Rajiv Naik

nobody is talking about Quantum entanglement. its not true that information Travels with speed of light only- its only in our spacetimes. otherwise all information is singularly present in quantum state, outside the spacetime and hence in valcume which is radiation free state. no time is required - as time is property of speed of light in space. entanglement clearly indicate that time doesnt exist beyond space.

you mean vaccume energy plays role in space time and is part of entire scheme ? do you mean vaccume energy intereacts with standard particle fields ? is it not that higgs field facilitate standard model particle fields to intereact. ? same quations can be asked about dark matter. how one knows that differential Calculus is sufficient to study vast not understood force like vaccume radiations? you mean vaccame responsible for inflation of universe is different entity from vaccume in atoms, between planets and galaxiesin space etc.? how vaccume energy can be compared to building of potential in even superconducting capacitor?

I dont understand what you are saying. may be you are better than Nasa. but for me your comments are as strange as vaccume by what I have understood most of the space is vaccume. The problems in understanding the true nature of the "vacuum" of space were discussed by a theoretical physicist CERN. From the point of view of cosmology, the vacuum appears to have an energy density, which is sometimes called "dark energy" or the "cosmological constant", responsible for the observed accelerated expansion of the universe. From a particle physics viewpoint, the vacuum is permeated by a "Higgs Field" - named after physicist Peter Higgs.

l think spacetime is creation of quantum singularity. its completely virtual.all dimensions we notice are sust convinientconcepts - This is what I have read recently: The Nature of Space and Time A pair of researchers have uncovered a potential bridge between general relativity and quantum mechanics — the two preeminent physics theories — and it could force physicists to rethink the very nature of space and time. Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity describes gravity as a geometric property of space and time. The more massive an object, the greater its distortion of spacetime, and that distortion is felt as gravity. In the 1970s, physicists Stephen Hawking and Jacob Bekenstein noted a link between the surface area of black holes and their microscopic quantum structure, which determines their entropy. This marked the first realization that a connection existed between Einstein’s theory of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Less than three decades later, theoretical physicist Juan Maldacena observed another link between between gravity and the quantum world. That connection led to the creation of a model that proposes that spacetime can be created or destroyed by changing the amount of entanglement between different surface regions of an object. In other words, this implies that spacetime itself, at least as it is defined in models, is a product of the entanglement between objects. ITo further explore this line of thinking, ChunJun Cao and Sean Carroll of the California Institute of Technology (CalTech) set out to see if they could actually derive the dynamical properties of gravity (as familiar from general relativity) using the framework in which spacetime arises out of quantum entanglement. Their research was recently published in arXiv. Using an abstract mathematical concept called Hilbert space, Cao and Carroll were able to find similarities between the equations that govern quantum entanglement and Einstein’s equations of general relativity. This supports the idea that spacetime and gravity do emerge from entanglement. the next step in the research is to determine the accuracy of the assumptions they made for this study. “One of the most obvious ones is to check whether the symmetries of relativity are recovered in this framework, in particular, the idea that the laws of physics don’t depend on how fast you are moving through space

ha ha. what was that? s://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy What Is Dark Energy? More is unknown than is known. We know how much dark energy there is because we know how it affects the universe's expansion. Other than that, it is a complete mystery. But it is an important mystery. It turns out that roughly 68%of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 27%. The rest - everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter - adds up to less than 5% of the universe

how we can. say that they are only two things or few things without knowing what it is.? who said that. I suppose I said very little- by saying ultimate particle I meant most massive particle - misunderstanding ? I think it was hypothesis till cern claims. nobody is really sure its the ultimate particle . may be they will find some more massive one- experiment is not yet over. a bold statement it would be to say that ,"we know". recently cern has discovered new bumps of massive masses thin higgs particle it will take ore more year to complete investigation. , I suppose its know or one can check

I think it was hypothesis till cern claims. nobody is really sure its the ultimate particle . may be they will find some more massive one- experiment is not yet over. a bold statement it would be to say that ,"we know". this not a court argument I suppose, in law we call it hypertechnical argument. we both know what we meant.

how are you sure that they are only two things when we know nothing. about it today. ?

I know about God particle research, but do anyone truely know how higgs field give mass to particles?

I am talking about physics not biology or chemistry or other things etc. dark malter and dark energy combined is whooping 96 % of our universe We are ignorant about today its not "few things"

I think equivalence principle says that gravity is acceleration. . I think obviously pendulem fundamentally works on this principle. three dimensional universe is distortion of two dimentional spacetime. so everything is basically can be explained by two dimentional geometry of triage or circle. its ultimately that place where answers could be found.

so do we know more ? what is it? you are not answering my quations. we didnt know till recently that standard model particles form hardly 2 or 3% of our universe. we didnt know much about higgs field either do you know? do you know why existance of universe is remote chance? and I am an athiest. so do not take it as a phylosophy. one day we probably will know-but not tody.

so you know for sure what dark energy is? What dark mater is? where antimatter has gone ? and what happened to symmetry ? I never said human learning is pointless - I said what we know till date is very little. and do you know exactly how higgs field give mass to standard particles?

Law of universe is mathematical equations governing the possibilities in universe. we humans know little may be not even .ooooo1 of it. (96% is dark energy and dark matter) 2% is antimatter, and we know very little about remaining 2%. this Laws are not created by humans they exist we try to discover them with our tiny brain. We ignorants are not eligible to comment anything about it. We thought that we knew about four fundamental forces then we discovered about dark energy. We are confused about even higgs field and totally new science is emmerging- many miles to go. only a fool will comment confidently about its knowledge.

I think I am misunderstood? or not understood- I m using it (π)to define rate .- not a constant. but a constant rate of aaccelleration. I think the basic principle remains the same and and can be transerred to other motions also.

not much ahead of 1934. ,just kidding. I have referred to other research also. Ill post more.

I think I am misunderstood? or not understood- I m using it (π)to define rate .- not a constant. but a constant rate of aaccelleration.

rate at which acceleration due to gravity happens is directly proportional to square of Pi we cant look at mathematics only as numbers or variables- they are just references to make some methods to solve geometry problems. there can be terally different apronutri I think π is not just another constant.

. I'm not going to derive it, it isn't too difficult to show that for a pendulum with a small angle the period of oscillation is: What if I want a period of 2 seconds? That is the length of your seconds pendulum. Suppose we want to call this 1 meter? In that case, I have to have g = π2. That's why these values are related. I I'm not going to derive it, it isn't too difficult to show that for a pendulum with a small angle the period of oscillation is: What if I want a period of 2 seconds? That is the length of your seconds pendulum. Suppose we want to call this 1 meter? In that case, I have to have g = π2. That's why these values are related. whatever I am saying here is in terms of unit- as per matric system.

yes π (pie) is 3.14 in matric unit.md Phi is its counterpart. all physics is governed by it except fractal and chaos.

I am citing this as there genuine research going on regarding speed of light. .https://www.nature.com/articles/133759b0 velocity of light by Frank K Edmondson. J. GHEURY DE BRAY has directed attention to an apparent decrease in the velocity of light1. I have recently tried to explain this on the basis of the theory of the expanding universe. If the speed of light is a true constant, independent of any variation in our unit of length, then a doubling of the radius of the universe should cause the measured velocity of light to diminish by half. If the radius of the universe doubles every Kyears, then the velocity of light will be proportional to (1/2)t where K is the unit of time. Thus, the logarithm of the measured velocity of light must be a linear function of the time. I determined the two constants of such a function from de Bray's data and found that it represented the observations in a satisfactory manner. I then solved this equation for the length of time it would take the velocity to diminish by half. The time is of the order of 60,000 years, which is considerably shorter than the value derived from a study of the recession of the external galaxies2. Consequently, this observed variation cannot be explained by the expanding universe theory unless we assume that the rate of expansion is much more rapid in the vicinity of the earth than it is at the distance of the spirals.

not about total spin - which will remain 1/2 as per physics. but if photon is absorbed by proton would not it change its spin state ?

we define light and gravity with math- galleleo's experiment proved that gravity travels with rule of π. In an experiment when a pin is dropped on a paper with horizontal lines, the probability that it will fall on line or in between line follows π ratio. so even information we see around us follows π. some information follow fractals and chaos. but it represents some order.. π. itself is infinite number or at least extreamiy large . infinity itself is a concept related to hysenberg uncertainity principle as its about indivisibilty of a unit. I feel Speed of light is not constant as believed by many , I have read about there are some experiments which have proved this. for eg.. following article is relevant: https://www.sciencenews.org/article/speed-light-not-so-co . Light doesn’t always travel at the speed of light. A new experiment reveals that focusing or manipulating the structure of light pulses reduces their speed, even in vacuum conditions. A paper reporting the research, posted online at arXiv.org and accepted for publication, describes hard experimental evidence that the speed of light, one of the most important constants in physics, should be thought of as a limit rather than an invariable rate for light zipping through a vacuum. “It’s very impressive work,” says Robert Boyd, an optical physicist at the University of Rochester in New York. “It’s the sort of thing that’s so obvious, you wonder why you didn’t think of it first.” Researchers led by optical physicist Miles Padgett at the University of Glasgow demonstrated the effect by racing photons that were identical except for their structure. The structured light consistently arrived a tad late. Though the effect is not recognizable in everyday life and in most technological applications, the new research highlights a fundamental and previously unappreciated subtlety in the behavior of light. The speed of light in a vacuum, usually denoted c, is a fundamental constant central to much of physics, particularly Einstein’s theory of relativity. While measuring c was once considered an important experimental problem, it is now simply specified to be 299,792,458 meters per second, as the meter itself is defined in terms of light’s vacuum speed. Generally if light is not traveling at c it is because it is moving through a material. For example, light slows down when passing through glass or water. Padgett and his team wondered if there were fundamental factors that could change the speed of light in a vacuum. Previous studies had hinted that the structure of light could play a role. Physics textbooks idealize light as plane waves, in which the fronts of each wave move in parallel, much like ocean waves approaching a straight shoreline. But while light can usually be approximated as plane waves, its structure is actually more complicated. For instance, light can converge upon a point after passing through a lens. Lasers can shape light into concentrated or even bull’s-eye–shaped beams. The researchers produced pairs of photons and sent them on different paths toward a detector. One photon zipped straight through a fiber. The other photon went through a pair of devices that manipulated the structure of the light and then switched it back. Had structure not mattered, the two photons would have arrived at the same time. But that didn’t happen. Measurements revealed that the structured light consistently arrived several micrometers late per meter of distance traveled. “I’m not surprised the effect exists,” Boyd says. “But it’s surprising that the effect is so large and robust.” Greg Gbur, an optical physicist at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, says the findings won’t change the way physicists look at the aura emanating from a lamp or flashlight. But he says the speed corrections could be important for physicists studying extremely short light pulses for exi

But what is this news... even though its about laser , it talks about photons and speeds in vacume: sent a pulse of laser light through cesium vapor so quickly that it left the chamber before it had even finished entering. The pulse traveled 310 times the distance it would have covered if the chamber had contained a vacuum. Researchers say it is the most convincing demonstration yet that the speed of light — supposedly an ironclad rule of nature — can be pushed beyond known boundaries, at least under certain laboratory circumstances. “This effect cannot be used to send information back in time,” said Lijun Wang, a researcher with the private NEC Institute. “However, our experiment does show that the generally held misconception that ‘nothing can travel faster than the speed of light’ is wrong.” The results were published in Thursday’s issue of the journal Nature. my second pt. is any constant becomes variable when unit differes. In fact there is no constant in vaccum.depending upon its position in given coordinate system. mathematically any constant can include -ve and +ve infinity, complex part of it and even a zero. I am referring to π in that sense

But what is this news... even though its laser it talks about photons and speeds in vacume: sent a pulse of laser light through cesium vapor so quickly that it left the chamber before it had even finished entering. The pulse traveled 310 times the distance it would have covered if the chamber had contained a vacuum. Researchers say it is the most convincing demonstration yet that the speed of light — supposedly an ironclad rule of nature — can be pushed beyond known boundaries, at least under certain laboratory circumstances. “This effect cannot be used to send information back in time,” said Lijun Wang, a researcher with the private NEC Institute. “However, our experiment does show that the generally held misconception that ‘nothing can travel faster than the speed of light’ is wrong.” The results were published in Thursday’s issue of the journal Nature.