. A Wolf claims it was more like 32 years….) – but nevertheless, we have the model that photons where the first particles to permeate spacetime, creating a background temperature of radiation.

This makes the Vacuum a physical manifestation. In relativity, we are taught that not only is space and time unified as a spacetime continuum, but you can’t seem to have a spacetime without energy. They are all one of the same thing! Matter is nothing but a longer lived and stable form of energy, which will in the end convert back into energy: We can think of energy as being like ‘’radical’’ and ‘’badly behaved’’ diffused matter until they are ‘’caught up into a frequency.’’ These frozen states of frequencies will create all the particles we know of.

Another theory I have heard, is that matter is formed not by my ‘’frequency trapped theory,’’ but by energy knots. Whilst I admire the theory, I prefer the idea that energy can e caught up in a state of material fluctuation without any type of complex knots or energetic acrobats.

The trapped energy is of course the photons that build up the Luxon Theory. To best imagine this theory, it’s like a molecule of water being inexorably trapped into some solid-state by freezing it: But ignore the quantum fact that there is still energy moving about… It’s just a lame example) – but like watching a thing like water crystallize and freeze, is a little like the theory, accept that no two water molecules will ever freeze into the same configuration – and there are so many more combination for water freezing than what there is known particles.

So, there is a limit on the trapped frequency theory of photons. I propose some type of universal intrinsic property that governs how a photon will manifest into a proton, neutron or even an electron – (In fact, the electron might not have a mass… and could be a particle that moves at lightspeed according to Dirac’s Equations).

The types of frequencies that photons trap into, will not only determine their elemental properties, but will also determine their lifespans. The lifespan of the proton (which is something like 10^33 years) – well older than the universe today – is one particle that needs to decay for unified physical purposes. If it is found to have an infinite lifespan, then that makes physics even more stranger than what we ever imagined. We would then ask… ‘’Why the proton?’’ Why is it unaffected by weak force?

Now to finish… You and me, the tree, the rock, the air we breathe are all but forms of trapped frequencies of photon energy which I find to be as primal as time itself.

But What Causes The Trap of Frequency Mode?

The only logical solution to this would be to imply that the type of particle created is due to the energy of the surrounding space and time – Just like the known theory that if you add a certain amount of energy into spacetime, a particle will ‘’pop’’ out of the vacuum... This is evidence that the virtual photon is effected by real energy, and causes it to flux into a solid state of diffused matter.

This post, and others by OG, bear a very strong resemblance to posts by "Reiku", in the sciforums.com internet discussion forum.

To be clear about originality, authorship, etc, would you mind stating, OG, whether you are simply copying and pasting material from that other forum (or the other way round)?

Lux[b]o[/ b]n or Luxen? Please make up your mind or is one (some unknown form of) plural of the other?

As said before, a citation would be nice, I think you may hint at this but why leave it to the reader to find the relevant information?

so a "Luxen" is a photon.

Not really, that depends on the "frequency" of the photon, doesn't it? The equation that you are going to use later with E = h f, so the higher the frequency the more energy the photon has.

Well at least this disposes with the idea of tired light.

usually "the first chronon" is the Planck time and not 32 years or whatever value you want to give. But this would not be the first time you change the meaning of standard terms in physics.

So the mass of a proton is created by the gluon and not by the mass of the quarks? From Wiki (often a good primer to see if your ideas agree with standard theory. Oh, but this is ATM so we do not have to care about standard theory) we find the following quote on gluons: While massive spin-1 particles have three polarization states, massless gauge bosons like the gluon have only two polarization states (read the rest later, but the limit is a few MeV, which would mean a few times the electron energy, and quarks have more mass).

well at least here we agree

(my bold)
I thought photons follow geodesics and in curved space time geodesics are not straight but curved. Never heard about light creating curvature.

What was predicted and what was observed here? very confused!

Well, in a Feynman diagram the EM interaction between the two is described by the interchange of a virtual photon. The photon does not mediate the EM force because it is in the Feynman diagram (as your "thus" seems to imply).

and then "in this sense", whatever do you want to say in that sentence, apart from stating the obvious that electromagnetic waves can also be seen as photons.

If a photon is absorbed it does not slow down, it disappears.

I don't think Einstein was "sir"

some new age babble

First time I heard about a "bradyon" but it seems to be a real term.

Why not? Nature does not have to have a reason, it just does/is.

why would that be?

use as little energy? what is that supposed to mean?

so I guess you put c=1 here? otherwise you are in trouble.

For tardyons (normal particles) it should be clear from this equation that E cannot be less than M and is always greater than P. This is why there is so much energy contained in a thing. A standard marble has about 1093 grams of energy. That’s a lot of energy indeed. But a tachyon would contain M2 that would be negative. This makes the energy equation:

E2 = P2 - |M|2 or P2 = E2 + |M|2
[/quote]

Tardyons, for those who missed it explanation, are the same as bradyons, what most of us would call "normal particles with rest mass".

A standard marbel has 1093 gram? that is one heck of a marble, I think you even want to say it has 10⁹³ gram of energy, whatever that may mean. How do you get to this value?

This only looks like that because you are looking at everything from a "real" viewpoint, whereas you already said that mass would be imaginary, so you have to work in the complex plane, which is not so bad as you only have 2 variables in the scalar equations. You might want to read up on it again in Wiki. But then, tachyons have not been observed, and may not exist even in mainstream, but not because of any negative energy arguments.

I am glad we are not predicted by relativity

<more in the next post>

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

what is this supposed to mean? freezing vacuum? vacuum means there is nothing there, nothing there means there is nothing to give it a temperature, unless you have background radiation like in space, which is something else then the temperature of vacuum. -273 CELSIUS I think you mean is absolute zero on the KELVIN scale. Get your facts right, -273 K does not exists.

I think we are doing a very good job at reaching absolute zero actually. What kind of energies do you mean here, now it just looks just like so much more new age babble. Do you mean zero point energy or internal energy of the proton, or better make that gluon, or what?

HUH? what is infinite movement? If we reach 0 Kelvin all motion stops of the cooled specimen. Would that be a limit to FINITE motion? that there cannot be no-motion?

Well, at least the equations are correct, but the speed of light (or luxen) is now and energy?

Uhhhhh, then why the comment above that scientists created matter out of light. Don't the photons have to interact to create the matter? And why would Bose-Einstein statistics disallow photons to interact? And why are virtual photons electrically charged? Are you mixing here virtual photons with virtual particle pairs?

I put in the bolded word, see Wiki "virtual particle" for an intro and read a book to get more information.

The virtual photon carries the interaction of the EM field, be it electric or magnetic. Whatever this has to do with relativity I fail to see. Also "given as electromagnetism" is supposed to mean what, apart from seemingly being some profound statement?

The photon has an energy of ..., well, it could have, how do you come to this value? what are the things you put in? why specifically that energy?

The photon can give energy to matter (being absorbed) OR it can give momentum to matter (colliding without being absorbed) in which is only gives up part of its energy. You state things here that sound profound, but on a bit closer look show that you have not really thought out the details.

NO, nowhere above was anything of the like stated, you have discussed, sort of, why there should not be tachyons, for the rest you have made unsubstantiated comments on how particle physics should be, but never ever discussed anti-particles.

NOT AT ALL! One of the way or creating electron-positron pairs in a neutron star magnetosphere is by photon-photon collisions. Get your facts right.

You have not presented anything yet, apart from some correct and some incorrect physics, but there has been presented no model at all unifying the photon-photon interaction with particle-antiparticle interaction.

What is this supposed to mean? if an electron and a positron get together and annihilate, you will get 2 0.5 MeV gamma photons, exactly the amount of rest mass energy (if the two particles were at rest)

Not only in theory, but also in practice, as your claim in the beginning was and which I found for you on the web. This now has been done in the lab.

Oh dear, now suddenly we have to have an eather, where did that come from?

And what kind of babble do you have at the end there? I think the only place where there is no matter might be in ad hominim, do not go there. So basically, you need to come up with something significant, citations of your sources, better description of values you assume to be correct, etc. etc.

Like I said in the other thread, concentrate on one thing at the time. I am a professional space physicist and I cannot write two papers at the time. Now, this may be because I am a bad scientist, but I kinda think that it has to do with keeping ones focus point on the topic, instead of straying in every which direction.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

''So the mass of a proton is created by the gluon and not by the mass of the quarks? From Wiki (often a good primer to see if your ideas agree with standard theory. Oh, but this is ATM so we do not have to care about standard theory) we find the following quote on gluons: While massive spin-1 particles have three polarization states, massless gauge bosons like the gluon have only two polarization states (read the rest later, but the limit is a few MeV, which would mean a few times the electron energy, and quarks have more mass).''

Actually, when two quarks come together, there is more energy there than what they contained which makes gluon energy. Don't mix up things i say.

Light can generate its own curvature, or distortions of spacetime. This is how photons couple to gravity.

32 years has nothing to do with the Planck Length 10^-33 or 10^-35.

Bradyons are simply Tardyons: v<c.


The photon is chargless, but it does indeed mediate a force. You should know this without question.

When i speak about using the lowest energy, whenever some accelerates or slows down, requires an energy increase or a decrease.

Yes... the power wasn't raised 10^93/ a peice of matter contains a whopping amount of energy you know. How do you think we created the atom bomb|?

Oh and eh... wiki? I don't recite from wiki unless i really have to.

I hope you are asking these question geniunly for correct answers, and not trying to make a mockery of my work.

''what is this supposed to mean? freezing vacuum? vacuum means there is nothing there, nothing there means there is nothing to give it a temperature, unless you have background radiation like in space, which is something else then the temperature of vacuum. -273 CELSIUS I think you mean is absolute zero on the KELVIN scale. Get your facts right, -273 K does not exists.''

If you removed all the matter and energy from the vacuum, an infinite amount of energy still exists. This is called the Zero-Point Energy Field, and if it where possible to freeze the vacuum down to -273K, then there would still be movement.

''HUH? what is infinite movement? If we reach 0 Kelvin all motion stops of the cooled specimen. Would that be a limit to FINITE motion? that there cannot be no-motion?''

No, i have just shown you to be incorrect here.

''Uhhhhh, then why the comment above that scientists created matter out of light. Don't the photons have to interact to create the matter? And why would Bose-Einstein statistics disallow photons to interact? And why are virtual photons electrically charged? Are you mixing here virtual photons with virtual particle pairs?''

We can force photons to hit each other, but normally in reality, they do not interact with each other. I do believe i had made this clear.

''NOT AT ALL! One of the way or creating electron-positron pairs in a neutron star magnetosphere is by photon-photon collisions. Get your facts right.

You have not presented anything yet, apart from some correct and some incorrect physics, but there has been presented no model at all unifying the photon-photon interaction with particle-antiparticle interaction.''

Learn how to read and take in. If the first energy in the universe was the photon, then all types of matter are forms of evolved light. Photons are the most primal particle known. Magneto-stars and whatever have nothing to do with what i am talking about.

''Not only in theory, but also in practice, as your claim in the beginning was and which I found for you on the web. This now has been done in the lab.

Oh dear, now suddenly we have to have an eather, where did that come from?

And what kind of babble do you have at the end there? I think the only place where there is no matter might be in ad hominim, do not go there. So basically, you need to come up with something significant, citations of your sources, better description of values you assume to be correct, etc. etc.

Like I said in the other thread, concentrate on one thing at the time. I am a professional space physicist and I cannot write two papers at the time. Now, this may be because I am a bad scientist, but I kinda think that it has to do with keeping ones focus point on the topic, instead of straying in every which direction.''

The aether is the Zero-Point Field. Check Diracs, ''Do we need an Aether?'' in respect to a quantum aether. The answer is yes.

Now... go and learn some physics. I wouldn't be as so bold as to post nonesense when i know fine well anyone in the world can read it.

could you please use the quote possibility of the board, your answers are rather difficult to find out like that

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

But this is EXACTLY what you said, I quote: In fact, 98.12% of our bodies are made up of gluon mass. I did not mix anything up here, you just don't know anymore what you write. Quarks have mass, much more that gluons, period, final, read up on it in a book


care to quote some mainstream source for this nonsense?

I was not talking about the Planck length but about the Planck TIME. One Planck TIME is normally used as "first chronon" not 32 years.

Thanks for the late explanation, this should have been in your first post.

Yes, I know that, but you do not seem to know that from your first post, don't attack me on mistakes you make talking about "charged viritual photons".

How on Earth can a piece of matter, a marble, contain 10⁹³ GRAM of energy, anyway as said in your closed thread (the same as this one) in general science, energy is not measured in gram but in Joules. So, correct your mistakes.

Wiki may not be perfect, but at least it gives you a handhold for the first step and then you can go to a textbook, which might not immediately be available for you. I do read the wiki pages first before I link to them on BAUT.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

I comment on the nonsense that is in your post, for all I care you can stop with this thing you call theory.

Once more -273 Kelvin DOES NOT EXIST. ZPE is not infinite, and there cannot be motion in vacuum, because vacuum means there are no particles to move, unless you invoke here the virtual particle sea.

You have done none of the kind, you say vacuum which contains particles (impossible). You relate this now suddenly to cooled down particles and whatever. You are mixing up stuff, I am just commenting on your mess.

But they DO, e.g. in strong radiation fields in the magnetospheres of neutron stars. From Volwerk et al. (1993, Space Science Review, vol. 68, pg. 363-364) (and yes that is me)

And the same happens in various stong radiation fields.

I can read and I can understand what is written. Who cares what the first particle is in this case. You claim photon-photon collisions do not occur in nature, I tell you that they are an important method of creating particle pairs. Wheter or not neutronstars are important for your model is beside the case.

Looking to the development of the universe indeed, in the beginning there was light, and the photon saw it was good. Then a little later there was a shift in the balance between matter and radiation etc. etc. it is all there in "the first three minutes."

If the eathere is ZPE then call it ZPE, because it has nothing to do with the eather that was supposedly necessary to let electromagnetic waves propagate through vacuum. And that is the problem with you, you just redefine accepted meanings of physics and math without stating that you put a new meaning to those terms.

I study physics every day, it's my job, OC, and I learn something every day. Unfortunately, I have yet to find something to learn from all the threads you have started on BAUT, apart from that most of it is nonsense.

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

''But this is EXACTLY what you said, I quote: In fact, 98.12% of our bodies are made up of gluon mass. I did not mix anything up here, you just don't know anymore what you write. Quarks have mass, much more that gluons, period, final, read up on it in a book''

I am not going to argue anymore on this.

''care to quote some mainstream source for this nonsense?''

Care to learn some relativity?

''I was not talking about the Planck length but about the Planck TIME. One Planck TIME is normally used as "first chronon" not 32 years.''

The Planck Time is the smallest known time. No matter existed until 32 years had passed. A chronon is thebillionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of one second. I am talking about distances in time much farther than a mere 5.3 x 10^-44.

''Yes, I know that, but you do not seem to know that from your first post, don't attack me on mistakes you make talking about "charged viritual photons".''

Where did i ever say a photon has a charge, virtual or not?

''How on Earth can a piece of matter, a marble, contain 1093 GRAM of energy, anyway as said in your closed thread (the same as this one) in general science, energy is not measured in gram but in Joules. So, correct your mistakes.''

You can measure any amount in grams. It's not widely used, but it is used nonethless. Check Dr Wolf's book, ''Spiritual Universe for reference.''

''Once more -273 Kelvin DOES NOT EXIST. ZPE is not infinite, and there cannot be motion in vacuum, because vacuum means there are no particles to move, unless you invoke here the virtual particle sea.''

Then you don't know physics. ZPE is a sea of an infinite amount of negative particles. As i have said before, please learn these things.

''You have done none of the kind, you say vacuum which contains particles (impossible). You relate this now suddenly to cooled down particles and whatever. You are mixing up stuff, I am just commenting on your mess.''

And obtusely boring i say again, learn some physics. Spacetime has an infinite sea of virtual particles. Read up on ''the Dirac Sea,'' and links that the Dirac Sea is the ZPF.

''I can read and I can understand what is written. Who cares what the first particle is in this case.''

Everything. I am unifying all matter down to photons, which is no ''new'' idea.

''If the eathere is ZPE then call it ZPE, because it has nothing to do with the eather that was supposedly necessary to let electromagnetic waves propagate through vacuum. And that is the problem with you, you just redefine accepted meanings of physics and math without stating that you put a new meaning to those terms.

I study physics every day, it's my job, OC, and I learn something every day. Unfortunately, I have yet to find something to learn from all the threads you have started on BAUT, apart from that most of it is nonsense.''

1. You are talking about electromagnetic waves created by interaction wth the 5th dimension.

2. There is a quantum aether, which by the by, repeating myself again, is the virtual sea of energy. Any educated physicist knows this fact.

And if you study physics -- then you have quite a bit to go i am affraid to inform you. But keep at it.

Wow . . . . just wow.

***Leaves the house now for a nice Sunday afternoon walk in the real world***

Another thread?

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

It appears that the only change is that now we dont know physics.

have you thought about going on a vegan diet OG?


All that dead flesh, cow puss and reproductive fluids may be play up with your mind.


I'm a strict veg myself, can't be bothered with all the small ingredients, but I recommend it.

__________________

The physics i have shown is sound. If anyone denies this, then there is some serious misunderstanding around this forum, in the sense it shouldn't be called only bad astronomy, but bad physicists.

Have you seen the film "Nurse Betty", OG?

It is about a woman who witnesses the murder of her husband, and, in a state of shock and denial, goes off in search of a doctor, from a medical soap opera, who she thinks that she has a relationship with.
She assumes the role of a nurse, and really thinks she is a nurse, from her favourite soap.

does this apply to you, in any way?

is there some kind of trauma, that you are not dealing with, by taking on the role of some sort of scientist?

maybe your life didn't turn out quite as well as you hoped; this I can relate to; I sometimes wish that I had gone to university to study physics.....

__________________

I'll repost my question from the closed thread:

So, let's cut to the chase:

What is the mass of the "luxen"? (I'm guessing zero.)

What is its spin?

What charges does it carry, if any? By charge I mean electric, weak, strong, or possibly a new one.

What interactions would create these "luxens"? Can you think of any experiments that might be done at the Tevatron and the LHC that could confirm the existence of these "luxens"?

__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.

Hopefully, this means that you see that what you wrote and what you thought you wrote were not the same.

You claim that light curves space, just like mass. I have never been taught the like, no ofcourse this could be that my university teachers (e.g. Gerard 't Hooft) had it wrong, but I would love to see which book you are using for this.

Totally irrelevant blahblah. If you google "first chronon" you will mainly find references to the Planck time. If you want to redefine this, okay, no problem, but state that you redefine terms.
And once again you are mixing up time and distance, do you know the difference?

How about in your first post here on the top of the page, at the beginning of your point 2:
Although I must say you are talking about a vrtual photon, which may be a whole new particle.

Sure you can measure energy in equivalent mass, thank you Mr. Einstein. But you cannot have more equivalent mass in that marble that the mass it has. And "spiritual universe" ??? if that is the resourced you use for your physics, I don't wonder anymore that you have such strange ideas.

I hope this means that you see that the Kelvin scale starts at zero and has no negative values.
And I think Dr. Wolf is rather mistaken to say that ZPE has infinite amount of "negativ particles" whatever those may be. Why not read a real physics book yourself?

The Dirac "sea" is created because of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, I have very strong doubts that there is any way of cooling down this sea. But if you have any references for me I (real physics books, not spiritual books) then I will gladly try and look it up).

Well, everything started as "light".

1. Ah, now we need a 5th dimension to create electromagnetic waves? Got any references for that?

2. There is a "Dirac Sea" because of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (but it does not contain any "negative particles" whatever those are). If you want to call this an eather, you are free to do so, but then tell the reader that you define that as the eather. But googling for "dirac sea eather" gives only results to woowoo sites, so I guess it is not the normal definition of eather or Dirac sea.

Well, I don't really study physics, I did that years ago at Utrecht University, where I got my PhD in plasma astrophysics. Now I just do research, which requires me to (re)learn more stuff, which I have not looked into before or which I forgot for not using it. My research is mainly electrodynamics/plasma physics near black holes, neutron stars, the Earth's magnetosphere, the Galilean satellites and Venus. I have probably written more scientific papers that you have read coming up with this what-you-call-theory.

You have quite a ways to go, OC, but eventually you will read real physics books and not "spiritual universe" which you probably buy in your local esotheric bookstore.

Later dude!

__________________

Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.


善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)

I was going to suggest you check on someone's bona fides before making a statement like this, but tusenfem seems to have set the record straight.

Still, keep this in mind in the future. Don't make accusations unless you know they can be supported, and especially avoid accusations that could be taken as attacking the person instead of the argument.

First, this is an Emperor's New Clothes argument, which doesn't fly well around here.

Second, this comes very close to being a blanket ad hominem directed at anyone who doesn't agree with you. As a Moderator, I cannot do anything about the former, but I can insist that you stay away from the latter.

No call for this.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

(emphasis added)

Bumping this question, from yesterday ...

I thought the "strong Luxen" was that guy on Farscape.

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
"The Mayan symbol for "book" looks a lot like a triple hamburger, but I've never seen them claiming it as proof the Mayans had Big Macs." - KaiYeves
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

Frog

No relation.

And the rest of the essay: But a prior note...

I want you all to know who have rejected such simple physics -- that it makes this forum look extremely stupid.

Moderator: WTF are you on? Mod-Ecky Pills or something>???? You don't know me, and none of you do. If i post physics, i post physics. I don't need to back myself up on remedial friggin question like:

''how does light cause curvature?''

Well here you go... didn't you know that energy and momentum in spacetime (properties that the photon has) causes curvature and gravity>???? Well... never mind.\ It just shows how thickle and how many prancies lightweights around here try and pretend they actually know physics, when the best they do is read from some antiquated wiki page.

Now, for my essay.

1.
A Clue with Luxens

Luxens do not experience inertial effects as they move through spacetime. Inertia seems to be a resistance on corporeal bodies moving through the cosmos. What causes it has never been explained by Newtonian equations or even relativity –

A major clue arises to why matter has mass, when considering the intrinsic phenomena of inertia. There are equations that where developed showing that a thing moving through the Zero-Point Energy Field causes distortions within that field of negative energy. Some scientists have proposed that the energy is somehow affecting matter – providing it with inertial properties.

Since matter is nothing but gravity, and gravity being nothing but distortions, these equivalent properties is a field conveying the property of matter – its inertial mass. This effect has also been proposed to be what gives matter its mass, instead of the hypothetical Higgs Boson.

The Luxens provides vital clues to proving this hypothesis. Since photons do not experience inertial effects, it must be due to the fact it has no mass – which stands to reason with the relativistic equations provided earlier. The effect of inertia however links Newtons equation of:

F=Ma

Since inertia only effects a matter that is accelerating. Because of this, force is proportional to inertia as well, and what is this force?
The ZPF might have some kind of ‘’back-reaction’’ on the presence of real matter in the vacuum. Acceleration causes curvature, which creates gravity, and this might couple to like-distortions in the ZPF. If curvature is gravity, and gravity is mass, and mass is acceleration and acceleration is distortions, then the ZPF might be acting on the mass from inside, sparking corporeality.

Photons themselves cause curvature because of their energy and momentum, so they give off gravity as they move through space, but the ZPF doesn’t seem to be able to couple to the Photon like it does when effecting matter. This is because the gravity a photon produces is not local, as matter produces gravity from within its innate structure…

The ZPF even at absolute zero temperatures still effect matter with inertia, for the vacuum would still contain ½h. This is where the Dirac Sea comes into valuable play. It has been known for a while now that the Dirac Sea, which is a negative sea of energy is also a zero-point source. Because of the equations that describe this, we now link the Dirac Sea as being the same thing as the Zero-Point Field.

The Dirac Equation was formulated by linking together quantum mechanics and relativity together in hope of some unification. At the time, Dirac only had three particles to work with, as the proton, neutron and the electron was the only particles on the quantum standard model. He found that when a certain amount of energy was added in spacetime would force one of these negatively charged virtual particles to spontaneously bubble from what can only be described as a quantum aether.

The Dirac Equation is given as:
……………… .3
(Mc^2 +  p_c ) (x,t) = ih t (x, t)
…………k=1

Whilst the Dirac Equation has many implications and relations in physics, such as being a wave equation itself, therefore it is linked to the Schrodinger Equation, it also predicted that spin was in fact the product of relating quantum theory with relativity using wonderful mathematics and matrices.

But more importantly, it showed and confirmed the existence of antimatter, giving a negative solution to E=Mc^2. By coupling the electromagnetic field with the Dirac Equation, positive and negative properties are mixed, and the solution became antimatter-matter annihilation. This alone is a massive set of proofs that photons where the primal existing particle of energy, creating everything in the universe… and that an inverse property could reduce that matter back to its photon energetic form.

3.
A Vacuum, a Photon and no Time at All

1.

As I mentioned throughout my essays, the vacuum itself is physical. Even if you removed all the visible matter and energy, there is still an infinite amount of energy. But I made it even clearer that this wasn’t just ‘’any’’ energy. I wanted to show empirical proof that the photon (electromagnetic radiation) was in fact primal – that the vacuum of space and time, was just electromagnetism itself (1). I’ve never heard a physicist call the photon as a primal particle, but it certainly gives it an edge.

(1)* I won’t highlight the gravitational, weak or strong forces as of yet. Electromagnetism has been successfully unified with the weak force and the strong, and at high enough energies, the strong and gravitational forces are theoretically able to be unified as well, as a one-single force, named Quantum Gravity.

But if you ask a physicist, is time primal (as in the imaginary dimension of space), they will almost definitely say ‘’yes’’. We extrapolate back to find the most primal and fundamental occurrences so that we can initiate a picture of our universe today – the foundation upon which God created everything.

It turns out that the equations describing a single photon evolving into other particles can be relatively easy. During the process of this work, I was asked to integrate Quantum Electrodynamics into the frame-work, and quite rightly so.

Scattering light with light is In fact contributes to the magnetic anomaly of the leptons ~ Especially the ones with higher mass. For instance that of the muon. I suggest that before such scattering occurred a few moments after energy appeared in the universe, the photons first had to decay into like particles – Leptons… and this contributed to the first light-light scatterings, and could have created some of the most exotic particles known on the standard model.

A photon with a high energy E has quite a short wave length, whilst photon energy which is low exhibit long frquencies which are of course proportional to their wave lengths. If a photons scatters of another photon, the result would be that it would endure a decrease in energy, and shorten its wave length. There is an inverse law which states that a photon can scatter off matter, and inversely gain energy – more than what the photon contained originally. This can inevitably lead to the photon (if my theory on photon frequency trapping is correct, instead of the energy knot theory), create new particles; which would be finite – since there is only a limited amount of particles that can be created in this universe due to statistical laws.

Compton Scattering, as it has come to be known in physics history, find that such processes are due to the conditions I raised above. The Compton Scattering is given through a string of math, as derived from (λs = c/) giving the formula:

’ - h/M_ec (1- cos)

The result of scattering photon energy will collide with a system at rest, and this will produce a new photon (out of the Aether of virtual electromagnetic radiation), and the angle of the release of this new energy is given by the variable . This can only be done however if there is a conservation in energy and momenta.

E(gamma)+P(gamma) = E(gamma)’+P(gamma)’

Where E(gamma) and P(gamma) is the energy and momentum of the photon. The creation of matter very early on will have also happened through pair production. However, quite a few photons would have had to have decayed into protons, decaying into electrons and neutrons before hand, because pair-production is when a photon moves into an atomic nucleus in high energy collisions. The result is that the photon creates two electrons; one being a negative electron and the other a positive electron (its antiparticle), without violating any necessary laws of conservation:

y → Positron + electron

- Both at periodic angles again given as . Because the produced particles have opposite forces, they tend to rush away from each other. It’s almost analogous to an anti-gravitational effect. When two electrons are produced in the atom, the positron will rush out of the atom, whilst the electron remains in orbit around the nucleons in a cloud of probability.

Pair production can only happen however, if the photon has an energy that exceeds the rest mass (me) of an electron (1.022 MeV) – twice the relativistic energy E/c^2; the same applies for the generation of other higher energy leptons such as the muon.

Such processes still happen today – especially round black holes where their boundaries give off radiation in pair production. One antiparticle will fall into the black hole, whilst the other particle will accelerate off into spacetime. There aren’t that many antiparticles though. There is something like 1 antiparticle to every 10^7 photons in our universe, but because of recent developments showing that nothing can disappear from our universe through black holes, the antiparticles that do fall into them will return, possibly in the future state of our universe. This is only speculation on my behalf though.

2.

So far, there can be no reason why we should not suspect the primal photon to have provided everything with substance through processes like inflation, natural decay and even pair-production, a little later on after the photons had flooded spacetime. Somehow acceleration of energy creates the matter within a particle, and the inertial effects are an indication of the mechanism that seems to be the suspect cause.

So for this section, what evidence mathematically-wise do we have to attach these hypotheses together>? Well, it seems best to start with Newton’s relationship between matter and acceleration – his second law of motion. His three laws are:
1. A physical body will remain at rest, or continue to move at a constant velocity unless an unbalanced net force acts upon it.
2. The net force on a body is equal to its mass multiplied by its acceleration.
3. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
As you will most probably know, these laws don’t necessarily apply to the subatomic world. It is the second law that is of interest here, for it is found that force is directly proportional to the mass multiplied by the acceleration of a system.
Newton’s second law is derived mathematically as:

F = d(mv)/dt
The equation is seen in reference of an inertial frame, which is basically a mass moving through spacetime experiencing a resistance. The first law however is more of a special case of the second law, which is really a law of acceleration. In relativity, we find that acceleration is the same as mass, and this is the same as gravity.
Inertia can be felt. It seems to be directly a consequence of acceleration itself. If we imagine a stationary ball inside a moving train, the ball will according to the observers inside the train see it move back, whilst paradoxically the train is moving forward. This is called the inertial frame of reference. This resistance hasn’t been answered by Newton or by Einstein’s relativity theories.
Inertia is intrinsic to gravity and matter, so massless bodies do not have any inertial effects effected upon them.

(Apologies up-front for the variables used. They don't seem to be showing up properly.)

More of the essay to come>

Wow...what wonderful arrogance

Are you done insulting people yet?

Let us all bow down to your staggering intellect :roll

Pete

__________________
PJE

There's so much I don't know about astrophysics. I wish I had read that book by that wheelchair guy.

Insulting people? I think they achieved that first. I was quite diplomatic before being called a crank.

I've closed this thread. I'd like to point out that generally, we do not regard one person's use of ad hom attack as justification for retaliation against all who disagree with you.

Whoever called OC a crank, please let me remind you that there might be more productive and diplomatic ways to get answers. BTW, Thanks to those who alerted us to the lack of answers.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak