NOT "faster than light neutrinos.”

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

de Broglie waves are "matter waves." They refer to ordinary particles (quarks, electrons, whatever) having wavelike properties. They are not special waves that can radiate outward from the center of the Earth, certainly. So I'm not sure what your "de Broglie waves" are or how they related to the standard model at all.

[Realitycheck]

And regarding the neutrino thing, if the whole purpose of the experiment is to fire the neutrinos through the earth (that is the purpose, right?), then how is the elevation of the two sites even relevant? I mean, sure, the thing has to do its everyday job of detecting coordinates, but whats so hard about that? Seems like too basic of an undersight to expect out of Cern for such an experiment, even if my understanding of the details is off..

 

edit:referring to Japan experiment.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Realitycheck

[pantheory]

So let me get this straight. Pushing gravity is actually just gravity as applied to dark matter. Regular matter amasses the way it does, but non-baryonic matter,or ether?,

No, this is an entire theory of gravity. I am saying that dark matter accordingly can be explained as a physical aether with pushing forces having vortex and fluid mechanics/ dynamics.

 

...doesn't interact with light nor does it interact with regular matter either, but their effects on gravity do affect each other, causing regular matter to flow one way, to gravitate towards the planets, systems, etc., and the dark matter to flow, well towards the halos.

This aether is accordingly the carrier of light primarily as a wave, but it also interacts with all of reality, being the cause of gravity. The model proposes that the aether density is generally constant throughout the observable universe excepting within and surrounding matter where the density becomes less.

 

Surrounding galaxies there are vortex currents of aether that move into the galaxy since it has a lower field pressure. In this model the effect of these aether currents we currently call the effects of dark matter. Instead the aether particulates could be called the dark matter even though they are vastly smaller than present ideas of dark matter, and the push rather than pull. The aether and its energy can be observed in the lab as the Zero Point Field and in the universe its currents can be observed as the source of gravity.

..

 

de Broglie waves are "matter waves." They refer to ordinary particles (quarks, electrons, whatever) having wavelike properties. They are not special waves that can radiate outward from the center of the Earth, certainly. So I'm not sure what your "de Broglie waves" are or how they related to the standard model at all.

In this model de Broglie waves are physical aether waves that radiate away from matter reducing in intensity by the inverse square law, the same as EM radiation except for having less intensity. Their wave energy can be absorbed so accordingly it will increase the temperature of surrounding matter. Just like EM radiation most of this radiation accordingly comes from molecules close to the surface of matter.

//

Edited October 30, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

In this model de Broglie waves are physical aether waves that radiate away from matter reducing in intensity by the inverse square law, the same as EM radiation except for having less intensity. Their wave energy can be absorbed so accordingly it will increase the temperature of surrounding matter. Just like EM radiation most of this radiation accordingly comes from molecules close to the surface of matter.

Ah. I suggest you choose a term other than "de Broglie waves," then, as this has nothing to do with de Broglie waves as described by modern physics.

 

So are you suggesting the aether can exert a force on matter? It seems it would have to, if it is to interact with matter.

 

Also, aren't waves in the aether merely light?

[Realitycheck]

I'll stick with the standard model.

[pantheory]

Ah. I suggest you choose a term other than "de Broglie waves," then, as this has nothing to do with de Broglie waves as described by modern physics.

The prime mover of radiating aether particulates away from larger matter is accordingly EM radiation but at the atomic level de Broglie waves accordingly are also a major player concerning radiating the aether outward from the nuclei.

 

So are you suggesting the aether can exert a force on matter? It seems it would have to, if it is to interact with matter.

yes, it interacts with matter. Accordingly individual aether particulates are more interactive with matter than classical neutrinos because most do not possess great velocities. Accordingly the field pressure of the aether upon matter is defined by the universal gravitational constant G: 6.673 X 10^-11 m³ / kg / sec ² .

Also, aren't waves in the aether merely light?

In the aether models of 150 years ago aether was thought to be the carrier of light waves. This was called the luminiferous aether. In this model the aether is both a luminiferous aether as the carrier of light waves, and it is also the cause of gravity via pushing currents of aether. The reason for aether flow accordingly is to equalize field pressure.

Edited October 31, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

The prime mover of radiating aether particulates away from larger matter is accordingly EM radiation but at the atomic level de Broglie waves accordingly are also a major player concerning radiating the aether outward from the nuclei.

So you'd predict there's large amounts of EM radiation being emitted from the center of the Earth?

 

Also, that still has nothing to do with the de Broglie waves of modern physics.

[pantheory]

 

So you'd predict there's large amounts of EM radiation being emitted from the center of the Earth?

At the center of the Earth much heat is accordingly produced because of the pushing forces of gravity and the resultant friction between matter. This heat progressively increases while compressing downward. It also conducts upward to the surface where it is radiated away as EM radiation, close to or at the surface (infra-red). This heat is also enhanced by the sun's heat directly or indirectly.

 

Also, that still has nothing to do with the de Broglie waves of modern physics.

De Broglie believed "his waves" were physical waves and so they are according to this model -- physical aether waves. EM radiation is also accordingly physical aether waves, with an additional transverse character to it because of the particle's oscillation/ temperature which creates the radiation.

 

http://en.wikipedia....ouis_de_Broglie

//

Edited October 31, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

"de Broglie waves" refer to the wavelike properties of particles like neutrons and protons. The term does not refer to any other kind of waves -- particularly waves in the aether, which are completely different.

 

Unless you're saying that matter is made out of aether.

[pantheory]

"de Broglie waves" refer to the wavelike properties of particles like neutrons and protons. The term does not refer to any other kind of waves -- particularly waves in the aether, which are completely different.

 

Unless you're saying that matter is made out of aether.

In this model de Broglie waves can be explained mathematically the same way as in the standard model. The description of them however, is very different in that they are accordingly physical aether waves like EM radiation, but generally with much less intensity and a simpler structure.

 

In this model the majority of what we call matter is aether. I will not explain too much in depth so as not to get off subject, but this entire model is a three dimensional string theory (plus time is 4). Both protons and electrons are accordingly made of a single strand of particulates, maybe millions of these particles in a single strand. There are no quarks in this model. As the particle loop spins within the aether field it creates an aether vortex inside and surrounding it. This accordingly is the bulk of the substance which we call matter. Slower moving particles will interact with this vortex. Known neutrinos will not interact unless they actually come very close to the spinning loop of the particle itself, otherwise as we known they readily pass through most matter, because of their energy, as if it were invisible. The same string like structures accordingly make up the aether, but most have much smaller lengths. In this model there is only one elementary particle that has only one single internal mechanical characteristic. Everything in reality consists of just this one particle. There are no priori forces or pure energy in this model. When the vector forces from the surrounding aether move relative to matter it pushes it in the direction of the net vector of the aether. This accordingly is gravity.

 

If you wish to ask any in-depth questions I can also bring up past speculation threads of mine as needed, to discuss any particulars of anything in cosmology or theoretical physics that you wish to discuss since one subject often is related to another and can often lead to peripheral questions.

//

Edited October 31, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

What is the speed of wave propagation in the aether?

 

How do you account for observations indicating the existence of quarks?

[pantheory]

 

What is the speed of wave propagation in the aether?

The propagation speed of a wave within the aether is at the speed of light, which accordingly varies to some extent based upon the aether density and its motions.

 

How do you account for observations indicating the existence of quarks?

The quark model was proposed in 1964. Before that time there was little evidence for their physical existence until deep-inelastic-scattering results from experiments at the Stanford Accelerator in the late 1960's. The quark model seemed to be a convenient and successful analog that could make predictions at the quantum level.

 

Because of the way that photons scattered they came to conclusions concerning the sub-structure of protons. Using those same results I came to different conclusions but see no fault with the mathematical system of quarks presently being used since I presently have nothing better to offer, as I do for some other aspects of physics.

 

I think one of the biggest areas of doubt concerning the existence of quarks and gluons should be the contention that quarks and gluons can never be observed independently.

//

Edited October 31, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

The propagation speed of a wave within the aether is at the speed of light, which accordingly varies to some extent based upon the aether density and its motions.

But if de Broglie waves are matter waves the way de Broglie described, then in your model matter would have to travel at the speed of light, since it's an aether wave.

[pantheory]

But if de Broglie waves are matter waves the way de Broglie described, then in your model matter would have to travel at the speed of light, since it's an aether wave.

It's just that the wording is a little different. Matter is not an aether wave but accordingly is made up of mostly a spinning aether vortex. As the physical particles/ strands spin they wobble producing waves moving outward at the speed of light. These are accordingly the de Broglie waves. The matter particle can be stationary relative to the surrounding aether or they can have relative motion. If they have relative motion their internal time period will dilate (its spin will slow) and the length of the de Broglie waves will increase. Accordingly the particle's frequency concerning its de Broglie wave, is proportional to its kinetic energy and inversely proportional to its wavelength; the same as in standard physics.

 

Hope this answers your question

//

Edited October 31, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

So a stationary particle is radiating aether waves constantly? If an aether wave is an EM wave, wouldn't that mean that stationary particles emit detectable EM fields?

 

(Incidentally, that's still not like "de Broglie waves" in ordinary physics)

[pantheory]

So a stationary particle is radiating aether waves constantly?

yes

 

If an aether wave is an EM wave, wouldn't that mean that stationary particles emit detectable EM fields?

This I think is the same as in standard physics. EM radiation is emitted from matter at all temperatures above absolute zero.

 

(Incidentally, that's still not like "de Broglie waves" in ordinary physics)

It is a different explanation of course, but I propose no new mathematical physics concerning de Broglie waves.

Edited October 31, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Then you're proposing that the emitted EM radiation has a wavelength matching the de Broglie wavelength of the particle? That's the implication of post #39.

[pantheory]

Then you're proposing that the emitted EM radiation has a wavelength matching the de Broglie wavelength of the particle? That's the implication of post #39.

No, de Broglie wavelengths can vary greatly depending upon the particles momentum. EM radiation is based upon the energy of the atoms and emitted by electrons in motion or in orbit while losing energy, at much lower frequencies. In this way I think there is no difference between this model and the standard model.

//

Edited November 1, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

But you said:

 

As the physical particles/ strands spin they wobble producing waves moving outward at the speed of light. These are accordingly the de Broglie waves.

 

So the particles radiate aether waves (which is EM radiation) at the speed of light, at the wavelength h/p given by the de Broglie equation?

[pantheory]

Happy Halloween, Cap

 

Gots to take them grandbabbies trick-or-treaten. Have a good one and will be back online again tomorrow

 

best regards, Forrest Noble

 

But you said:

 

So the particles radiate aether waves (which is EM radiation) at the speed of light, at the wavelength h/p given by the de Broglie equation?

Well made it back to answer your question tonight

 

Here you are mixing up the two. Both radiate aether waves at the speed of light, but only de Broglie waves have a wavelength given by h/p. Again the equations of the two models do not differ from the standard model concerning de Broglie waves or EM radiation. Only the explanations concerning the physical characteristics/ properties of the waves are different.

Edited November 1, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

But radiated aether waves are EM waves, aren't they? So wouldn't I detect radiated EM waves from objects at their de Broglie wavelength?

[pantheory]

 

But radiated aether waves are EM waves, aren't they?

yes, but also de Broglie waves are also accordingly a different form of aether waves.

 

So wouldn't I detect radiated EM waves from objects at their de Broglie wavelength?

De Broglie wavelengths can vary greatly but have little energy. The highest frequencies and shortest wavelengths of EM radiation are gamma radiation which are also the most energetic of all EM radiation.

Edited November 1, 2011 by pantheory

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

The de Broglie wavelengths of most particles are very, very small, so they should be correspondingly high-energy as aether waves. But you didn't answer my question. Would I detect radiated EM waves from objects at their de Broglie wavelength?

[pantheory]

The de Broglie wavelengths of most particles are very, very small, so they should be correspondingly high-energy as aether waves. But you didn't answer my question.

 

Would I detect radiated EM waves from objects at their de Broglie wavelength?

No

 

De Broglie waves are probably a minor player in my theory that there is a low pressure aether field surrounding all matter. It is proposed that EM radiation is the major contributor to this low pressure area. To what extent de Broglie waves contribute to this low pressure is more speculative. There may also be other contributing factors to this low pressure volume that are either more speculative or that I have not thought of.

//

Edited November 1, 2011 by pantheory

[pantheory]

This thread speculates that the OPERA neutrino experiment had errors within it resulting in their preliminary results which indicated that muon neutrinos apparently went faster than the speed of light. Most scientists and science knowledgeable people also think that there was an error(s) of some kind in the experiment but the possible causes of errors are many.

 

Summary of this model

 

I am a theorist. In my own model of gravity light does not have a constant speed. This theory is a model of pushing gravity first proposed by de Duillier. There are many such versions of pushing gravity, some modern, but the most well-known version was made by Le sage in the mid 1700's. Some of these gravitational models can also be called aether models since many require particulates in the ZPF, something like the dark matter idea but instead these particulates are a pushing rather than pulling force. So my model is an aether model with vectors pushing on all sides of matter. The aether accordingly is made up of string-like particulates of different lengths but just in three dimensions. Some of these particulates could go down to Planck lengths (10^-35 m.). They are pushing and bouncing in all different directions, the fastest and most forceful pass right through matter. For a body the size of the Earth, most of these pushing vectors are absorbed. This heats up the Earth but the Earth continuously radiates EM radiation which are accordingly physically comprised of both particles (photons) and waves (of aether). Since all the downward field vectors are accordingly absorbed by the Earth there are little up vectors on the opposite sides of the Earth. The result is that there are always more downward field vectors surrounding matter than there are up vectors.

 

In a luminiferous aether such as this model proposes, the carrier of light is the aether, waves and particles of aether. This according would result in a "vector flow" (flow of downward field energy) toward the Earth. This also would accordingly result in some aether flow downward. The formula for this flow was estimated to be EVD ~ 1.25 G M _E / r²s, where EVD represents the velocity of aether flow downward. This is a downward speed of 40 miles per hour, or 36 meters per second aether flow going downward. In this model the aether is gravity and mass centered for reasons explained. Michelson/ Morley could not find the aether because they could not look "up or down" with their equipment which also was not sensitive enough.

 

The difference in the speed of light that this model proposes is about 80 parts per billion difference up vs. down, partly based upon the OPERA results. But the speed of light would still be constant relative to the aether.

 

 

Summary Explanation of the OPERA results -- as it relates to this proposal

 

The OPERA neutrino experiment results can be explained as follows: The GPS system was used by OPERA/ CERN to measure both the distance that the neutrinos were traveling as well as the coordination of the timing between the two locations. If the speed of light varied by the small extent that I suggest, then the results could be explained by a small error in the GPS system relating to an incorrect speed of light based upon Special Relativity.

 

 

Explaining my proposed experiment

 

For many years I have been planning a verification of my theory of gravity by measuring the difference in the speed of light up vs. down. To date I have not found nanosecond timers accurate enough for such an experiment. Although I believe there now are such a timers, I would need two of them and the costs are very high, so I'm looking to find others or rent some if I can. The experiment involves two fiber optic cables and two timers, one going up for a mile and the other going down for a mile. After the proper calculations I would expect there to be a difference in the speed of light as indicated by the timers, if so this could explain the OPERA result as an error in the programming of the GPS receiving calculators.

Edited November 4, 2011 by pantheory