Mike Smith Cosmos

Research done by the Refs of AJB in previous posts seems to indicate there is evidence for a rotation of the whole universe of about one ten trillionth (10exp -13) of a radian per year. This seems to be demonstrated by the rotation of galaxies produced by the corriolis effect and eddy currents . This is in relation to the overall structure of the universe.

Rotation seems to be a fundamental attribute of many aspects of reality: from particles; to planets; to moons; to stars; to star systems; to galaxies. So why not the whole Universe ?

Quite where this - making happen stuff - comes from is an interesting question . N.B What does " You must enter a post. " mean ?

. I don't think you are the only one . Reading Frank Wilczec book " the lightness of being " although not using the word aether , he uses the word Grid. I have read some other books about the Void By Frank Close. Again there seems some alluding to a far from empty void. Both these men are well recognised scientists. I think this whole issue of the aether needs re-visiting . Keep going ! .

The collapsing of the wave function , is surely one of quantum theory's intriguing mysteries. Namely why should an observation, or a measurement cause a change of performance ie wave to particle. Perhaps if we embrace the fact that it happens, can lead to an idea of what is going on in part . A bird is flying fine free in the sky. Now lets grab it and examine it to see how its flying. The act of grabbing it causes it to stop flying. Maybe waves are good if they are left alone to wave and do their business. If we or other matter get too much of a hold, then the waves have no option but to respond by taking on a particle form. Maybe this is necessary for matter to interact with waves. To change state from probability to reality. Sort of like those parallel miniature setting switches ( 8 bit switches ) [ on off on on off off on off]. Once set the switches are encoded until the system is reset [ 00000000 ]. The universe is quietly going from a probability state to a Reality state. Past to Future.

In view of the news out in the New Scientist and Scientific American about the possible discovery of a new Technicolour particle at 145 Gev approx and the possible idea of a fifth fundamental force working within the atomic nucleus . (This all currently due to Fermilab work) . I think this subject of Spin has more to offer. Has anything come out of The Large Hadron Collider project about spin. .

Intuitively I am not too keen on all these multiverse universes. Intuitively I think , from a probability point of view there is the probability for all these other universes, BUT that the one that has moved from a probable state to a real state is tho only REAL one. Of course for this universe all that is past is Real all that is future is Probable. I appreciate this opens up all sorts of questions, like whose time, whose future , whose past etc etc As multiverses are not yet proven, they must still be in the region of hypothesis, however probability is a well proven science. So my reasoning is that "The influence and touching of the quantum field is the mechanism for the formation of the cosmos , Or how the cosmos is being Made " MKS 2008 .

. . Looks like I'm going to have all of the time in the world sitting on top of some hills in Italy, trying to contemplate the whole Shebang" . ( Time and all ) . No final takers ? Give me something to think about ? .

. . INTERESTING .

. . Where did everybody go ? .

Sorry, I was not meaning that the phenomenon of tunneling is incorrect, as clearly it makes nuclear fusion possible in stars, and as you say all the IT uses. What I meant was the description or model of a tunnel/ train tunnel is good as far as I can sea, but as you guys have "been beating me with", classical models are incomplete individually. Namely if I understand it correctly, it is not a penetrating in a strait line through a potential hill , that is happening but a probability peak, though a small peak exists on the other side of the hill by some form of wierd ( non classical ) quantum effect. An electron , according to the probability function/wave , where it will find itself at some remote small chance location in space-time ( however it does it "wierdly" ) on the other side of the potential hill . As, to whether it dug itself a level strait hole through the hill. I very much doubt. Surely this is a case, as you guys have been trying to get me to concede, ( or shut up and calculate ), makes classical models like " Hill" be incomplete. However I am very happy with the word model "Hill " or "Tunnelling" all be it , that further models are required to explain how it got on the other side of the hill, other than saying the mathematical probability wave had a small peak on the other side of the hill. Patently it works and works very precisely, which I would not dare to suggest otherwise, with the shear weight of research , development, and production of devices that work precisely as per QM prediction. My personal scientific desire, is to back off at a distance , possibly inter-discipline distance, possibly visually distant (screwed up eyes , figuratively ), turn round and look at QM with the appropriate MODELS ( not just mathematical models ) and see what there is to be seen ! Maybe nothing ! Its like sending a scout over the mountain range to see what he can see. Maybe he sees nothing, Maybe he is killed in the process by foes. Just maybe he sees something, that just might have some relevance. Surely this is the observation, that starts the chain of scientific endevour , off ( observe, postulate, experiment, measure, conclude , evaluate/ falsify , iterate the process all over and over. I'm off to Italy for five months next week Wednesday 13th, Up into the mountains of Umbria . I'm going to poke an internet dongle into the sky and if I can get the www then I might have some further contact. If not then in September I will return . I have a library of QM books over there, and a lot of Sun and a flaggon of wine. Should you wish to join myself and wife in our mountain Casa . Once leaving Switzerland, head south to Florence, East into the Appenines, Hit the ancient Roman North Road ( Via Appenines ) , where it crosses the pilgrims trail to Assisi, there you will find us. Leave a message on my members message pad. Look for a Dongle sticking up in the air on a bamboo pole with a long USB cable. Thanks for all you guys interesting comments ! Mike .

The "we " is the developed technologically based world. Yes I place myself in the framework of a scientist . If I happen to mention a disbelief in our accepting QM at face value without a real perception of what is going on, only but belies my desire to find things out. Surely the scientific method is to :- I thought the copenhagan agreement on QM broke up with two camps. One saying "shut up and calculate " and the other group went away to think, discuss and come up with new ideas. . http://depts.washing...rg_SSN_1_14.pdf I am by far from being non mathematical, having studied Pure maths, applied maths , EM maths as applied to field theory and electronics at University, however I do find it hard to see models using only maths . I am sure there are models somewhere waiting to be found which will lift the fog on QM. . PS Thanks for your great comments. Much appreciated. . Yes well , this illustrates my point. Even though quantum tunneling is an incorrect model as it is the probability wave that exists the other side of the barrier wall , it still helps with QM understanding . Similarly with the word "entanglement" Great stuff .

If symmetry is the great guiding light should we not be looking for negative movement in time, as with matter antimatter, etc.? .

I appreciate your engagement , and in no way disrespect your comments. ( both yours, Ajb, and Mr Swansot and others ). I do believe this sort of engagement and discussion is productive as long as it is honest and does not get dogmatic unless a fundamental truth is up for discussion. In keeping QM just mathematical I believe is a mistake and I have also noticed that many physics breakthroughs were made, even if in the wrong direction , when scientists got together and discussed at length " Philosophical ideas " . I am that Greek seeking such enlightenment. .

Yes. " Things are waves, and obey the relationships described by QM. " You seem to want a mechanism ( is that wrong of me ) to explain why quantum mechanics works that way. Is this not what the string theorists are up to . But there appear to be difficulties. . I cannot believe that we are conducting a technological society which is based , in the main , on quantum mechanics, which is no more than a fragmented, yet very precise and accurate technology yet fundamentally not conceptualised. We appear to be riding along on a list of phenomenon, such as Heisenbergs uncertainty principle, Pauli exclusion principle, particle wave duality, de broglie probability wave, localised , entangled , spin , spooky action at a distance, God playing dice, and a whole host of parts, with not a real tangible feeling for what is going on . ( Even if one accepts that, it is nothing like the classical world ), it surely cannot be beyond words and images. ( models for want of another word ) . Or are these the words of another "Doomed scientist who dared to look at Medusa's face " .

<br>To my knowledge, there is no experimental data that does not agree withthe predictions of quantum mechanics to within acceptable experimental errors and the domain of validity. <br><br> <br><br><br>eek! What have I done <br><br><br>.<br><br><br>

Whats that supposed to mean ? .

Yes out here in the classical world, its very positive and with entropy very uni-directional. ( My comment ) But what happens in the quantum world ? ( My question ) There appear to be hints of something different ? ( Richard Feynman ) .

Have I missed something, or was this scientology thing an APRIL 1st joke ?

Is this not the difference between a medical symptom being understood "behaves " and not understanding the underlying 'cause' "works ". Surely it behooves us to get at the underlying 'cause' , "works", in science if we are ever going to manipulate the underlying "works" to our advantage . . Yes, Fine . But I personally still have the need, the way my brain works , for me to contain ideas, and work forward, to translate the quantum concepts into a working Model. This so, even if that model has all sorts of bits, waves and things hanging off it, unlike anything in the normal classical world, I still need a model or series of models. The maths is all well and fine but much as I understand the operations of much of the maths, I am unable to keep a picture going in my mind when it all goes too convoluted. You mathematicians seem to be able to wander unruffled in a sea of equations. Very well done , but I need to pull some workable models out of this quantum jungle. At a later juncture, and in another subject area, say September when I return , I would like to investigate this issue of :- are we using maths to describe reality, perhaps sometimes in an awkward way, or is maths the reality that underlays the universe?

In a universe full of all sorts of Particles and Waves, does the change of state of the particle or wave constitute merely a change or a passage of time . ( if so who's time ) . If only change exists does it matter going from state A to state B or from state B to state A . Does this constitute time going in the opposite direction.

Surely it is the "lot" of scientists to discover and find out how the universe works! If not, how can we learn to harness the "goodies", move and exist. "Exactly " means more than a superficial level of understanding. Guarantee toward understanding. Well there's a thing ! If not, then we must remain like the Eloy or whatever they are called in H.G.Wells the time machine. Those below the earth and those above ( the Eloy ) just wandering about accepting everthing at face value , smiling. ( Perhaps that is the better state to be in ) .

Surely if we cannot pin the electron down to some understandable form , we are in a ( blindfolded ) position of not understanding exactly what makes the whole of chemistry, much of physics, much of the workings of the universe, work. .

I am sure you have probably come across Lee Smolin A lecturer ( Prof or Dr ) at the Peninsular Institute Canada ( an offshute of Princetown University ) He came up with Loop quantum gravity as a link from/between quantum mechanics and relativity. He found that space rather than being a backdrop to " things" came out of, and with, the loops and knots . See The road to reality by Lee Smolin

Whether it is of any use SysD. Whenever anyone speaks of waves I always thing of waves on the sea. Early physics often uses sea waves as a model. The recent Tsunami is a wave example. The source of energy to the wave was a major jolt in the pacific plate. The Tsunami wave could be seen all over the world on TV. If anyone said where is the wave ( equivalent of the electron ) then you could point to the wave on the tv screen.But which part of a wave miles upon miles wide would you point to. Bit difficult as its all over a long wave front. However once the wave is interfered with, ie landfall. It was easy to see exactly where the collapsed wave was. ie JAPAN or even more specifically the northern region which took the brunt . ( electron now , not a wave but a particle - Energy hit that caused an atomic power station to blow up . The model is only of use so far , but it does illustrate the difference of a wave like condition and a particle like condition ( wave fairly benign while out at sea ( boats bob up and down ) destructive or energetic when a particle of confronted enegy ( boats smashed to bits )