Science > Physics > Quantum Gravity Via Expansion-Contraction 60.2: Continuation of U.S. Naval Academy Annapolis Maryland Makes Top 10
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"OsherD" |
| Date: |
31 Dec 2006 04:28:50 PM |
| Object: |
Quantum Gravity Via Expansion-Contraction 60.2: Continuation of U.S. Naval Academy Annapolis Maryland Makes Top 10 |
From Osher Doctorow
Robert A. Herrmann retired in June 2004 as Professor, U. S. Naval
Academy Annapolis Maryland, USA, having been Full Professor there since
August 1987, and Associate Professor there January 1981-Aug. 1987, and
Assistant Professor there August 1968 to January 1981. He is a member
of the AMS (American Mathematical Society) and MAA (Mathematical
Association of America) and published 73 papers in 30 journals in 14
nations as well as 7 books. His brother, Ernest C. Herrmann Jr., M.D.,
Ph.D. (microbiology) discovered the first antiviral agent and is
heavily involved in antiviral drug research.
Herrmann's GCU Model, his main physics model, satisfies the Wheeler
requirements for a pre-geometry. The modeling procedure automatically
generates theory and mechanisms of subparticles that satisfy the
Wheeler reqirements for a "substance" of which space itself is
composed.
Herrmann zeroed in on Force, which again is Nonconformist in
theoretical physics. A few innovative researchers including one in the
Federal Republic of Germany's Armed Forces have published on Forces as
central objects in physics. The Einstein and Bohr/Heisenberg schools
de-emphasized Forces as ordinarily understood in Mechanics up to then
and even now in Classical Mechanics, so that today we have a weird
"Force Field" abbreviated as a "Field" with little conceptual clarity
especially in its relationships to Elementary Particles. Although Cao
(1997) regards that as a conceptual advance largely because of his
admiration of Einstein, this is debateable. Herrmann found Force to
be a central part of his Nonstandard Theory, although his Force was
somewhat like modern Tachyon Condensates and Monopoles in the sense of
unobservable at present. In Herrmann's theory, Force is in the form of
a Force-like (logical) operator *S belonging to the Nonstandard part of
the Universe and an entity w ' such that S(w ' ) generates sequentially
each Natural system that comprises a Universe, which leads to solving
the Pre-Geometry problem of Wheeler.
*S is a hidden process, an intrinsic (hidden) ultranatural process, one
of the entities known as an ultralogic. Herrmann quotes Weyl as
saying: "is it conceivable that immaterial factors having the nature of
images, idea, 'building plans', also intervene in the evolution of the
world as a whole?" The similarity to Platonic Ideals/Ideas is
noteworthy, and although Sir Roger Penrose claims to be a Realist, his
work largely reflects Idealism as well as Realism.
Idealism doesn't hurt in Set Theory either. In Probable
Influence/Causation, the set (A-->B) = (AB' )' = A' U B, that is
"either 'not A' or B" in logical language, is interpreted as Causation,
or as a "Causal Set" although the latter term has been monopolized by
some theorists using it for a much more restricted type of set. I'll
try to discuss this further later (readers can find my arguments for
(A-->B) in earlier threads, but I write and think better now).
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Quantum Gravity Via Expansion-Contraction 60.2: Continuation of U.S. Naval Academy Annapolis Maryland Makes Top 10 |
31 Dec 2006 05:00:06 PM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
Before continuing on PI, I'll indicate what is wrong with dropping
Force as a central concept in theoretical physics. Force in
macroscopic physics is indispensible, and intuitively refers to
"push/pull", "tension/compression/pressure", though it is typically
extended to radiation and hydrodynamics and aerodynamics with
frictional/drag effects, all of which have in common the intuitive
notion that one thing "Causes" another thing or event or process. It
has also turned out to be indispensible in Mechanics and Condensed
Matter physics and large parts of Space Physics.
By dropping Force and replacing it with the extremely complicated and
much lesser intuitive "Field", which then elevates Energy to the main
concept in theoretical physics from the Quantum and GR/SR reviewpoints,
one loses Intuition and insight into the interconnections between two
objects. Individuals are replaced by Pluralities, aggregates with a
loss of intuition. Probability and many deep Statistics Mathematicians
are often aware of the price that one pays for Pluralistic thinking,
since "Averages" of various types tend to not reflect Individual
behavior. Even in Bureaucracies, Nonconformists tend to be the
Creative part, but Pluralistic Conformists tend to have the power.
One quandary or Paradox is the gap between Elementary Particle Physics
(the physics of elementary particles) and Quantum Theory, in which the
latter always in practice keeps referring back to results and models of
the former even while paying theoretical lip service only to the
Pluralistic non-Individual Quantum ideas. Elementary Particle Physics
does use the Force model in a rather curious form, in which a typically
observable particle transmits a Force to another observable particle by
means of an unobservable or very indirectly observable third object
called a Force-carrying Boson. It is a sort of "football" model in the
USA sense of Football or in the U.K./Canadian Rugby sense, although the
ball kicked around/hit around in Soccer is also this type of thing.
Since there is no Fundamental basis for the Force-carrying Boson
intermediating between two Fermions or between a Fermion and a
Non-Force-Carrying Boson in either Elementary Particle Physics or
Quantum Theory (it can't even be logically analyzed by philosophers of
science in terms of any of the major axioms and definitions), one has a
"Multiple Personality" Paradox in theoretical physics from the
disappearing Force scenario.
Energy is a rather poor replacement. It is true that atomic and
hydrogen bombs and technology involve what is arguably Energy. But we
are beginning to see that Dark Energy and even Dark Matter involve
enormous Paradoxes and quandaries that arguably are only the tip of the
iceberg. In fact, Energy has always been less intuitive in macroscopic
physics than Force. "A pushes B" (force) is much more intuitive than
"A moves" or "A potentially versus actually moves". Do you know
anybody who goes around thinking about his environment: "That object is
potentially moveable, while this object is actually moving, and that is
important for ___ (fill in some blank)," ?
It is even counter-intuitive at a Macroscopic level to say that Energy
is Conserved, in the sense that nobody in their right minds goes around
thinking: "If I don't watch out and be cautious, I won't conserve
Energy," except in matters like water and food and fuel/electricity/gas
conservation (which are not typically even thought of as Energy except
for fuel (and electricity/gas) which is obviously burned, although
biologists tend to think more of food as Energy or fuel). When you
play a game or walk in the street or drive or sit down or lie down, do
you worry about Energy Conservation? It is rather unlikely unless it
pertains to water, food, or fuel/electricity/gas conservation. These
Energy concepts belong more to the Supply or Upper Bound Limitations
side than to the practical Strategies and Tactics of daily life.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
| User: "OsherD" |
|
| Title: Re: Quantum Gravity Via Expansion-Contraction 60.2: Continuation of U.S. Naval Academy Annapolis Maryland Makes Top 10 |
31 Dec 2006 05:36:29 PM |
|
|
From Osher Doctorow
Christopher Glocker, Associate Professor at Zurich ETH - Swiss Federal
Institute of Technology, wrote Set-Valued Force Laws - Dynamics of
Non-Smooth Systems, Springer: Berlin 2001, and readers should obtain a
copy of that at least at their Research Libraries if possible. I'll
have to see whether it is available in part through internet papers.
Glocker is one of the main researchers on Force as a central concept of
physics.
Osher Doctorow
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
