"Michael Moroney" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > "Tom Potter" <email@example.com> writes: > >>Sammy, >>why do you spam sci.physics >>with articles from popular science articles > >>and spam my posts with off topic comments >>such as the one above? > > It's not that off-topic in alt.comp.freeware. (Why were _you_ spamming > such a group with alleged physics?) > > Regardless, you're in China. Your system is probably so pwned that > nothing Sam could tell you could help you.
I don't understand why "Michael Moroney" and Sam Wormley, a couple of sci.physics regulars,
get all bent out of shape because I share some of my posts about physics with my pals in alt.comp.freeware,
and why they are so concerned about China,
and why they dilute the intellectual value of PHYSICS threads by misdirection and posting NONESENSE comments, rather than addressing the PHYSICS issues raised in the threads.
Could someone explain this to me?
It may be that the post which is listed below, is too complex for them to comprehend and comment on. ========================================
The explicate order!
Reality is composed of properties, not objects. ( Objects arise from real and imagined properties. )
1. There is only one property in the universe and that is: closed cycles about geodesic paths.
2. These cycles can be clockwise or counter-clockwise.
3. These cycles combine algebraically.
4. What we call bodies are aggregates of cycles which we perceive to be associated.
5. Time arise from three H's. ( Cycles or angular displacement ) a. H(M), the H to be measured. b. H(big), an H which can be used as a reference with which to determine when H(M) has completed a cycle. c. H(small), an H which can be counted to determine "how long" it takes H(M) to complete a cycle.
What we call time is H(small) / H(M). In other words, time is the H(small) of some outside reference system per H(M) as referenced against the most stable background possible, H(big). Perhaps, H(big) should be called H(small) as many cycles of H(big) occur for small angular displacements of H(small).
6. The Uncertainty Principle arises, because we can only count whole cycles of H(Small). ( The use of neutrino's rather than electrons as our reference would reduce the uncertainly enormously. )
7. What we call an interaction is when two aggregates of H are perceived to influence each other in some way. Interactions basically change the H of the systems under observation. Interactions involve 4 H's.
a. H(A) - the cycles perceived in body A. b. H(B) - the cycles perceived in body B. c. H(C) - the cycle of the bodies about a common center. d. H(D) - the cycle ( precession ) of the bodies about the universe.
The relationship between these cycles is:
H(A) * H(B) = H(C) * H(D)
Note that this equation equates particle-like properties to wave-like properties. H(A) and H(B) are associated with bodies ( particle-like ) while H(C) ( period ) and H(D) ( Precession ) are associated with times ( wave-like ).
8. The dimensionless ratios of these cycles are commonly called beta.
beta(A) = H(C) / H(A) beta(B) = H(C) / H(B)
These beta's are sine functions. The corresponding cosine functions can be used to compute conventional Special Relativity problems.
length = length(0) * cosine(A) Fitzgerald contraction time = time(0) * cosine(A) Time dilation mass = mass(0) / cosine(A) apparent mass increase
9. Some conventional properties expressed as betas and cycles:
period = 2 * pi / H(C) radius(A) = C / H(A) radius(B) = C / H(B) velocity(A) = beta(A) * C velocity(B) = beta(B) * C mass(A) = beta(B)^3 / H(C) * U ( Kepler's law ) mass(B) = beta(A)^3 / H(C) * U ( Kepler's law ) force(A) = beta(B)^3 * beta(A) * U * C force(B) = beta(A)^3 * beta(B) * U * C energy(A) = beta(B)^3 * beta(C)^2 / H(C) * U * C^2 energy(B) = beta(A)^3 * beta(B)^2 / H(C) * U * C^2
C = the speed of light. ( Distance per time constant. ) U = C^3 / G ( Mass per time constant. ) G = the universal gravitational constant.
** Note that some of these properties are composite. That is, they cannot exist unless two bodies are involved.
** Also note that the are TWO masses, energies, forces, etc. associated with a closed system. The conventional system tends to ignore this.
** There are also TWO RADII involved in interactions.
Conventional physics tends to define ONE radius as: radius = C / ( H(A) + H(B) )
**** Radius is a very bad definition as it leads to many errors. ****
10. Angles are cycle ratios multiplied by some constant.
constant(angle) = 2 * pi or 100 or 360 ( Commonly )
11. There are four distinct sets of bi-directional cycles. These are associated with time, charge, baryon number and what I call "weakness". weakness = strangeness + baryon number - charge.
*** Weakness needs to be defined as neither strangeness nor hypercharge is symmetrical.
Time is associated with left handed neutrinos. Time and parity are the same thing. Time and parity violations are associated with right-handed neutrinos.
Some of the advantages of this system over the current system include:
1. No infinities. 2. Only one fundamental property. 3. Is symmetrical, whereas the conventional system tends to emphasize the mass of more massive bodies and the velocity of less massive bodies. 4. Clearly shows the particle-wave duality. 5. Indicates why uncertainty exists. ( Smallest cycle is our scale ) 6. Eliminates errors caused by the radius concept. 7. No constants are needed. 8. Makes clear what constants are for if they are used. ( Scaling ) 9. Energy-like angular displacement ( H(D) ) is velocity invariant.
The implicate order!
Does a deterministic reality "unfold" from chaos?
Bohm says in his book, Wholeness., ('82,US ed) p.77: "we assume that psi is.in a rapid random, chaotic fluctuation. Values of psi in quantum theory.must be long, compared with [these] fluctuations [which] can be regarded as coming from a deeper sub-QM level, [as a] Brownian motion of a microscopic liquid droplet comes from a deeper atomic level."
Note that these fluctuations would cause the smallest cycles ( Those associated with neutrinos and electrons. ) to deviate from perfect circles but as they would average out and we have no smaller cycle to use to detect them, we could not observe them directly.
It seems to me that these "chaotic fluctuations" would let some kind of underlying "implicate order" modulate uncertainty chaotically ( Rather than randomly as Bohm indicated. ) and interface with the classical world in such a way as to allow a deterministic world to arise from it.
This makes sense to me because:
1. If there was an underlying "Planck's Constant", we could use it to perform Fourier transforms on uncertainties which occur at a higher level and detect fluctuations. ( There may be a "Planck s Constant" associated with neutrinos but chaos would ultimately lie under this order and any future unfolded order. )
2. If the underlying fluctuation was random, negative entropy would be randomly distributed rather than associated with certain kinds of "things". The distribution of negative entropy seems to indicate that what arises from uncertainty is not random.