Mike Smith Cosmos

O.k. I have to look in to what you are saying . As I understand things . Einstein's breakthrough with general relativity produced the matrix which we understand and illustrate . As gravity. Newtons formulae contained G on the top line and r on the bottom line being very small would counter any weakness in G . True there are the other forces and fields electrical and magnetic, . Also there is the matter of spin and frequency which appear to be present . I will try and address these if only in principle at this stage Mike

Thanks for your link.( about the experiment simulations wave particles ) I am giving this subject of the duality ( wave -particle ) some serious thought. I think if I can make sense of that , it will be a progressive step in the right direction . It is always brought up as one of quantum physics mysteries . If the entity ( photon new view) can be seen as an invariant phenomenon . Even if aspects come to the fore, more ,under certain conditions , and other aspects , under different conditions . That can be invariant , that will be fine . That will make it real. Therefore a major step toward , what really is going on . If by taking the (hole, void, bubble approach) makes for a more plausible explanation for the wave -particle phenomenon. Then this will be a step in the right direction . If it is , then the maths needs to come in , if possible . Intuitively, I think the radical view of what photons (are or do, ) are taking advantage of what is already there. Flap and slash about in a pool , with or without detergent present and perfectly formed foam, bubbles, appear on the surface or in the air. Although energy is applied to the situation, there is already a pre-disposition to form bubbles. In the greater aspect of space-time and vacuum energy there exists a pre disposition to release energy suitable to form bubbles. There is latent energy in the system which by calculation have wildly different values. From observation of natural systems and from experience of electronic design. there are certain constituents that are required. a) a Latent supply of power or energy. In electronics this is a power source like batteries, or mains converted to DC power. In nature this can be chemical energy or sun power. Thus in our Quantum Gravity project , the vacuum energy of space- time can supply latent energy. b) a stimulation energy , to start the process of bubble photon formation . The initial energy can come from an electron falling to a lower energy band , or excitation via an electrical radio frequency amplifier and antenna , or thermal activity of sufficient level. c ) there needs to be a positive feedback system present to make the production of photon bubbles, reliable , quantifiable, and easy to produce. In electronic systems this is provided by using the output to stimulate the input. d) There needs to be a stabilizing system which kicks in when the required level is reached. Anyone familiar with blowing real bubbles , and making a chain of domino's to fall ,knows there is a critical band of strength of blowing or tapping the first domino in the chain. In electronics, a design can balance positive and negative feedback, and stabilization. I have illustrated this before in falling Domino's. From 'Energy makes things happen' by definition . There must be sufficient inbuilt latent potential energy in a system for it to go on a 'roll ' by itself after being given the initial input initiative . Like the domino's , otherwise it will require an ongoing input of energy to keep the system 'rolling' . An observation of bubble blowing through a ring, there is a set level when the bubble prefers to pinch off into a bubble , than collapse back into the ring. In radio frequency there are levels, wavelengths and distances , when the oscillations of electro - magnetism prefer to move outward than return into the antenna by induction. This is the difference between a mains transformer at 50 hz and a radio frequency coil at 1000,s hz , in a condenser antenna combination. In Nature , there are countless examples of latent Energy , Initial input, Positive feedback, Negative feedback. Pinching off. Stabilization. Mike

Although it is early days in my fathoming the nature of the " Photon " as it enters existence at the electron / other interface, I am of a mind already that we are dealing more with the absence of a particle , rather than the presence of a particle . Namely the bubble formed is in fact more a condition of the immediate space -time , rather than some independent particle. Mike Some of the maths looks a little daunting Link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_the_mathematics_of_general_relativity . Link : http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_differential_equation#Wave_equation_in_one_spatial_dimension I am sure it's bark is worse than its bite . Mike

I think " gravitational bubble " is a misleading expression. I was trying to explain the General relativity derivation of the distortion caused by massive bodies like sun etc at the large scale. This then I was saying was also true at the quantum size level. So I was proposing it would only take a small amount of energy ( this time not gravity) that we give to produce the photon . (say by an electron) or heat . What I am proposing is that this interaction with spacetime produces a " bubble" which closes over and becomes free standing within the structure of space time. This in the same way that a sun distorts at a much larger scale, and does not close over ( unless we reach black hole mode ). So I am saying this brings unity to quantum gravity at either end of the energy , mass, and size scale. I would dare to suggest the comparison of scales is similar to trying to push a needle through a thick straw mat (easy) and pushing a football through a thick straw mat (nigh on impossible ). mike I would like to sleep on these questions. However it was the wave particle duality , that led me to think there was something not quite ' real ' here. Namely if reality lays well within super symmetry and invariance then something of our view of wave particle differentiation , ie one minute it works as a wave , the next moment it works as a particle , then it points to we have not got to the REAL picture of a photon . That is , it is invariant by being constant, say as a wavicle or whatever. Hence I was proposing a bubble . As that has invariance and symmetry . That could make it reality if it were true. Let me sleep on things , it's been a busy day . The dog has led me a merry dance! Mike My method of progress in these matters , is to observe , observe , observe , the natural order of things. . I look for patterns, I think a lot . I postulate , many times dismiss my postulations , occasionally get the feeling , I have a good one. Then I test it out a bit , then I speak about it. This may be where the waving about of arms comes . Quite a long way down the line. A BBC horizon program last night reviewed all of science from Newton to Einstein , to Hubble to Hubble telescope . To the universe. What progress in thinking over 400 years . The big driving factor across those four centuries among two other factors was IMAGINATION Mike

I am talking about general relativity with the distortion of space time, working at opposite ends of the size, mass and energy scale. Illustrated below is a non accurate scale sketch of the principle of this proposed theory. On the right a sun sized distortion requiring a lot of mass /energy. On the left a photon requiring only quanta sized energy to produce a bubble ,quanta,photon . I am not sure of the formula relating to distortion to energy ratio. In gravity formulae often there is an inverse radius squared term. This can have a large influence on the ratio of energy requirements. ( sun mass-energy and size , to photon mass-energy and size ) Mike Ps sun is never likely to reach energy level to produce its bubble and disappear , unless that is what happens at black hole formation . Here however the scale of energy would be massive . Whereas for the photon the energy requirement is easily achieved . By heat black body radiation or electro magnetic radio waves . Both these are within man generated small energy supply.

This is the Radius of the event horizon of a Black hole . Are you sure this is the formula i need. A black hole has immense mass at its centre. I am working with something that has Zero mass at its center. If Rs = 2GM/Csquared if M=0 Then Rs=0 Surely a black hole and an event horizon are keeping light in , I want light going out . Maybe I need to convert the energy of the photon into an Equivalent mass. ? Then Rs would be very small . Mike

Eureka ! I have it ! .................."Quantum Gravity and the implication for photons" ......................................... Link to Bubbles produced in numbers :- http://www.doctorzig...m/cp2u/image2ql .....very small...quantum bubbles .............-------..... very large galaxy superclusters It is so easy to do . 1. ...... We turn on a light . 2 ..... We fire up a coil ,capacitor , antenna combination We produce quantum bubbles of space time , and out they shoot , like streams of kiddies bubbles at the speed of light. It is so easy . Tying this in with general relativity at the quantum radius , might prove a little more tricky . However we can have a bit of fun blowing quantum bubbles ( oops ! Photons ) , in the mean time . There , did it , trillions upon trillions of quantum bubbles - photons Mike Edited by Mike Smith Cosmos, Today, 09:20 AM.

O.k. Fair enough, but people were discussing particles being ' real ' or not. We are however discussing ( according to the title of the thread ) ..The properties of a Photon .. And whether it is real or not seems to be a consideration and some members were calling for a definition of ' Real' . How can we progress if we do not distinguish , around the issue of real and physical object ? If anything , I am suggesting that a photon is NOT a physical object , but it could be REAL if a photon was viewed in the correct way . I am also suggesting to test for its Real ' ness , we need to look for invariance and symmetry ' ness Maybe our problem is trying to hang on to the particle aspect of wave- particle duality. Perhaps we should 'dump' the particle as a physical thing and look for the particle nature more as a real hole type thing . Like my vortex in the pool . Real but not a physical thing like a rubber ball . ......................................."Quantum Gravity and the implication for photons" ...................................................................... ------------------------------------------------------------//---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------//----------- Eureka ! I have it ! --------------- [ Warning Speculative ] ----------------------------------------------------------------//----------- ------------------------------------------------------------//---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------//----------- http://www.doctorzig...m/cp2u/image2ql .....very small...quantum bubbles .............-------..... very large galaxy superclusters Now comes the application and test . It is so easy to do . 1 We turn on a light . 2 We fire up a coil ,capacitor , antenna combination We produce quantum bubbles of space time , and out they shoot , like streams of kiddies bubbles at the speed of light. It is so easy . Tying this in with general relativity at the quantum radius , might prove a little more tricky . However we can have a bit of fun blowing quantum bubbles ( oops ! Photons ) , in the mean time . There , did it , trillions upon trillions of quantum bubbles - photons Mike ..................................................... ............................................ ................................... ..................................... ............................. As the latter half of this post is Speculative. I have moved the Subject of "Quantum Gravity and the implication for photons" to the Speculations Forum . See :- " Theory of Quantum Gravity & Photon Production ", Speculation forum . ..................................................... ............................................. ................................... ................................... .............................

I dare not say it... But does this not indicate Observation itself may be part of what makes things real . I do not pretend. I can not easily adjust to the statement in italics. Although I have heard it put that way , and also, that observation can be viewed in terms of inanimate interaction counting as an observation. I think Professor Al-Khalili is giving a presentation on this subject , here in the U.K December 9th Link - http://www.jimalkhalili.com/ mike Ps. IF this is correct . There are two rather profound things afoot. 1) The universe is undergoing , by interactions all over the place ,a sort of self constructing , Auto build process. 2) Observation, particularly by Sentient beings like ourselves are making our reality by our observation.

As I have been lead to believe, The Test for seeing if something is REAL is :- Is it invariant. Namely , does it look the same from whichever perspective we view the 'Thing ' Be that, constant velocity, accelerating, electrically, magnetically, charge, spin, gravitational, Whatever way you look , it looks the same. Mike One could speak in terms of nearly, very close to reality. The most real view. So, If this definition of reality is correct, if we need to get a hold of a ' Real Photon ' it needs to be Invariant . So could it be a wave , and a particle . Surely it needs to be ' xxxxxxxxxx' . what ever 'xxxxxxxxx' it needs to be viewed , invariant. I suppose it could have facets . Not sure.

Yes , well you are probably right , with the Maelstrom of interactions. Whatever is down there , is pretty good to be able to pass these photons along to wherever they go, and arrive pretty darn quickly . Mike

Sorry , I got chopped in half ,as the posting was split . It lost my answers in oblivion. I was trying to show how such things as angular spin and momentum , can be set up ( photo 1 ) they can have a rotational frequency and maintain an independent existence and move independently across the pool. ( photo 2 ) And the energy input , is no longer attached to the source ( photo 3 ) . All this in the pool ( acting as free Space-Time ) , with no THING present no PARTICLE ( as in a fragment of some THING ) only the effect of the initial injection of energy goes sailing off as a free standing Photon Looking vortex. Frank Wilczek refers to the pool as the Grid , made up of the quantum foam, fields, virtual particles and all the other sub sub atomic phenomenon . Presumably now including the Higgs Field . My whole point here being , you do not need a central 'Thing' { what most people think of as a particle } , it is the effect with all its characteristics of Energy, Angular Spin , Frequency , within the Wilczec Grid. ( maybe its now combined with Higgs field, i am not sure ) Mike Ps The first arrow points to the free standing vortex . The other arrow marked 'There'. is pointing to another phenomenon , which I have not commented on here , a feint independent moving free standing line. ( as opposed to the free standing moving Vortex )

Well yes , you are right, there are these attributes present Energy, angular momentum in spin , frequency . But then one might ask Energy of what ?, angular momentum of what ? , frequency of what ? . The notion of the particle aspect of ( wave -particle duality,) The thing that I was speaking of in my post ( there is no thing there . I was meaning there is no piece of grit, fragment of some matter etc rather there was a compact effect or photon effect ) Experiments I have done show it is possible to produce a compact ( not spread out ) effect . See following model . :- Mike

I shall probably get jumped on from a great height for saying this " But , I have never imagined anything going anywhere much when it comes to a Photon. There is nothing there , actually there. So no mass as there is no thing. All that goes off is a unidirectional EFFECT. Like a wave on the sea. The sea water goes nowhere much , just bobs up and down a bit . But a wave appears to go across the sea. I know the sea is altogether different in substance but the wave is , in some ways a good illustration of how energy can travel without any thing going anywhere much. " Similarly , seeing as how this thread is called "looking through a telescope at a distant star" . The photon just coming into your eye. I would say is not some battle worn ' thing ' having traveled half way across the universe, but rather a 'uni directional wave like effect' , that was just stimulated a moment ago , not far off from your eye. Mike

I think my non lingual , Pictorial illustration of the Cats shows this well. The ONLY CATS that look like a cat are in the present. .Future cats are hoped for, and past cats are ,mere traces , or memories. The Present , for the cat is now. One Point . The Present . Mike

.. . Does this then invoke the Schreoniger cat in a box model .. Applied to my six cat , possibilities .. Namely we can only really " know " If we " observe " by opening the box " by observation " ? Eeek ! Maybe we kill the cat by observation ! Maybe we do not ! Mike

I am not grotesque , in fact I am quite cute ! I think I look the same on timeline , in the past , as I do now , and hopefully into the near future . Not yet sure ? Perhaps , that's not quite true . More like :- ....past time.......... .......... ........... Present Then :- ..present ........... ......... ........ ......... ...... Future Mike

Yes , saw the movie Interstellar about a week ago . Heard that Kip Thorne advised a lot on the film making . Link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kip_Thorne Imagine a lot of film producers licence also went into the pot. But if you like musing about the possible future or possibilities elsewhere in the universe , very stimulating and enjoyable. My personal take on things , for what it is worth . Creative things often seem to happen where ' systems are in balance . ' Eg . Where symmetry breaks , or balanced forces open up some form of equilibrium. A wormhole , or an area surrounding a black hole at an event horizon , both seem likely candidates for interesting creative things being possible ! Mike

...--- Yes! but . .... where am I , ..... And when am I .......-----?.? ---------------------------//-----------------/-----------------//----------------//----//---------------////////---- And who am I, for that matter ? And who are all you lot out there ? You are not cats ! Mike

Wormholes. I think the Film Interstellar ,well illustrated or visualized the principle of possibly going through a wormhole near Saturn. Such would make possible contact with other life forms, if there are any? [ At , if necessary, far distance reaches of space ? ] As an example of the principle , we could think of the surface nature of the Arctic including the North Pole.[ Exploration difficulties] Looking under the North Pole Ice cap , via a hole drilled down through the ice, and viewing through a upside down periscope long undersea distances . Similarly an underwater vehicle [submarine like] , traversing underwater the arctic, surely illustrates how apparently, difficult or death defying projects, may be realized ? Perhaps this compares with the dangers of the surface of the ocean by sailing ship and underwater security by submarines . Mike

FREQUENCY OF OSCILLATION x WAVELENGTH = SPEED OF LIGHT Mike

This may, or may not, help in understanding electrical and magnetic dipoles. I come from an Electronic/Radio background . Dipoles and electromagnetism are at the core of operations in this field . See following drawing . Explanation which could possibly help :- The green pole split in the middle is called a DIPOLE . You may have seen them sticking up on top of people's houses , being the old way of receiving TV programmes. It is still used to transmit some signals from tall masts you may see dotted around towns and on top oh hills. Like a violin string , it is a very useful way of transmitting and receiving electro - magnetic waves or signals ( via these DIPOLES ) . Basically because one sets up a standing wave ( like shaking a skipping rope or plucking a guitar/ violin string ) Why it works so well. Is the far ends (moment ) are electrically zero and magnetically a maximum. The centre is electrically maximum and magnetically zero ( again a moment ) Strings and electro magnetism ' loves'. To exist in this configuration . OSCILLATING . Setting up this stable , efficient, configuration or moment. Perhaps in biology this happens also ( not my field ) Mike Ps the electrical and magnetic fields are polarised at 90 degree in space to each other . Shown by pink and blue signals illustrated diagrammatically at 90 degrees to each other .

My experiments with mechanical strings are such that you can input a certain amount of energy, and they will vibrate at a fixed frequency, or at least a set of frequencies ( fundamental, First harmonic, second harmonic, third harmonic ). If the energy is increased beyond a certain point, the string( seems not to want to, or is unable to absorb any more energy ) so the oscillation breaks into another dimension ! ( from 2nd dimension to 3rd dimension -both ) Mike

How is this Courtesy of Wikipedia mike

Now that is interesting ! You should see me go Mike