Light

[jehovajah]

This is a video on light as used in Astronomy.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/wiv3uVBSEAI&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/v/wiv3uVBSEAI&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

However all explanations of light cobble together various metaphors and analogies. Apparently the mathematics is too difficult to give one consistent metaphor. Actually it is because subject boundaries are pulled together to give this broader overview.

I think that the electron and photon explanation queers the pitch, despite being highly researched and empirically grounded. The issue is the concept of the electron, the concept of electron motion, the concept of sinusoidal waves and the concept of energy.

Temperature is also in need of review.

The Uncertainty principle is often used to the detriment of the certainty aspect of the probability, but the use of statistical and probability mathematics at the quantum level of research is standard because we cannot be certain about anything. But we have always worked with approximations in physics, so what was the big deal?

In reality the big deal is that scientists should be able to give us a break down of the probability of certain events happening. To my knowledge, this part of probability is buried in the back addendas of research papers if published at all.

The claim that Quantum theory has never yet been proved inaccurate is a sine qua non. True quantum research will estabLish a range of probabilities, and of course in that sense cannot be falsified in the classical right and wrong  principle.

I cannot separate " matter" from " light" with any justification, any more. Thus I have to rethink the notion of matter and material and the notion of light and luminous or radiant.

[jehovajah]

This second video- about force, while interesting , shows how confused even the more radical thinkers are about the nature of space.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/qVF1OQhNeDo&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/qVF1OQhNeDo&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/qVF1OQhNeDo&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/qVF1OQhNeDo&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>
The latest empirical data by Ivor Catt et al in the Wakrfied experiment undermines all traditional concepts or rather classical concepts of electromagnetism, as usually presented today.
https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/alexyakovlev/2013/10/15/newcastle-electromagnetism-seminar-with-ivor-catt-and-david-walton/

In fact, Maxwell and thes who came to be caled Maxwellians, we're far more radical than today's classical electromagnetism.
http://async.org.uk/IvorCatt+DavidWalton.html

The declaration of the Electron set theoretical electromagnetism on the confused track of particle physics , mediated by eager chemists seeking to improve the standing of theoretical chemistry. Light, which oncecLaVosier included in his table of chemical elements was conceded to the physicists during the constant subject boundary wars.

It is ironic that Newton and Lavoisier were both highly aware of levity, and sought to study it scientifically, but once Newton was declared to have discovered Gravity, levity was quickly pushed away under the carpet. Today we are still told gravity is the only force with no opposite! Well it's opposite is Levity, and to every centripetal force Newton posited a centrifugal one. This force is discredited in gravitational physics today, but no real reason is given. In fact I think they have now created a theorem to extinguish the centrifugal force in gravitational systems!

If we do not look for levity we will not find it, nor will we recognise the oppression of thought exerted by gravitational physicists and the I peril weights and measures who wanted to maintain mass in our scientific equations long after it became apparent this measure was inadequate!

[jehovajah]

The Newtonian concept of a force measure has many derivations. The form is derived according to the situation.

The gravitational force was derived in terms of centrifugal and centripetal force acting on a point. Newto knew that in space or a distributed body pressure was more appropriate.. Newyon was well aware that a pressure field exerted force. His difficulty was, given space was ot empty, how could this pressure field act radially about a planet in motion? His fluid dynamic analysis confused him too much. In conclusion he referred back to his point analysis, but pointed out that this formulation was an untenable action at a distance in an empty space!

Newton did not posit an empty space or that aether did not exist, he merely stated that in his approximation these things were minimised or left out, and yet doing o gave him the most remarkable agreement with he dats! This was the puzzle: how could a deliberate approximation be so highly accurate?

[jehovajah]

The interesting aspect here is the supposed Thermo plasma of impact is denuded of its magneto and Electro components by current astronomical science. But it is clearly present in their data.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/O1f99ReNJVw&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/O1f99ReNJVw&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/O1f99ReNJVw&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/O1f99ReNJVw&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

[jehovajah]

Sorry the presentation is in german.
Iconic Turn: Prof. Dr. Anton Zeilinger - Nicht lokalität in der Quantenphysik

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/_HYW_b_ylDg&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/_HYW_b_ylDg&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>



Hermann
P.S To be continued

OMG this man looks like and talks like Hermann Grassmann!

[hermann]

in the years 2002 and 2003 I attended the lector series „Iconic Turn — Das neue Bild der Welt”, at the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in munic.
http://www.iconicturn.de/

One of the lectures was from Anton Zeilinger on non localety in quanten mechanics.
Here is the Wikipedia Information on Anton Zeilinger. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Zeilinger He is from austria.
http://vcq.quantum.at/research/research-groups/zeilinger-group.html
He and his group is well known to bring up quanten mechanicel states on long distances.
That means one prepares a system localy and spreads the systems up to a big distance and then make measurement at distant points.
For example you measure spin up at one place you will mesure spin down at a remote place or the other way around. But it will be always the opposit state.
This states can be mesuared simuntaiously. The state is either up or down so it is not possible to communicate with the speed of light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

See also Roger Penrose on this issue. I think at the disussion he gives a good explanation on this Issue.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/hAWyex1GKRU&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/hAWyex1GKRU&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

A wave function is prepared localy. Then spread out over a large distance. A measurement is made and by this mesurement the wavefunction is forced into a state. This state can be mesured over a large distance simultanouesly. If one prepares the wavefunction again in the same way it is possible that a different state can be detected by the same kind of measurement. For this reason it is not possible, to transfer Information faster then the speed of light. But the mesured state appears simultaniously on different places.

[kram1032]

Anton Zeilinger is working at the University I'm studying at.
He tried to teach 1st-semesters last semester but he gave up, heh. He was a bit too harsh with them. I never actually saw his lectures but apparently he tried to teach it as if they already knew Quantum Physics on a deep level.
His public lectures on actual Quantum Mechanics and also his books on the matter are pretty good though.

The next wave of experiments will actually go towards quantum gravity. Zeilinger himself has been working for quite a while now on measuring uncertainty phenomena on larger and larger structures and has arrived at molecules of quite significant size.
Other parts of the group are working on entanglement of (comparatively) large-scale structures. If they succeed, and they are pretty close, they could potentially have scales that can directly measure masses of even single protons in the same way a normal scale would. (Normally, you'd use something like a mass spectrometer or another particle accelerator for the task. This would, instead, be a pretty much completely passive way of measuring things. You wouldn't need to directly accelerate particles. You'd just bounce them off a surface. - except, of course, that you'll need to super-cool the surface which is not exactly trivial)

[hermann]

The next wave of experiments will actually go towards quantum gravity.

As I know we have no accepted theory of quantum gravity. Do you have some background Infomation?

Hermann

[hermann]

http://home.comcast.net/~trochoid/TroWithMesh.html

How to use this software? Seems it doesn't work in my browser.

Hermann

[kram1032]

Well, yes, that's precisely the point of those experiments. The main problem with theories on quantum gravity is that none of them are testable as of yet. They are designing experiments that may start filtering out some of the already proposed theories as well as give clues on new theories that can be constructed with actual experimental data in mind.

http://vcq.quantum.at/research/research-groups.html here you have the current research topics. Anton Zeilinger is working mostly around quantum optics and quantum information theory which will hopefully eventually lead to stuff like "off the shelf" quantum computing. Markus Aspelmayer is focusing especially on quantum gravity. These experiments are really young. Some of them began 2012, so it really is cutting edge research.
But all those experiments are interrelated to some extend.

The current experiments may not seem much like they would directly be about quantum gravity. Rather, they are about quantum effects in large large scale structures (compared to single atoms, that is), and in some instances about measuring pulse transfer of single particles, which basically means you have an ultra accurate scale (basically as accurate as it gets) which, in turns, means that perhaps the tiny general relativistic fluctuations in mass in quantum scale objects could actually be observed. (Special relativistic observations are easily possible in particle accelerators and the like and there even are some experiments which simply involve particle scattering in the atmosphere, where high energy particles (99.something% of speed of light) are produced which have an extremely short half-life, like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation_of_moving_particles#Rossi.E2.80.93Hall_experiment )

[kram1032]

At the same time, Časlav Brukner leads a team focused on theory, trying to come up with experiments that may be feasible in the near future. This experiment may very well be executed and evaluated soon: http://iopscience.iop.org/0264-9381/29/22/224010/pdf/0264-9381_29_22_224010.pdf

The various teams tend to work together at the bigger goal of understanding the fundamentals of physics but they all go slightly different paths.

[hermann]

Look at the diagram again:
Spacially, the two particles never actually meet in the same point! They get annihilated before that already, turning into two photons.
AFAIK the reason for that is, that uncertainty due to quantum effects actually makes it virtually impossible for two particles to meet perfectly. Remember that, as position is known better and better, impulse is known worse and worse and vice versa, and with impulse also velocity.
The closer the two particles are to each other, the more they react to each other's presence (both due to Electromagnetic and, to a very minor degree, due to Gravitational Forces), which is equivalent to them "knowing" of each other where they are relative to themselves.
At some point, the impulse uncertainty could become so big, that the two particles, despite flying right past each other, might actually turn away in a completely random direction, including the direction they just came from.
Because they never actually meet, infinite Forces and infinite Energies are avoided.

Hallo Kram 1023,

I have now worked a little bit more on my post (Schwarzschild Radius of an Electron) and started to bring in a bit quantenmechanics. But quantenmechanics is a curtain which I try a little bit to look behind. Also this theories are presented at very high speed at University and too often questions and discussions are suppresed.
http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/60/

Hermann

[hermann]

Today I have read an artikel, that we have much activity on the sun's surface. I found the following video and an article on the swich of the magnetic field of the earth.
Sorry its all in german!
http://www.focus.de/wissen/videos/hoehepunkt-der-sonnenaktivitaet-2014-sonne-steht-unmittelbar-vor-einer-umpolung_id_3501729.html
http://www.focus.de/wissen/weltraum/astronomie/sonne-starker-sonnensturm-rast-auf-die-erde-zu-2_id_3524426.html

[kram1032]

For an English article on the pole flip:
http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/the-suns-magnetic-field-is-about-to-flip/

[jehovajah]

How to use this software? Seems it doesn't work in my browser.

Hermann

It is a java app, so you must have java enabled and updated. It is the update part I am not sure about. My machines are old and not updateable any more. For example I use a original series iPad . It works fine on that.
The controls seem mysterious but intuitively you want to click on them! When you do things happen to the numerical controls . You can also click and hold on the numbers and drag to alter them. Bit hard to do that on the iPad!

I could go on but I think you will find it fun to click on every box and see what happens!