1. Sub Quantum Echo Particles...(SQEP's) & Sub Quantum Echo Particle Kinetic Resonance Flux

[Imagine Everything]

I should add, I know I've been a bit vague regarding spins, excitements, collisions and maybe even more but I'm still learning and no doubt that will come together as time goes by.

Also the above is version 4 of n?, it is by no means the finished article and still needs a lot of maths study/input too..

[Imagine Everything]

I think I may have been able to draw it. And hopefully in a more accurate and simple way.

 

Hopefully I'll be better at explaining it as the weeks go by, especially the 'goings on' inside the 'quantum gap'.

A wavelength within a wavelength within a wavelength within ...

Maybe lots of wavelengths within lots of wavelengths within lots ...

 

Happy Christmas.  🎅

 

Edited December 24, 2024 by Imagine Everything

[studiot]

On 12/24/2024 at 2:56 PM, Imagine Everything said:

hink I may have been able to draw it. And hopefully in a more accurate and simple way.

 

Can I introduce you to the KISS principle ?

KISS

(Keep it Simple Stupid)

 

https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/keep-it-simple-stupid?srsltid=AfmBOoq5O5di2nqYTSotLvSK7jpCBybGO_1r9STj1NEk99MIoYktDGNE

 

I was reading a history of particle physics and this piece caught my eye.

How the simple resonance experiment I have been banging on about with the knotted handkerchief and the hanging weight led Lawrence to the Nobel Physics prize.

 

 

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks Studiot, sorry I'm a bit ill atm, I will have more of a look in a few days hopefully.

Hope you and everyone else had a good xmas if you celebrate it.

[Imagine Everything]

Questions please

Is string field considered at all as Sub Quantum?

 

Do Super Nova's inflate and then expand before the material ejected starts cooling down as it spreads out everywhere around the cause of it's ejection.?

 

Similar (though on a much smaller scale) as the universe inflating before expansion.

I kind of see the initial big bang as being a Alpha Nova if that makes any sense?

Perhaps the BB is the Alpha that creates the Alpha particles and SN are Beta and produce the other particles from the Alpha required to keep the universe going.

The BB that keeps on Banging.

Like a rechargeable battery that slowly loses energy each time it's recharged maybe, only on a supermassive universal sized battery.

If DE exists, are SN candidates for producing it?

The BB must be responsible for DE if DE exists. So going on from that, could SN be a candidate to produce it too?

I'll stop there. Need to go study some more.

 

On 1/1/2025 at 12:32 PM, studiot said:

 

Can I introduce you to the KISS principle ?

KISS

(Keep it Simple Stupid)

 

https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/keep-it-simple-stupid?srsltid=AfmBOoq5O5di2nqYTSotLvSK7jpCBybGO_1r9STj1NEk99MIoYktDGNE

 

I was reading a history of particle physics and this piece caught my eye.

How the simple resonance experiment I have been banging on about with the knotted handkerchief and the hanging weight led Lawrence to the Nobel Physics prize.

 

 

Taking a 'wild' jump on from this, would or could that mean that indeed some type of particles can or do indeed get created without the need for a hadron collider? Merely 'kicked' along into, over, under, inside, outside, alongside, decaying and creating by and with each other, against each other and because of each others vibrations/kicks?

The simply create due to the 'vibration' they incorporate/absorb/merge?

Edited January 5 by Imagine Everything

[Imagine Everything]

I think I might be close to putting together my first formula/equation? Albeit perhaps very roughly.

It very early and I'm not sure I understand everything but perhaps you nice people can help show me where I might have gone wrong.

I'll refer to it as the gap instead of quantum gap. The BC's are not very conductive and therefore can have more λ than the casimir effect with conductive plates/BC's would (if I understand this correctly, still have more to learn)

The gap exists between State 1 BC and State 2 BC - so S1BC & S2BC.

S1BC QT = State 1 Boundary Condition Quantum Tunneling...

 

(Gap) a =  ± λ1, λ,2...λn ÷ T + S1BC QT + S2BC  QT +  QT Ke = Nameless Particle (Dark Quasiparticle?)

 

In my full idea, I see this nameless particle as making up or creating DM/DE or in some way being involved with it.

I  know how that sounds, but hey ho, never know unless you try eh.

What I have tried to say is that within this Gap, I see different particles, fields interacting with each other and also with the Ke coming into and through and also interacting with the fields and particles/quasiparticle fields/quasiparticles and VP's... within this gap

 

 

(I called it smudge before but with more thinking, perhaps nameless 1 is better.

I don't` currently have a great grasp on Quantum Tunneling yet but hopefully I'll be able to replace the 'QT' with more determined maths in the future.

There is obviously so very much more to this, not least ,of which is explaining the possible different interactions between all the different particles and fields themselves somehow.

No doubt as I learn more, I might see this differently. So far i would say that even though science is pretty head bangingly difficult and fascinating, I haven't come across anything YET that has made me think the idea can't work.

 I constantly wonder how long it will be before something tells me it's impossible. Perhaps I'm not seeing DM/DEor even anything new at all, probably it's nothing....But maybe.. just maybe

Still can't help but wonder, even though my original descriptions were off, I seem to keep finding things that explain them scientifically in the same, similar way. Anyons are very interesting.

@Mordred I'll be moving back into determinants some time in the next few days all going well.

It'll be interesting to find out more about spin too when we get to it.

Hmm 15 months ago, I knew nothing at all really about science.

6 months ago, had a thought nova if you will

Today I hope I am in some tiny way getting closer to having an equation to work with and see where it takes me.

15 months from now? Tbh I would be very very happy just to know the idea had lasted that long without being quashed.

 

Is there a physics symbol for particle/particle field collision?

 

 

 

Edited January 10 by Imagine Everything

[CosmicDreamer]

@Imagine Everything I truly find this thread and you truly inspiring, to of started off with an idea that you couldn’t even grasp or comprehend truly how it came to you. But your dedication, commitment and passion to pursue whatever you can find to keep building on your idea and making sense of the insensible. I find this tremendously inspiring and I hope I can one day understand and appreciate the posts on a more comprehensive level when into learn to understand all that’s being discussed here and on the forums. Your scientific knowledge has grown so much in such a short time and I truly congratulate you for all you have accomplished and continue to achieve going forward. 

[Imagine Everything]

@CosmicDreamer

Thanks, that's very kind & you flatter me but I really don't know much to be honest.

Bits and pieces are starting to sink in but I am nowhere near as knowledgeable as the very clever people that admin & help with this website and the people that visit or post here.

I have an awful lot to learn still and regardless of what I saw in my idea, I truly don't know if it will amount to anything or not.    +1 for your kind post.

I am a nobody of nobodies and if I may be so bold, if you're really interested, I would encourage you to try and learn.

It's extremely fascinating and opens up your eyes to a completely different way of understanding things.

 

 

Few other things if I may, mainly @Mordred & @studiot

 

I know I might have come across as someone who thinks they've discovered something and knows it. I haven't and I don't.

I just had this idea regarding how it may be created and what the thing is that might be created. I don't recall actually stating before that I was thinking of it as DM, I might have but don't think I did.

I also don't mean to sound like I'm latching onto something that has already been written about. I'm not.

It's so very strange to me that the way I see things in my idea have so many times already been termed and explained by clever people like yourselves. It's seriously uncanny.

I still have the original idea in all it's glorious &  badly described/worded form which goes onto see this created thing as possible DM.

I got maybe too excited about the dark photon but it (to me) almost seemed too god to be true when I read about it.

It was like a big piece of the jigsaw fell on my lap.

I also said I had forgotten a lot in the 2 weeks or so when my pc decided to go nuts and break down.

Like anything, if I don't do it or deal with it, day after day after day..., my brain seems to tuck it away somewhere until I see it or deal with it again. I noticed you haven't responded since my pc went down @Mordred and wonder if this is why.

I'm sorry if I came across as possibly wasting your time.

Your patience and help has not been shown or given for nothing. I wouldn't still be writing or studying if it had.

Just wanted you to know that and also that I still appreciate yours, Studiots and others time.

Also @studiot I dare say I might have lost you or your support too, perhaps because of my excitement.

That said and done, thank you regardless of however this does or doesn't turn out.

I guess right now, the future of this thread is in superposition lol.

 

So moving forward this potentially might be part of a much much bigger equation that goes on somehow to describe this nameless particle and how it happens or doesn't.

@studiot Sorry if my drawing was too messy, I didn't know how to draw it properly if I'm honest.

And from what I saw yesterday and if I understood it correctly, the Feynman diagrams describe collisions more simply but all of them? have to be considered before finding the appropriate collision diagram/s to try and describe the possible way this happens in my idea. At this moment in time, the thought of this is bewildering, having had a glimpse at how many possible diagrams there are.

Maybe thats where vectors and det come into it.  I don't know.

 

Anyway, @Mordred again, I'm now back to determinants again. I've been watching lectures about upper triangles matrices, rref. Little bit intimidating but I think I'm sort of following it so far, though I did get stuck with one part on a nxn matrix.

The teacher was somehow swapping and i for a j and I couldn't quite understand how or why he was doing that.

And then 2 i's appeared in a column and that was my call to stop watching for tonight. Right now and then too, I found the extra i's and newly created/added j to be too much to understand.

Hopefully I will with time.

 

Lastly, I have a question as always if I may

I'm a bit stuck with understanding how this determinant ends up becoming 30 on khan's website

https://www.khanacademy.org/math/multivariable-calculus/thinking-about-multivariable-function/x786f2022:vectors-and-matrices/a/determinants-mvc

 

Can you explain it to me please?

The matrix is

4 1 3

0 2 4

3 2 1

I get to the 3 small det and so far so good but I don't understand the sum below

= 4 (-6) -1 (-12) +3 (-6) = 30

 

 

 

 

[Imagine Everything]

Hello again,

 

Can 2 particles, vp or otherwise colliding or..hmm..an electron being excited, fermion repulse or photon transfer and simliar make a very tiny noise of some sort.

I'm not talking about something anyone can hear but possibly something that can be picked upon or measured in some way either directly or by the influence they have on other particles / vibrations.

I'm wondering if DM behaves somewhat similar.

If it isn't a 'something', could it be thought of as if it was a big 'noise' (probably not the right word) in/during or even created by the BB that is merely echoing / expanding on and on and on.

Rather than being stretched, it simply carries on due to the huge, possibly unimaginable amount of Ke created by the BB.

Can the BB be thought of as Ke? or as having Ke? Hmm maybe I'm asking if energy can have Ke.

It's the way I kind of see my idea working but as yet I don't know the maths. Hopefully I will in the future and be able to prove or disprove it.

That is all I really want to do. It's why I came here to start with to get you folks expert opinions.

Have a good weekend.

Edited 5 hours ago by Imagine Everything

[swansont]

4 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Can 2 particles, vp or otherwise colliding or..hmm..an electron being excited, fermion repulse or photon transfer and simliar make a very tiny noise of some sort.

I'm not talking about something anyone can hear but possibly something that can be picked upon or measured in some way either directly or by the influence they have on other particles / vibrations.

Sound is vibration of atoms and molecules. 2 particles colliding doesn’t make sound. You need a lot of particles.

Particle collisions can be detected by the recoil of the particle you hit, or by particles emitted as a result of the collision