QWC 2012 Updates

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by quantum_wave, Jan 19, 2012.

  1. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    QWC 2012 Updates

    OP is only ~1000 words of fresh mixed greens

    QWC (Quantum Wave Cosmology) evolves as I talk about it on various forums and as you tell me what doesn’t work and why. I draw from that and from my own continued education and research on the internet or the library, etc. The “QWC revisited 2011” covers QWC and was updated throughout the year, and that is the basis from which this thread will build.

    For a good part of last year I talked about rewriting posts 38 and 39 that explained QWC gravity, and I have finally done that and will include it in this year’s SciForums update. There are only minor changes though and they really only incorporate a couple of small improvements related to the wave energy background and what I think is a better description of the mechanics involved in the wave overlap space as quantum waves converge, produce high density spots, then the spots disburse as spherical waves and the time delay involved in the process that is responsible for the containment of wave energy within a particle. The directional imbalance in the inflowing gravity wave energy density is more fully explored in regard to the time delay of gravity and why objects move in curved paths through space.

    This year’s updates will include more on the Universal Cosmic Wave Energy Background (UCWEB), where it comes from, where it goes, why with an infinite number of arenas is the night sky still dark, and why we cannot detect gravity waves yet.

    Also, I will get into the question of the beginning from a new perspective. Not just by saying I select the explanation, “The universe has always existed”, but to address the concept of something from nothing more broadly. I found several who were willing to bring up the links and claims that seem to suggest some believe the expansion of space concept is the “something from nothing” explanation and see it as a possibility and why. As usual, this is not a “God did it” thread and in QWC the concept of God is addressed in the Philosophy of QWC where Eternal Intent is described and offered as common ground between science and religion. Eternal Intent cannot be true unless specific prerequisites are true as I explain in the Concept of Eternal Intent essay.

    And there is a story that leads me to examine Big Bang Theory in the words that describe the work of George Gamow, the Father of Big Bang Theory, and one or two other word salad descriptions of the Big Bang with Inflation scenario. I mean to single out what I think is the most important difference between QWC and General Relativity, the expansion of spacetime as opposed to the QWC concept of infinite and eternal space filled with fluctuating levels of wave energy density, and where time simply passes. Wave energy density comes into play here too because the rate at which clocks measure time is governed by the wave energy density of the environment and the wave energy density is affected by relative motion through the wave energy density of the background.

    That discussion leads to how to distinguish which object is in motion and which is at rest based on the concept that an observer in the rest frame will observe redshift in all directions while there will be blueshifting in varying degrees in the direction of motion at relativistic velocities in the moving frame. It is much like the “at rest relative to the fixed stars” idea of the past but with an understanding of the cause of redshifting and blueshifting. QWC does not include the concept of absolute space, absolute motion, or absolute time but there is a potential discussion about differences between QWC and spacetime in that regard.

    There is some new “freeze frame” discussion that helps differentiate between space and time as opposed to spacetime, and start to describe wave energy density from a freeze frame scenario. Those discussions also lead to the discussion of the QWC alternative to the curvature of spacetime on the basis that wave energy density fills all space. In QWC, wave energy density governs the velocity of light through space while in spacetime it is the consensus that light is self propagating as it traverses spacetime.

    That leads to a new topic of discussion which explores how light might hitchhike on gravity waves. That discussion brings in Huygens and his concept of how light wave fronts move through space and of course includes the concept that space contains gravity waves that travel at the speed of light (or is it that light travels at the speed of gravity, lol). You will recall that I describe inflowing and out flowing standing waves (gravity waves) that establish the presence of particles and cause gravity. This new concept of hitchhiking light explores that possible association between light emitted by oscillating dipoles which themselves are maintained by inflowing and out flowing gravity waves.

    And not necessarily last, and certainly not least there is the new discussion about arena action, the arena landscape of the greater universe. I hope to have a first time discussion on the arena lattice structure of the universe that takes the arena landscape to a new level and explores the light absorption that takes place in and around big crunches as they form and collapse. That would include the effect on the wave length of light in space surrounding the collapse of a big crunch as well as the absorption of light throughout the process. That is one of the solutions to the new Olbers’ Paradox. Wild guesses about the size of big crunches, and the number of quanta in a proton are revisited in the arena lattice concept.

    Please have fun and remember my disclaimer:

    My speculations are not science; they are speculation upon speculation intended for my enjoyment and the pleasure of those who enjoy this kind of thread. I have not come up with something that hasn’t occurred to the scientific community, and I’m not mentioning my alternative views as hints or guidelines for science to heed. It is my intention to speculate about things that the scientific community cannot yet observe, test, and quantify but only with the intention of having internally consistent personal views. Don’t construe that into me telling the scientific community anything. My views are about what the cosmology of the universe might be like when science resolves the current theoretical inconsistencies between QM and Cosmology and I do it to occupy my time while scientists work on the real deal.

    There are no reports yet of children being harmed by QWC, but you must still be 18 or over to read about it, just to be safe.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2012
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Ah man. That's a show stopper.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2012
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    I luv you MD, but I just couldn't go all the way, lol.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Did you only get to 3rd base or somehting? Never mind; I don't want to know.
     
  8. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    I am glad for the opportunity to discuss the concepts of absolute space and time with you and feel free to participate. Let’s call this brainstorming

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .

    I understand a bit about the MD universe that you have defended steadfastly and so I want to differentiate between that and QWC. First, correct me if I am wrong. My understanding of your view on absolute space is that an event like a flash of light can occur at a fixed point in space and that event places the center of the light sphere in a fixed position relative to the rest of the universe, i.e. at an absolute point in space.

    In addition, since the speed of light is invariant, the distance traversed by the light wave front from the absolute point in space determines the length of time that has passed since the event. We can measure the length of time it takes for the light to reach an observer using MD’s box, and tell the distance that the light has traveled from the point of origin.

    Anything and everything else in the universe can be in motion relative to that point in absolute space and it will not affect the fact that the real physical light sphere is expanding spherically at c from the fixed point of origin.

    Therefore, a moving observer will see the same wave front and not a different wave front from the one and only real wave front. So any length contraction or time dilation that is necessary to explain why he will see the same wave front traveling at c from his moving frame is “funny” math, even if the math works perfectly, because there is only one wave front.

    An observer in motion cannot see the whole light sphere because even though light expands spherically through space, an observer sees only a ray of light on a line of sight. He has no reason to believe that light doesn’t travel at c because he has been told that it is proven experimentally time and time again and it is “reality” or close enough to it. He believes it. So he believes that the wave front of which he saw only one ray on a line of sight is traversing space at c relative to his motion, and he supposedly measures the wave length of the light for future reference.

    Later he and you meet up at the Cosmic Pub and exchange notes. You tell him the real frequency of the light; he tells you the wavelength along line of sight and you realize that they don’t coincide.

    Never the less the two of you try to calculate the point of origin.

    You, MD, might say that you both would be able to agree on the fixed point of origin in absolute space given your observations from the point of origin and his from a point on the sphere later while he was in relative motion to the point of origin. You believe you can do that because the frequency that he observed can be compared to the original frequency to give you his relative velocity vs. the point of origin.

    But in QWC you will not be able to make the calculations bring you back to the point of origin in absolute space. And the reason for this failure to be able to calculate the fixed point of origin in QWC is not about the SR calculations, or time and length transformations, or getting the relative motion of the observers to agree, it is about the fact that space is filled with varying levels of wave energy density.

    It is the energy density of space that governs the velocity of light. Since you cannot quantify the fluctuating density of the space that the light sphere is traversing from your point of origin, and he cannot quantify the wave energy density along the line of sight, your calculations will not give you the fixed point of origin in absolute space.

    Complicating the situation is that the wave energy density at the point of origin is never constant and it changes the instant after the light flash and continues to fluctuate based on the moving sources that emit the wave energy that is arriving at that point from all directions at every instant. That makes it impossible to locate a marker left at a fixed point in space and impossible to ever use observations of the light sphere to lead you back to that point of origin. Therefore an absolute point in space is a concept that cannot be verified experimentally.

    Would it be OK if the calculations got you close?
     
  9. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    MD, have you had enough time to respond to my comments about why I do not go all the way to embrace absolute space and time? If I didn’t misrepresent your views and if I made a case for mine, then say so because your case for absolute space fails in QWC for the reasons I have described. I want you to correct me and say if and why I am wrong in your view before I move on.
     
  10. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    You speak of frequency, I don't. I speak of distance and time. I don't care what the frequency is, the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s. That means that from the point of origin in space, the light will be 299,792,458 meters away after exactly one second has elapsed. There is no frequency to measure because as soon as the wave FRONT reaches the observer the game is over. As far as he is concerned there is no wave to observe or measure.

    If I throw baseballs at you, one per second, and the first ball hits you and the stop watch stops, what was the frequency of the first ball that hit you??? There is no frequency because we are not talking about when the second ball hit you, we are only concerned with the first ball, and how much time the ball took to travel from me to you, and the distance that it traveled.
     
  11. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,634
    Of course there is. Higher frequency photons have more energy. You can measure that energy and deduce their frequency.

    If it didn't hurt it was low frequency. If it hurt a lot it was high frequency.
     
  12. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    You make one point that I will immediately concede to you and that is that I did refer to frequency of the light. It was a careless mistake but you will notice that in my post I was careful to say that the distant observer measured the wave length, not the frequency with the very idea in mind that the flash might be just one emission and not a series of waves that are often associated with a light source and its multiple parallel curved plane wave fronts. When you and the observer got together later in the pub I did refer to the two of you knowing and sharing information about the frequency and that was my mistake brought on by my being too quick to revert back to the common interchangeability between wave length and frequency when discussing light.

    I would like to go back and reword that reference to frequency that I used in the pub setting and also offer the Huygens view of the nature of a spherical light wave front as it pertains to a single line of sight ray of light from a source.

    Clearly we agree that the flash of light expanded through space spherically and that a ray of light along a line of sight would be observable from any observation point at any distance away from the point of emission. QWC invokes the Huygens description of the nature of the advancing light wave front to explain why there is a ray for every line of sight even as the radius of the sphere increases. Huygens is invoked to give an explanation for how there can be a ray at every line of sight as the surface of the advancing sphere increases in area. Conventional wisdom might assume that the number of rays in the initial emission would have to thin out as the light sphere advances and yet we observe an individual ray at every point on the surface of the growing sphere with each increase in the radius of the sphere.

    When I invoke Huygens to the thought experiment we are discussing, the remote observer could have been at any location in space at any distance and he would have still been able to observe a ray of light along a line of sight, don’t you agree. That invokes the Huygens description of how a spherical light wave front, one flash if you will, advances through space. Hers is a good link to Huygens’ description for your reference.

    Using your baseball analogy, the baseball would be a single ray and no matter where the observer was positioned he would have been hit by a baseball with a frequency of one. But the advancing wave front, even if it has a frequency of one, still has the shape of an advancing wave where its presence starts at zero, builds to maximum intensity, and diminishes back to zero, i.e. one wave length. Our observe was careful to record that precise length from the first zero, through the maximum, and back to zero and that is the information he took back to the pub to share with you.

    What you and the observer would have found when you compared the wave length of the one curved plane wave that was emitted was that the wave length that you measured was different than the wave length that he measured. The difference is caused by his relative motion, i.e. he was moving relative to the point of emission. If he was moving away his measurement would show a longer wave length and if he was moving generally toward the origin his measurement would show a shorter wave length.

    From that point on in my earlier response, you would still not be able to calculate back to the exact point of origin because of the fluctuating wave energy density that fills all space and therefore affects that speed of light as it traverses space. The energy density of the space through which light passes governs the velocity of that light and there is no way to know the exact energy density along the path of the light.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
  13. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    I'm thinking that the same rationale would apply to tennis balls.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    High frequency?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    You are right, but I get his point. There is a frequency of one, not a sequence of waves or multiple photons.
     
  15. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Cute, but in the case of the tennis ball, speed determines the "hurt", while with light, velocity remains constant while the spacing between waves (balls) determines the "hurt",

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .
     
  16. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    MD and I are talking about wave energy in remote space and that gives me a good opportunity to bring into the thread a couple of topics mentioned in this year’s OP (original post).

    I’ll call this post The QWC Boiling Background brainstorming session. It qualifies as antipasto in line with last year’s word salad thread and hopefully will not attract any attention.

    Though the OP does still require you to be eighteen or older to view this content, please be warned again not to read the following post if you are under eighteen, and for those who do read it please be reminded of the disclaimer in the OP.

    Most everyone understands non-QWC electromagnetic waves. You can picture the propagation of light through empty space via its electric and magnetic fields that act at right angles to each other and whose strengths can vary due to both wavelength and amplitude. All light waves are emitted by oscillating dipoles, i.e. atoms and molecules that have both electric and magnetic characteristics. It is the presence of those characteristics of atoms that has lead to the science of the self propagating nature of light to be described in non-QWC terms.

    In QWC however, light does not need to be self propagating because it hitchhikes on gravity waves. Let’s do a little look-back to last year’s thread and restate some of the applicable content:

    Let’s remember wave energy density of remote space vs. wave energy density within a highly energized environment for example. The presence of a particle is established by synchronized inflowing and out flowing gravity wave energy. In remote space the synchronization cannot be sustained within a sufficiently small enough space to establish the presence of a self-sustaining particle, but in high energy density space, synchronization is successfully achieved and the presence of a particle is established by the process of quantum action described in detail in last year’s thread.

    A particle with a specific stable configuration evolves quickly under high energy density environments like that which follows a big bang for example. Once stable particles form, their presence is sustained as long as there is gravity wave energy inflow.

    Note that as described previously, in QWC matter is composed of wave energy in quantum increments, and the number of energy quanta in a single proton is carelessly determined by a WAGNER (wild ass guess not easily refuted) and is in the hundreds of billions which means that the internal wave energy composition of a single particle is hundreds of billions of these high density spots continually forming and disbursing. (I’ll post that updated WAGNER later.)

    In deep space, remote from any high energy density environment capable of allowing synchronization to establish a particle, there are still gravity wave sources in all directions from every point in space and therefore there is a high density convergence forming and disbursing at every point in space and at every point in time, causing the energy density to fluctuate everywhere in what I call “point wave action”, or for the fun of it, the boiling background. The convergences form high density spots which then burst out of the spot spherically, always at the speed of gravity. So at every point in space there are gravity waves coming and going in all directions to sustain the presence of a particle that has achieved stability like a proton or a neutron if such a particle enters that remote space.

    Connection between light and gravity

    Waves traverse space by wave energy transfer; this is much like the Huygens effect that I linked MD to in my response, i.e. transfer of spherical wave energy in three dimensions as the wave front advances. The radius advance is in all three dimensions, and there is a curved plane wave surface expansion accompanying each increase in the radius. This mechanism of wave advance through space is the same in high energy density space in and around concentrations of mass as well as in remote space.

    An increase in the radius and the associated increase in the curved plane surface are achieved by the process of quantum action taking place at the surface of the advancing plane wave. As the surface of the advancing curved plane wave broadens, there are more and more high density spots that form across it fueled by the ever present point wave action that fills all space. Each instance of quantum action results in the emission of a tiny new spherical wave of energy that is identical to the characteristics of the parent plane wave. A series of parallel waves carries information from the source that is conserved as the radius of each parallel curved plane wave increases.

    This advancing wave action applies to both gravity waves and light waves because light wave frequency and amplitude is imprinted on gravity waves when light is emitted by oscillating dipoles.

    The light frequency is carried by the cloud of gravity waves that are continually being emitted by every particle of matter. There are multiple gravity waves emitted between each light wave imprint and as the carrier gravity waves pass a light detector the frequency of the light will determine how many gravity waves will pass for each wave imprinted with light emission energy.

    The light wave emission rides the gravity wave and causes the affected gravity wave to carry the imprint of the light wave because affected gravity waves carry more energy than the unaffected gravity waves that are emitted in between the light wave carriers.

    It is like the light wave energy hitchhikes on the effected gravity waves. For talking purposes, a low energy light emission may affect every hundred millionth gravity wave and a high energy light emission may affect every hundredth gravity wave emission.

    The light energy carried by the periodically affected gravity waves can be reflected, partially absorbed, or can completely pass through particles. It depends on the laws of optics while the gravitational wave energy that is absorbed by matter is detained within the particles as the internal process of quantum action takes place. All of the inflowing gravitational wave energy that enters a particle is subsequently emitted by the particle as long as the energy density of the overall environment remains constant.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2012
  17. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    And I’m glad it hasn’t so far but it will take some participation and brainstorming to get very far with the idea of light waves hitchhiking on gravity waves; after all, we haven’t even established the reality of gravity waves, let along having them act like I say they do, and then be able to have the light act like we know light acts, lol. There is not just frequency and wavelength to consider, there is defining “h” in terms of hitchhiking light, establishing how coherence or “in phase” waves of a given frequency can be accomplished, there is polarization, lasers, bending of light through a prism and having frequency lines show up, and all of the other characteristics of light that have to be accounted for.

    If this hitchhiking concept is going to go anywhere it will take a lot of work to equate QWC quanta to electron volts and to fathom out how the energy quanta associated with light energy can be imprinted on spherical gravity waves and still allow all of the known characteristics to be displayed. It probably won’t work but it is worth trying because of the appeal of explaining light propagation in some fashion that is compatible with my supposed gravity waves and with the wave energy description of the UCWEB that I speculate about.

    So I will step into the void so to speak and start speculating and see if I can satisfy my own brand of logic using the reasonable and responsible methodology.
    The Huygens effect applies nicely to the propagation of gravity waves through the “boiling background” and so I like that part.
    Right now this part is sort of a bravado type statement, maybe more like wishful thinking that the detailed mechanics will fall into place.
    This might not be a good idea at all. If you think of light waves like the cycles per second traveling along a rope that is being waved in one direction or another, a single photon emission would be one crest traveling along the rope. If that one crest is imprinted on gravity waves, based on the number of gravity waves emitted during the instant that the photon is emitted makes it seem like one photon would be imprinted my many gravity waves so that needs some work.
    If the number of quanta gained or given up by an atom or by an electron in a dipole can be equated to the definition of energy quanta that make up various particles in QWC then that would be an important step.
    That concept might explain frequency but won’t work with other observed characteristics of light so if it is useful at all remains to be seen.
    This is another one of the hopeful statements that must come out to be true because we know it is true. Describing speculative mechanics using the hitchhiking concept that agrees with observations of the reflection and absorption of light might be tricky, lol.

    So anyway, whether I will be at all satisfied with the hitching concept as I work my way through the void that I am stepping into remains to be seen. I'll just post my thinking as I go with the intention of testing the idea for myself and seeing if anything worth keeping in QWC unfolds.
     
  18. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Nobody up to brainstorming? That is completely understandable. Here is some brainstorming that applies to the discussion somehow, but exactly how remains to be seen, lol.

    Quantum units: a wild ass guess

    In QWC the proton’s presence (three quarks if you like) is literally composed of the high density spots that form at the overlap of the multiple quantum standing waves within the proton. They are spherical waves that are bursting out of high density spots (HDSs), expanding spherically, overlapping, and forming new HDSs within the proton. It is a continual process and the wave energy out flow that escapes the proton from the surface is replaced by wave energy arriving at the surface from the out flow of wave energy from other particles. Thus the presence of the proton is maintained by the inflowing and out flowing standing wave action.

    Let’s say that we can freeze the quantum action process that has established the presence of a proton. That freeze frame will contain a finite number of spherical quantum waves in overlap positions within the proton, i.e. a finite number of high density spots where the spherical waves have overlapped at the moment of the freeze frame. That close configuration of high density spots (a lattice) has stability because there is no niche on the surface for any additional surface quanta or high density spots, i.e. when at rest, the surface wave energy out flow is sustained by wave energy inflow.

    The question is, from what we know about the proton at rest, and from what I speculate about the process of quantum action at the foundational level, can we derive a ball park figure or even a wild ass guess of the number of high density spots (or shall we say quantum units) within a proton lattice?

    In this exercise you might point out that the units of measure don’t work unless we define the whole exercise in terms of a new unit, i.e. a speculative “quantum unit” that occupies an average amount of space per quanta in the freeze frame or lattice view inside a proton (yikes, I know …). We are not talking about energy in joules for example because the units of measure wouldn’t work. Each quantum unit is a quantum of wave energy, not the only the individual spherical waves, but the high density spots that accumulate a full quantum and burst into spherical waves. So the quantum units would be the total number of spherical waves, or the high density spots that form and burst into quantum waves, one or the other.

    Here we go, and this is not science, just a way to put some perspective on the number of energy quanta in a proton and an electron at rest and to establish the concept of a lattice of quantum units within a stable particle. For simplicity we will call these “average quantum units” which simply occupy the space within the proton; a quantum unit would consist of one high density spot at the overlap of multiple spherical quantum waves. This can also be thought of as is the wave energy in a volume of space occupied by the accumulated spherical wave energy crests (wave peaks) that form the HDSs and the surrounding spherical wave troughs (wave valleys) of low energy density so that the entire internal space of the proton is accounted for unit by unit in a whole number. We are seeking a widely speculative guess at the number of these quantum units within the space occupied by a proton.

    Say the rest energy of an electron is 1/1836 that of a proton and that we can use that ratio to equate to the number of quantum units in the proton to the number of units in the electron. I know, you don’t have to tell me this is not science.

    In addition, let’s say we are supposing that the number of quantum units in an electron is equal to the number of quanta at the surface of the proton just to have a relationship to allow us to do the calculations. That relationship is simply the result of brainstorming the idea of doing this exercise in the past and has no other basis in science or fact that I know of. There are numbers of other speculative relationships that could have been used for this exercise, I suppose.

    Area/Volume = (4 pi r2)/(4/3 pi r3) = 3/r = 1/1836,
    therefore r=3*1836 = 5508, thus the radius of the proton is equal to 5508 quantum units.

    4 pi r^2 = surface area of a sphere
    4/3 pi r^3 = volume of a sphere
    pi = 3.14159265

    Quantum units in an electron = 381,239,356
    Quantum units in a proton = 699,955,457,517

    Verify the math for me if you want.
     
  19. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    I’m warning you, don’t read this post, and if you don’t heed my warning, remember it is brainstorming and if you don’t have a clue how brainstorming works then please Google it. You are welcome to participate in the brainstorming but I doubt that you can see how my contribution makes any sense at all to start with so why bother.

    So I’m going to start right off and speculate that an electron in a dipole at the ground state is going to absorb and emit energy and that the absorption might occur as an electron beam is passed through hydrogen in a discharge tube. The radiation is emitted after some atoms pick up energy from the energized electrons that collide with them. We know that a dipole will only absorb electron energy in specific packets or increments and so the energy of the dipoles will step up in increments as energy is absorbed and then step down as radiation is emitted in incremental packets. (Gravity in QWC is was not considered to be so picky in that particles will absorb gravity wave energy in fractional quanta as long as the total amount absorbed is equal to the out flowing quantum wave energy.)

    As you may recall, I have described gravitational motion as an imbalance in the directional inflow of wave energy, but that did not consider light energy as being interchangeable with gravitational energy in determining the highest directional inflow toward which the particle or objects would move.

    So if we start with the concept that an electron at rest consists of ~400 million QWC quantum units (from the WAGNER in the last post), and is part of a hydrogen atom (the dipole in this case in the ground state), then we will pass the excited electron beam through the hydrogen gas. I don’t know how energetic the electrons in the beam are or even how to characterize that energy level in terms of added quanta, but I will speculate until someone cares. I am going to say that the excited electrons in the beam are accelerated to carry 800 million QWC quanta each, and that the electrons in the ground state atoms have to pick up ten quanta to go from the ground state to the first level of excitement (there is probably several orders of magnitude error in using 10 because it could be 100,000 too if we are ever able to equate QWC quanta to electron volts, but either way that can be fixed later).

    Conversely, when the excited atom drops back down to the ground state it emits a photon at a particular frequency and the “energy” of that photon is 10 QWC quanta. If the radiation had been a drop for more than one state of excitement then the frequency of the radiation would be higher and would carry a larger packet of quanta. The higher frequency would appear as more peaks and valleys along the rope and so the extra quanta in the packets equates to more peaks along the rope; a problem that will have to be resolved between quanta and frequency but later for that too, lol.

    Now I want the think about those ten QWC quanta being imprinted on the gravity waves that I say are continually being emitted by the electron in the oscillating dipole (hydrogen atom). If the number of energy quanta emitted by the electron can be called individual quantum waves, and if the ~400 million quanta of the electron are emitted and absorbed by the electron every quantum period to maintain its presence, then I have to be able to equate a quantum period to the time it takes the electron in the dipole to change from the excited state back to the ground state. That is easy since I’m going to make it up, lol. No, just kidding, I’m going to use reasonable and responsible speculation to come up with a preliminary idea of the relationship between a QWC quantum period and the length of time it takes for the excited electron to drop to the ground state and emit the photon. I’ll speculate that the time period for the change in the state of excitement of the electron in the dipole is equal to one quantum period.

    The reasoning is just that for the electron to be completely refreshed by quantum action it takes one quantum period, and so I think it is reasonable that the change in state can occur in that same length of time because the quantum waves emitted by the electron in that quantum period will be the ones on which the photon energy is impressed, and the refreshed lower energy state electron will then be giving up the 10 extra QWC quanta during one complete electron reestablishment (one quantum period) to the lower ground state.

    If we go with that scenario, the ~400,000,000 quanta of the ground state electron was jumped to 400,000,010 quanta when the ground state electron was excited by the electron beam, and it dropped back to ~400,000,000 QWC quanta when the photon packet of 10 QWC quanta was radiated.

    I have to speculate that all the ~400,000,010 quanta in question that were emitted during the quantum period equal the sum of the gravitation quanta emitted and the light energy quanta emitted.

    The question is how those 10 light quanta, presumably indistinguishable from the gravity quanta, can do what light does while the other 400,000,000 quanta do what gravity waves do.

    To be able to speculate about that I have to follow those ~400,000,010 quantum waves through space and as I describe what happens to them in space see if there is anything that pops up to explain the differentiation between the light being carried by the gravity waves from the gravity being carried by the gravity waves, remembering what light of a precise frequency does, how it is reflected or absorbed by other electrons and atoms, how it has a polarity, how it gets diffracted by substances, etc.


    The electron that emits all ~400,000,010 quanta is in motion in the electron cloud of quanta surrounding the proton. I’ll have to speculate a little about the nature of the excited electron cloud in the hydrogen dipole and see if there is some way to differentiate those 10 quanta as they are emitted. Since I speculate that quantum action maintains the presence of the electron while the electron is in either the ground state or the excited state, I am saying that ~400,000,010 quanta are exchanged to maintain the presence of the excited electron, but when the electron drops to the ground state it only needs ~400,000,000 replacement quanta, allowing the 10 extra quanta to go but not be replaced.

    So the out flow of quanta exceeds the inflow, and those extra 10 quanta get to be light while the other ~400,000,000 quanta get to be gravity waves

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .

    There seems that there will be 10 more quanta in space when the state of the dipole drops to the ground state than there were when the dipole held the extra 10 quanta. So the radiation emitted increases the energy density of space and decreases the energy density of the atom. So light in space is an increase in the number of quanta in space. Assuming everything is precisely balanced in terms of quanta (conservation of quanta, lol), i.e. particles are composed of energy in a precise number of quantum increments, and assuming space holds extra quanta when it contains light that is traversing it, then the light isn’t distinguished from the gravity waves until it reaches an atom elsewhere.

    That atom elsewhere can absorb the gravity to the extent that it needs the gravity quanta to sustain itself and it can absorb the extra light quanta only in precise packets needed to raise its state one level (assuming our hydrogen discharge tube example). So the extra light quanta could be refused by the receiving dipole depending on the energy environment of the receiving dipole.

    Also, as the ~400,000,010 quanta expand spherically through space the energy of those quanta is disbursed over a large spherical surface that advances in accord with the Huygens effect. When that surface reaches the receiving atom it no longer represents QWC quanta at every point on the curved plane wave that intersects with the receiving atom (1/r^2 rule). So it follows that that wave energy arriving at the receiving atom is not in quantum increments and the energy quanta received are built up from less than quantum valued inflowing waves, i.e. in fractional quanta.

    But remember, the receiving atom must replace the quantum out flow so we speculate that there are multiple parallel plane waves arriving to replace each out flowing quanta. Thus that energy contribution of our subject quantum waves traversing space and including our 10 extra quanta are not the same quanta that get absorbed by the receiving atom; they are only a tiny contributor by the time they expand and traverse space. This is in line with the QWC description of gravity both as stated in posts #38 and #39 last year and as revised for this year (to be posted later), in that the inflowing waves are unsynchronized (not in quantum increments) while the out flowing waves are synchronized by quantum action within the particle into quantum increments in the form of spherical quantum waves.

    What I’m brainstorming is if and how those ten extra quanta in space that represent the light energy emitted by our subject hydrogen discharge tube can contribute to building the necessary replacement of gravity quanta to maintain the presence of the receiving atom (or if they cannot and why not).

    So where and how does the light traversing space get to be light? Are we going to speculate that excited energy environments give off both gravity and light and the light isn’t light until it shows itself by providing more than the required gravity quanta needed to refresh the presence of the receiving atom, i.e. if more than enough quanta reach the receiving atom than is required to maintain the presence of the atom by replacing the out flow, then that extra quantum wave energy qualifies for some different treatment that is afforded to light energy?

    That brings up two new considerations. 1) About what I speculate causes particles to move, i.e. a directional imbalance in the inflowing wave energy arriving from space, and motion in the direction of highest wave energy density. When I speculated that I did not mean that light wave energy acted like gravity wave energy and now I am faced with a situation where it seems it might. 2) The characteristics of light like polarity, wavelength, wave coherence or incoherence, etc. must be able to be displayed based on the source and it seems that those characteristics can’t be extracted from simple QWC quanta that arrive at a destination so there has to be some other means of differentiation if the light can be said to hitchhike on gravity waves.

    The hitchhiking concept isn’t fairing well so far in the brainstorming process, lol.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2012
  20. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    QW: "Nobody up to brainstorming? That is completely understandable. Here is some brainstorming that applies to the discussion somehow, but exactly how remains to be seen, lol."

    Still here QW . . . but "up to my ass in alligators at the moment" . . . several reports to get 'out-the-door' ASAP . . .

    wlminex
     
  21. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Jump in if you want.

    Undaunted by the apparent flaws with the “hitchhiking light” idea, another brainstorming thought is that the 10 (or however many) quanta representing the energy drop from one excited level to the lower level of excitement make up a particle, the photon, and that particle is ejected from the electron of the oscillating dipole of the atom or molecule. It seems evident that something associated with that electron has the light speed characteristic and if so, the ejection of a tiny packet of energy quanta at the speed of light would be consistent.

    Under this scenario the photons don’t hitchhike on the gravity quanta, they share the light speed characteristic based on a more foundational reality that we don’t yet have the tools to examine within the atom and within the particles responsible for the oscillation of the dipole. The photon then would be a packet of quanta that is ejected by the dipole at the speed of light.

    Left to traverse space uninterrupted, the photon quanta are self-sustaining by sharing their wave energy in accord with the same quantum action process that maintains the presence of the electron which also has light speed characteristics implied in its composition.

    At the speed of light, no spherical quantum waves can be emitted in the direction of motion and so the quantum action flattens the grouping of quanta and the repulsed forward force of quantum action is converted to oscillation of the photon relative to an axis of forward motion. The number of quanta in the photon determines the rate of oscillation and that rate equates to the frequency of the light. More quanta, more repulsed forward force diverted to oscillation, faster oscillation, higher frequency, shorter wavelength. It could all fit.

    A tilt in the plane of oscillation relative to the axis of motion could determine polarity. Redshifting occurs as the oscillation is slowed by the energy density of space or by the medium through which the photons pass. Diffraction is related to frequency. The laws of optics would apply.

    So I’m saying that individual gravity quanta and photons traverse space differently. The gravity waves that escape from (are emitted by) a particle or object expand spherically through space using the mechanics of the QWC-Huygens effect, and the photon quanta act as a particle composed of wave energy in quantum increments and are maintained by quantum action as they shoot through space.

    The wave/particle duality displayed by photons and other particles is the result of the quantum wave nature of particles. There are quantum waves emitted and absorbed continuously by every particle and when a particle is confronted by an outside interference like any object in its combined wave/particle space path, the wave aspect is interfered with. The energy density of entering and exiting quantum waves defines the distance out from the particle called the “wave space” surrounding the particle and the particle will display the wave characteristic when an interruption occurs within its wave space, while the coherent particle within the wave space displays the particle characteristic.
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2012

Share This Page