Science > Physics > Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Jan Panteltje" |
| Date: |
16 Apr 2006 06:59:05 AM |
| Object: |
Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
So dear eastern bunnies, lets look at those Le Sage particles flying about in the 'so called' quantum vacuum. Immediately it is clear the 'vacuum' is not empty, and these little LSPs could even bump into each other and give birth to other particles. So Le Sage also explains the quantum vacuum. I am leaving out linefeeds to save energy.
.
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
16 Apr 2006 09:36:40 AM |
|
|
In article <e1tbic$mfe$1@news.datemas.de>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
So dear eastern bunnies, lets look at those Le Sage particles flying
about in the 'so called' quantum vacuum. Immediately it is clear the
'vacuum' is not empty, and these little LSPs could even bump into each
other and give birth to other particles. So Le Sage also explains the
quantum vacuum. I am leaving out linefeeds to save energy.
Isolate a scintillation counter from external radiation. Get many events
in there? What makes you think there's a bunch of particles popping out
of the quantum vacuum that need to be explained?
If LeSage's corpuscles interacted to any degree, his theory would predict
a breakdown of the 1/r^2 force at large distances as particles scatter and
diffuse.
--
"Tell me, Dr. Einstein, at what time does Boston arrive at this train?"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
16 Apr 2006 09:47:50 AM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Apr 2006 14:36:40 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in
<e1tkpo$uk3$4@rainier.uits.indiana.edu>:
In article <e1tbic$mfe$1@news.datemas.de>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
So dear eastern bunnies, lets look at those Le Sage particles flying
about in the 'so called' quantum vacuum. Immediately it is clear the
'vacuum' is not empty, and these little LSPs could even bump into each
other and give birth to other particles. So Le Sage also explains the
quantum vacuum. I am leaving out linefeeds to save energy.
Isolate a scintillation counter from external radiation. Get many events
in there? What makes you think there's a bunch of particles popping out
of the quantum vacuum that need to be explained?
Well, I have read [maybe even here] that particles are popping in and out
of existence in the QV all the time.
If LeSage's corpuscles interacted to any degree, his theory would predict
a breakdown of the 1/r^2 force at large distances as particles scatter and
diffuse.
This does not hold exactly as far as I can see.
If these thingies interacted to form a new (bigger?) particle with some mass,
some of these would be just that: mass.
The rest [of the LS particles] would still do their thing.
You are thinking billiard ball bounces to diffuse?
My proposal (see posting last week) is that these LS particles originate in
processes in stars, and the universe that way is pushing itself apart (ever
accelerating).
You could say in a way that is is already 'diffuse'.
But I always wondered why Le Sage did not [for all I know] mention a source.
With [processes in] stars as source (of energy), always plenty of strait line
flying LS particles would be generated.
An interesting prediction that also follows from this model is that at the
'edges' of the current universe, gravity must be directional... and much
lower perhaps.
Where does it fly to? can atoms still exists? Is this what makes the edge?
Cool stuff, just to think about at easter [or any other time].
.
|
|
|
| User: "ma1ibu" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
16 Apr 2006 10:43:09 AM |
|
|
Yes, this energy may originate in stars.
It may in fact be photons!!
But not *our* photons: the photons released by
the stars that comprise our electrons- the
'electron cloud'.
Electrons HAVE TO be accelerating, but
we can't find the radiation they HAVE TO be
emitting. According to the Galaxy Model, these should be
photon-like but ultra-high in frequency and at a
much higher velocity ( ~30X the speed of light).
S0- find the missing radiation for
electrons and we find the missing radiation for Le Sage.
Simple (-:
John
Galaxy Model for the Atom
http://users.accesscomm.ca/john
.
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
16 Apr 2006 11:14:59 AM |
|
|
On 16 Apr 2006 08:43:09 -0700, "ma1ibu" <vegan16@accesscomm.ca> wrote:
[cut]
Electrons HAVE TO be accelerating,
If that were true, where is the energy that keeps them accelerating
coming from?
but
we can't find the radiation they HAVE TO be
emitting.
Well, we know the effect of the radiation: it's the electrostatic
field. Currently, physicists just don't know the source of the
radiation. However, rather than acknowledge their ignorance in the
matter, they decide to do "physics by labeling". "Let's just call them
'virtual photons' and hope nobody notices that we are clueless."
ahahaha...
According to the Galaxy Model, these should be
photon-like but ultra-high in frequency and at a
much higher velocity ( ~30X the speed of light).
How can a photon be point-like and have a wavelength (extent) at the
same time? This, of course, is ludicrous. It obviously takes more than
one photon to make a wave just as it takes more than one grain of sand
to make a sand dune. The idea a photon has a frequency will come down
as one of the worst crackpot notions to have ever come out of science,
on a par with the flat earth hypothesis. ahahaha...
S0- find the missing radiation for
electrons and we find the missing radiation for Le Sage.
Simple (-:
Yes it is simple but do you really know the answer?
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Surfer" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
17 Apr 2006 07:49:58 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 12:14:59 -0400, Traveler <traveler@nospam.net>
wrote:
It obviously takes more than
one photon to make a wave just as it takes more than one grain of sand
to make a sand dune.
According to the following, a single photon not only has a waveform,
but the shape can be controlled !
Continuous generation of single photons with controlled waveform
http://mste.laser.physik.uni-muenchen.de/nature.pdf
More here:
A calcium ion in a cavity as a controlled single-photon source
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1367-2630/6/1/095
.
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
17 Apr 2006 06:23:38 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 22:19:58 +0930, Surfer <surfer@no.spam.net> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 12:14:59 -0400, Traveler <traveler@nospam.net>
wrote:
It obviously takes more than
one photon to make a wave just as it takes more than one grain of sand
to make a sand dune.
According to the following, a single photon not only has a waveform,
but the shape can be controlled !
Continuous generation of single photons with controlled waveform
http://mste.laser.physik.uni-muenchen.de/nature.pdf
More here:
A calcium ion in a cavity as a controlled single-photon source
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1367-2630/6/1/095
I think it's all crackpottery. I don't care who came up with it. The
notion that a single sizeless particle can be a wave flies in the face
of logic.
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Materion" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
19 Apr 2006 02:11:04 AM |
|
|
Traveler wrote:
I think it's all crackpottery. I don't care who came up with it. The
notion that a single sizeless particle can be a wave flies in the face
of logic.
A quotation of John Bell from his 1986 paper "Six possible worlds of
quantum mechanics" describes a simple solution:
"While the founding fathers agonized over the question 'particle'
or 'wave' de Broglie in
1925 proposed the obvious answer 'particle' and 'wave'.
Is it not clear from the smallness of the scintillation on the screen
that we have to do with a particle? And is it not clear, from the
diffraction and interference patterns, that the motion of the particle
is directed by a wave? De Broglie showed in detail how the motion of a
particle, passing through just one of two holes in screen, could be
influenced by waves propagating through both holes. And so influenced
that the particle does not go where the waves cancel out, but is
attracted to where they cooperate. This idea seems to me so natural and
simple, to resolve the wave-particle dilemma in such a clear and
ordinary way, that it is a great mystery to me that it was so generally
ignored." End of quotation.
This idea seems indeed so clear that you can transpose it quite easily
to our familiar world: a pilot wave (acoustic, electromagnetic...)
steering macro-sized particles, whose mathematical representation are
vectors (and not points), for instance needles or rods. If the
orientation of the rotating needle is steered by the phase of the pilot
wave, the needles will impinge on the target depending on the phase of
the wave at that point. Different orientations of the needles at the
target mean different detection probabilities. If we have built up an
interference pattern for the pilot wave, the detection probability of
the needles on the target will follow that pattern.
--
Arjen Dijksman
--------------------------------
Materion physics, the search for a satisfactory explanation of natural
phenomena at http://materion.free.fr
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "platopes" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
18 Apr 2006 01:01:07 AM |
|
|
Traveler wrote:
The
notion that a single sizeless particle can be a wave flies in the face
of logic.
Well, *something* has to, doesn't it?
p
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Materion" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
17 Apr 2006 02:43:49 AM |
|
|
Traveler wrote:
How can a photon be point-like and have a wavelength (extent) at the
same time? This, of course, is ludicrous.
A photon is therefore not point-like. It is vector-like.
It obviously takes more than
one photon to make a wave just as it takes more than one grain of sand
to make a sand dune.
Yes, a wave of photons.
The idea a photon has a frequency will come down
as one of the worst crackpot notions to have ever come out of science,
on a par with the flat earth hypothesis. ahahaha...
Not only waves have frequencies. A single spinning object also has a
frequency.
--
Arjen Dijksman
--------------------------------
Materion physics, the search for a satisfactory explanation of natural
phenomena at http://materion.free.fr
.
|
|
|
| User: "ma1ibu" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
17 Apr 2006 11:13:12 AM |
|
|
I see where Traveler is coming from.
*Everything* is 'point-like' because there
is no such thing as physicality.
Matter and light are forms of energy being projected
on a matrix of points.
But within this matrix of points the standing waves
which are matter and the travelling waves which
are light do have extent which is based on the
energy making them up.
Protons here and at the other side of wherever are
identical in size. Why? Because a certain amount
of energy is needed to produce that standing wave
within the matrix. Less will not do.
So the matrix, which is composed of an infinity of points,
becomes a 3D screen on which the energy projects
matter and light. There is nothing there but a medium
influenced by energy, technically.
John
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Ok, I can do it too :-) le Saga and quantum vacuum |
16 Apr 2006 07:12:13 AM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Sun, 16 Apr 2006 11:59:05 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in <e1tbic$mfe$1@news.datemas.de>:
So dear eastern bunnies, lets look at those Le Sage particles flying about in the 'so called' quantum vacuum. Immediately it is
clear the 'vacuum' is not empty, and these little LSPs could even bump into each other and give birth to other particles. So Le
Sage also explains the quantum vacuum. I am leaving out linefeeds to save energy.
So to test this, we wil repeat the measurement of the QV energy within a 10 meter diameter lead sphare. This predics a lower energy there. When this is correct, and you are invited to Sweden, you, by reading this, agree to share the price mony with me on a 50/50 basis.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
