TakenItSeriously

I appologize, I'm afraid I wasn't very clear about the final model that I was trying to propose. Lets take another look at the origional particle wave model and the helix model: Click on the image to show the animation. Differences you should ignore: We need to ignore the axis and color orientations. Also the arrows showing the directions the waves are pointing in the first model are missing in the second model. I appologize, I had to make do with wharever gifs that I could find in the Wikipedia library that best fit the models since I dont have a PC to create the gifs. Differences that are intented: A key difference is that the particle is always there located at the tip of the arrow. For a light wave the particle is a photon, bit it can represent any particle in free space. We can see both the electric wave and perpendicular magnetic wave as orthoganal projections of the helix model. Therefore nothing much has been changed about what we know about the old model, However, an invisible half was added to the new model that makes a little more sense about the particle/wave itself but explains much more about duality and QM More will be clarified in part 2 the intuitive model for QM Also notice that instead of being 180⁰ phase shifted, they are 90⁰ phase shifted as they used to be defined which I am certain back around the late 1990s. I actually recall some of the pictures when they started changing, which I presume was to make it appear more like they were exchanging energy between them. Whats missing that we need to imagine is there: Imagine a second helix rotating in the same ccw direction but with the opposite phase to the first helix so that together you get a Dual Helix. Instead of a single particle, there would be a particle and an anti-particle locked in a dual orbit with the following properties: equal mass, opposite charge, in 180⁰ phase shift, and Hidden. Notice while the anti-particle is hidden due to being 180⁰ phase shifted, the EM fields would still interact since fields can cross parallel dimensions, but particles cannot. If we took the orthoganol projections of the Dual Helix (imagine both helixes are visible) then the electric wave would be a differential wave pair and perpendicular to the magnetic wave thar would also be a differential wave pair. (again ignore the labels and colors) Differential pairs have a zero net energy and are self referencing in the y axis (no gnd needed) and self referencing in the x axis (no clock needed) All four waves in the two pairs would be moving in the same direction. The HSDD Analog: Above represents a pair of differential copper traces over a return path plane with fiberglass material between the bottom of the traces and the top surface of the ground plane in a microsrtip configuration. Below is a model for showing the top view looking down at the trace pairs. The copper traces are grey, the balck dots are electrons and the arrows are the EM field. Below Imagine the arrows are oscilating between up and down, then outline of the arrows represents the orthogonal projection of the differential wave pair in 2D Now imagine the arrows are rotating perpendicular to the screen. The outline of the arrows now represents a dual helix in 3D Another duality issue I forgot to explain last time: particle passing both slits at once: The wave behavior in the dual slit experiment had implied that a single photon had to be going through both slits at once in order to know when waves would cancel each other out. How dual helix model can explain it: If you look up the silicon droplet experiment they found that pairs of drops in a dual orbit passing through a slit would change their angle such that they created an inteferance pattern without needing to interfere with another particle. The same thing happens with the particle/antiparticle pairs that are in a dual orbit

I'm posting because I'm pretty certain that I was/am a 2e when growing up. Back then they hadn't even discovered dyslexia yet. I was born in 1964. Thankfully I wasnt mis-diagnosed, however, I went through a scare when I over heard that reading comprehension disorder had come up. Since my gift is the opposite of a comprehension issue it could have been a pretty horrendous experience. Ive kept it a secret for my entire life until recently because of that incident, which has had it's own negative consequences. I noticed that my particular pairing, isnt listed any where on the internet that I can see. Since I dont want some poor kid potentially being misdiagnosed as had almost happened to me Id like to discuss my case with someone so that it could at least be on file somewhere and others in the field could be made aware of it. If your interested in hearing my case please send me a PM. Please note that I'm pretty ignorant of the entire field, other than my own case which I believe I have a pretty solid understanding of after discovering a connection was made between reading and short term memory. If I'm in the wrong place, I appologize. Any suggestions about where I should go, or who I can contact would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. somehow the submit button bounced, could a mod please delete the extra copy, thanks.

Got it, thanks. All the online wavelength calculators were showing 9 significant figures but I didn't notice that they had rounded off c = 300,000,000 m/s which was what threw me off.

Imagine observers A & B are in uniform motion in freespace and seperated by 1 lightsecond which is d = 299,792,458 m But if we transmit a clock signal with a funtamental frequency of 300MHz for exactly 1 second: f = 300,000,000 Hz λ = 1.0m exactly another words, in 1 second we transmit 300,000,000 lightwaves so the speed of light tells us the wave front traveled a distance of: d = 299,792,458 m but the sum of the wavelengths add up to d = 300,000,000 m So either light is blueshifted at v=0 or 415,084 bits of information was destroyed. So what's wrong with this picture?

test

It's been 30+ years and the notation is new but decipherable.I can remember the basics: head to toe vectors rotated based on PoV, triangles, trig, sum up the components...

you can base it all on CPT theorem then Well, it would be better if you started from the beginning where if the anti-universe moved in reverse time from the beginning of time then their time line would look like 0, -1, -2, -3 but thats all relative and to them it would be us thats the anti-universe moving in a negative time line. However, I'm starting to drift away from the model because if you continue on, they would be one universe with equal and opposite halves hidden from each other because they could not deviate due to entanglement. edit to add: But this is an example of the things that will seem a bit inconsistant until you get the whole story. And why the number of attempts to rewrite the models must be several hundred by now. It's like learning physics as an autodiadact where every article you read assumes you already know all about physics, or they are articles of half-truths that allow people to accept or understand it but are inconsistent in tthe larger picture. Welcome to my world

It wouldnt be anti-time to anyone living in either universe, it would just be time. Neither would they be moving backwards or something like that. they would both follow the same arrows of time such as increasing entropy

well, that's in part two an intuitive model for quantum mechanics. So at the beginning of time particles were created as entangled pairs of matter and antimatter. I realized that if they moved in opposite directions of time, instead of direction, at the beginning of time, then they would simply be in two different time lines which if they were 2D universes and you flipped one top to bottom, then all particles would be aligned but their rotations would be 180⁰ phase shifted, which fits with the helix model. So they could be thought of as two sides of the same coin and they could occupy the same spacetime while they were hidden in phase shift of 180⁰ or different dimensions of time, I'm not sure of the propper way to look at it.

By virtue of every particle having an entangled antiparticle, therefore dual entangled universes

Sure, Bell didn't account for hidden observers, so there would be a Bob and an Anti-Bob making opposite observations

High Speed Digital Design is the name Dr. Howard Johnson gave it, and he was the first to do any real research in the field. for years. Everything else at the time was just crackpot nonsense. You could call it Signal Integrity, but that doesnt include EMI issues which is the largest problem for ports. Also the simulation and modeling industry started to claim that name and I was dead set against the methods they used, or the excuses they tried to give to not learning the models that could tell you everything you needed to know to avoid problems in the first place. You could even call it Black Magic which was the term the industry used before they could understand that they were in the middle of a paradigm shift. But I'll always refer to it as HSDD because that was what the man who made the first contributions to the field named it.

I looked at quantum information theory a little whan I had based SR on the conservation of information, meaning the distance between observer ans light source must be ∝ the average λ. But I was thinking more in temrs of Hawking and... I forgot his name and I just saw a couple ov videos of his lectures, which I thought were great BTW, they had a bet over whether a BH could destroy information or something to that effect. Found it, His name was Kip Thorne, I knew that, here's the bet: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThorneHawkingPreskill_bet Anyway, that looks interesting, do you have a specific example of how they can be used as a model, I mean is it the mental model type or for computer modeling. edit to add: I missed this stuff from before That's fair, but that was why I was hoping for some kind of collaborative effort. Despite my earlier comments, I'm under no illusion of being a real physicist and what I know only scratches the surface. I'm just good at making intuitive models, and I might have a clever thought now and then. I'm beginning to think a TOE is not the right name. I think it may be More like a complete fundamental theory of the origional three theories which completes the loops and finds the hidden domains but theirs all that science on top of that foundation that's still valid, I'm sure, but probably nuch of it could be expanded on in the modified context as well. I'll have to look into it, but I'd still like to try to get the whole model layed out first to get a baseline version to start from. But with gravitational waves, which are compression waves, In a sense you are using a ground, because wouldn't the instruments be anchored to measure the force?... Or perhaps it's a compression of spacetime your measuring? Now that I think about the two long perpendicular arms of LIGO I wasnt paying that much attention to the gravity wave news when I was still so swamped with just learning the science that I needed at the time. I'm still not sure that applies to the much weaker forces of light waves though, maybe it's color that provides the reference? I don't know, I'm just grasping at straws now. I'm too used to thinking in terms of needing a reference. I am an old dog you know and learning new tricks isnt as easy as it used to be ;-) Don't get me worng, I'm still very interested and willing to learn more but I dont want to set my goals too high.

Sorry that was my mistake. I was tired when I posted that and forgot myself. HSDD, is High Speed Digital Design, which is the field of engineering I had retired from. It was when I was working in that field that I thought I could see parallels with physics which I though might include a propper analog to physics, specifically QM, SR, and GR based on what I could recall from childhood. I grew up wanting to be a physicist, but my dad had other plans for me. What made me seriously doubt myself was how could it be an analog to all three, which seemed impossible. It was right before the time that my work in that field had been acknowleged and my career took off in the mid nineties. Since I could do my PCB design job on auto-pilot and I had literally run out of things to think about in that field, I needed some new mental challenge to pass the time as I worked. On a lark, I decided to test my hypothesis of the propper analog for physics and try to build a model for the universe based on the model of HSDD which I had bassed mostly from Dr Howard Johnsons early research, but it included included some of my own models including a rolling wheel model for the rising edge of a digital wave, that worked very well for 2D PCB geometries. I knew how preposterous it seemed, but I already thought I could improve the particle wave model for light so I may as well do that first and see where that lead me. I used the rolling wheel model was the bassis for the 3D partical helix model. The matter/antimatter Duality Universe was based on the transmission line model of a differential pair. And the Gravity Loop was based on a micro-stripline structure of a differential pair. I had half expected to just give up after a couple days when the analog would fail to pan out but the child physicist in me new otherwise and the model of the universe just flew together so I knew the analog had to be at least a proper analog, but then I started to think it could possibly be a scaled down model of electromagnetism that could scale to any size which I had also discovered back then using a simple 2D impedance solver which I had programmed as a simple batch program. Meaning the impedance of a trace over a plane would remain constant if I scaled the entire structure though I didn't see the practical value of that at the time. The analog never faild so it had to be real. So I guess all my silly childhood fantasies of science could come true.

sorry I didnt get back to you sooner but I was thinking about your question and saw something I needed to work out. For the strong and weak forces, I dont think the situation changes with the matter/antimatter dimensions which are completely symmetrical dimensions. explaining everything else at this point is going to have to be taken out of context since their is such an intricate cause and effect chain going on, so it may sound strange but it will make sense in context. BTW, I may as well tell you it's all been modeled from HSDD which, I discovered is a propper analog of the universe. Their are two loops. The duality loop which is looping two dimensions of matter and antimatter.beginning at the big bounce and ending at the EH The QGL which is looping world lines with return lines in reverse time. QGL begins at the EH where it is unified with the EM force, and ends at the Big Crunch, meaning the source of gravity is in the reverse time dimension where gravitons take on the roll of photons gravity is the near field force DM is the far field loop force and together they are the same as the EM force in reverse. The duality loop has both timelines moving in the same direction which is possible because they are equal and opposite waves and are each others return path. the QGL is the world line and return line moving in opposite directions of time but thats ok because black holes stay synchronized by saving all matter on the EH Till its time to return such that everything returns to the big crunch at the same time as energy. for the higgs field, I'm uncertain but for symmetry reasons and for optimal isotropic homogeneous it seems like the higgs bosson belongs at the CMB its symmetrical to the EH because matter annihilates with antimatter on the EH its this action that makes everything at the EH make swnsw

Thanks! could be an incredible moment for science if It happened to pan out. A Grand Unification of Theories

Thanks, good catch. I made the edits describing the electric wave and magnetic wave and removed the assumption of 90⁰ phase shift. I also added how the model resolves QM wierdness at the end.

If all motion in the universe stopped, then an observer would have to conclude, yep it looks like time has stopped because all motion has stopped. But then again, the observer wouldnt be aware that time had stopped because he had been stopped as well, so who's there to say. It simply becomes an equivalent statement of if a tree fell in the woods and theres no one around to hear it does it make a sound.

An Intuitive Model for a Theory of Everything * Part 1: An Intuitive Model of a Particle Wave * Part 2: An Intuitive Model of Quantum Mechanics * Part 3: An Intuitive Model of Special Relativity * Part 4: An Intuitive Model of General Relativity In this post I will only be presenting Part I: An Intuitive Model of a Particle Wave First, some things you should know: An Intuitive Model of a Particle Wave As a retired expert in the field of High Speed Digital Design I've had some problems with accepting the current model of a particle wave for light as shown below. The blue electric wave is perprndicular to the red magnetic wave and together they are said to be self-propagating waves by transferring energy between each other, but I'm unable to understand the mechaniism of how the energy can be transferred between perpendicular waves. Waves require two references, a ground reference in order to measure its amplitude and a clock reference in order to measure its phase but their are no such references for a wave propagating through spacetime This model is similar to a differential signal wave pattern only differential waves are alligned in the same plane. Differential signals are used for the transmission of high speed signals over long distances. Among the advantages are: the wave is self-propagating, though it is still subject to losses to the medium or through the skin effect. Also the signals are self referencing in both the X and Y axis. Figure 2: this is actually an example of an eye diagram because I had trouble finding a clip of a differential signal signal for some reason. However its close enough in that a differential signal is actually two signals that are equal and opposite signals that are traveling in the same direction. Figure 3: the EM field created between a Differential signal pair. The black dots represents the motions of the electrons in the two copper traces and their movement creates the EM field. Note the that the field appears to look a lot like a dual helix. A proposal for a new particle wave model. Figure 4: Helix Model from the Wikipedia library, acting as a proposed wave model with a hidden, entangled, anti-matter particlein rotating in a dual orbit. Using the helix model shown above let us assume that at the tip of the arrow their is a particle with some given charge and mass. We can see two orthogonal components of the electromagnetic field create the two perpendicular electric and magnetic waves as predicted by Maxwell's equations. However this kind of rotational motion for a single particle is not consistant with Newtons Laws of Motion without some hidden point source of a force as described by the Inverse Square Law. One way to resolve this motion is to add a second hidden particle of equal mass and opposite charge in a dual orbit that follows Coulomb's Law. Matter and Antimatter was created at the beginning of time as entangled matter/antimatter particle pairs, yet the anti-matter created in the beginning appears to be missing from the universe. For this model, we will assume the hidden particle is the anti-matter entangled partner to the given particle. This kind of motion is similar to a binary star system which followas the laws of gravity. The force involved with charged particles is the electromagnetic force which follows Coulomb's Law which is a proper analog to the Law of Gravity at a much smaller scale factor, while both forces extend out to infinity in a diminishing curve. Therefore its reasonable to assume that two particles of opposite charge could sustain a dual orbital motion. Together, they create a dual helix model with differential waves that are equal and oppite to each other while being hidden from each other 180⁰ out of phase. How the Dual Helix model can resulve Duality issues in QM EPR Paradox where observers and hidden anti-observers provide full information in one location so that their is no information at a distance and gets around Bells Theorem Particle/Wave duality is due to entangled pairs causing the wave effect and broken entanglement causing the particle effect. The mechanism for how observers can effect the particle wave effect is caused by observers breaking matter/antimatter entanglement. and how the information is carried between the two particles, explaining why their is never complete information in a single particle In part 2 I will expand upon this model and show how the matter/antimatter particles became hidden from each other.

For some reason I can't upload a picture for my profile. Starting from the Profile Window, after selecting change in the profile photo frame I get a photo editor window. I select the upload button and see a tiny thumbnail pic (though it looks upside down). However no photo shows up in the photo frame or crop frame. There doesnt appear to be any way to select the photo either like you would do when posting a photo. selecting done and save changes doesn't do anything. Using Safari on iPad Here is the photo. follow up question: How do I rotate a posted photo. Edit to add: I found the problem. The photo was too large. I didn't see the warning right away because it was displayed under the import button and not the choose file button that I was using. Apparrently it also effects the rotation of a posted pic since the croped pic now posts with the correct orientation. I would speculate that these are effects might be caused by a higher resolution camera on the iPad

Great! thanks! looks like everything I wanted to know but was too ignorant to ask for ., Just browsed through it for now, looks very promising for filling in what I'm missing so thanks again! I'll probably need a day to rest before getting back to the study. I may have to take you up on that offer, we'll see. I keep thinking about how much trouble Einstein had with solving the math for GR lol.

Einstein first published the theory in 1905, using a clocks and rods thought experiment. Paul Langevine created the twin paradox as a response from Einsteins critics in 1911 using the premise that the twins POV should be interchangeable and symmetrical in an attempt to create a paradox that would invalidate SR. Ironically, Paul Langevine resolved his own paradox later that year giving relativistic doppler shift as the source. Einstien claimed it was acceleration using GR that caused the time deviation. Others have since given frame jumping at the turn around, or the accelerated turn around, or the frame jumping twice at the Earth or the fact that it was a round trip. I proposed the asymmetry is created regardless of which frame we thought was moving because It's always the ship that's moving relative to the distance between the two planets. Therefore only the ship experiences length contraction. Yes, but in the relativistic domain even the truth can be relative to how you look at it. Reduce the problem to only the outbound leg where the ship drifts by the two planets in a straight line at a constant speed of 0.8c. We effectively remove all potential sources except the relativistic doppler shift and length contraction from the problem. Still we can see half of the time deviation experienced is caused by length contraction in exactly the same way. Observations through telescopes or radio signals can confirm the deviation without needing to meet. Edit to add: You can also think of it this way, after calculating distance and time in the stationary frame, length contraction is the next calculation that is required before any other calculation can be made. Without length contraction, there is no time deviation. I removed the stuff below on the new SR model as I got carried away and will repost something in the speculations forum where I had already started a thread An Intuitive Model For Special Relativity

Source Wikipedia Twin Paradox article,

Symmetry is the premise behind the veridical paradox which states that each twin should have symmetrically identical observations of the other. That is a completely different thing. The situation there is not symmetrical: one twin accelerates and the other doesn't. I agree, the premise that the twins should have symmetrically identical observations of each other is a false premise. I was only pointing out that symmetry was part of the origional premise given in the first place, not that symmetry was part of the conclusion. I would point out that the asymmetry is in how the two inertial reference frames are divided. A moving ship in one frame and the two planets including the distance between them in the other frame. Therefore only the ship's twin experiences length contraction of the distance while the Earth twin sees only sees the ship become length contracted. This means the Ship's twin travels less distance which takes less time and accounts for the dime deviation experienced between them. In the Wikipedia example, the earth twin experiences d = 4.0ly t = 5.0 years or 10 years round trip. the ships twin experiences d' = 0.6d = 0.6·4.0 = 2.4ly (due to length contraction) t' = 2.4/0.8 = 3 years or 6 years round trip Therefore the ship's twin is 4 years younger than the Earth twin when he returns

Symmetry is the premise behind the veridical paradox which states that each twin should have symmetrically identical observations of the other. There are many different conclusions that provide sources for time deviation but don't necessarily show how the apparent paradox is not a paradox or they don't provide a transparent cause and effect relationship. I had gotten the impression that the overall conclusion of the science community was that SR was not a symmetrical framework based on the Twin Paradox, which is no reflection on my personal hypothesis. Ok, thanks very much for your help.