Witness the "God particle"

[JvNrocks]

The Higgs...the Higgs the Higgs the Higgs! So what? Well, we've topped off the Standard Model. At the same time, the Anthropic Principle is gaining ground. The uptake? People are starting to shift their spirituality to science. Many of us feel God and science are becoming good bedfellows. In the field of medicine, Carl Jung showed us that we need the spirit in the same way children need love. We just wither internally without it. Materialism takes over--a dangerous substitute for spirituality.

 

Many people will say, "I believe in something," without naming anything. At least atheists take a stand by actively disbelieving. But by the 1930s we knew statements of absolute fact were unworthy of the title, via the Uncertainty Principle and von Neumann's Catastrophe. Nothing is certain; certainty is a privelage we have not earned, apparently. Will certainty ever return to the mind of man? How? Heisenberg seems more solid that Einstein to me. To Einstein, sensibly but erroneously, a fact was untouchable. Without flat facts that have certainty, he was unable to accept anything. We remember his words, "God does not play dice with the universe," but we forgot his interlocutor Bohr's response: "Einstein, don't tell God what to do."

 

It turns out the only way anything happens is by probablity, not provenance, and Einstein paid a huge price for that position, declining into old age with no Unified Field Theory. His theory of gravity stands on trembling ground today, in danger of being "Newtonized" into mere functional utility that doesn't reach the fundamental quantum standard.

 

Can a theory of quantum gravity unify physics for mankind? Your opinions please.

[Fuzzwood]

Because the original godDAMN particle didn't make it through the media.

[JvNrocks]

And which particle is that?

Because the original godDAMN particle didn't make it through the media.

[Janus]

And which particle is that?

 

Same particle. Look, the nickname " the God Particle" is only used by the media. It was taken from the title of a book by Leon M. Lederman. He thought it made a catchy title. Fuzzwood's response refers to the fact that the original title was going to be "The Goddamn Particle", but his publisher wouldn't let him use it.

[illuusio]

Can a theory of quantum gravity unify physics for mankind? Your opinions please.

 

Absolutely! The key can be found behind the gravity.

Edited September 21, 2012 by illuusio

[JvNrocks]

I think you speak truth. There's a REASON General Relativty can't absorb quantum gravity. We are missing something about gravity. I propose gravity is a dimension and not a field.

Absolutely! The key can be found behind the gravity.

[dimreepr]

I think you speak truth. There's a REASON General Relativty can't absorb quantum gravity. We are missing something about gravity. I propose gravity is a dimension and not a field.

 

 

 

It has been suggested that gravity is so weak (compared tothe other forces) because it bleeds into a 5^th dimension.I really don’t think gravity itself is a dimension.

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18474193/The-Elegant-Universe-Notes

 

http://www.cheniere.org/books/aids/ch4.htm

 

 

[Nobrainer]

No, I do not think the "quantum theory can unite the physics of Mankind because without God the universe has to somehow be involved with a perpetual motion machine and that violates the basic laws of physics. Multiple universes, multiple dimensions something from nothing one of these things have to exist for there to be no God. Remember that science taught the universe existed forever and that was a main reason to say the bible was wrong, because the bible said there was a beginning.

Einstein had insight when he said that God does not play dice. It is our limitation to understand that Bohrs dis not understand.

God does not play dice, he plays billards, pool, and the big bang was his break. - CMT

 

 

Let's look at something else the bible says. The Earth is circular in form and the universe glorifies God. Funny how that works.

 

The universe Glorifies God? How? Well let's look at God's image in which we are made says the bible. In Christianity God is a father, son and holy spirit (comforter) who exists outside of time, forever. God is his own family and the human family exist from generation to generation as a minimum of three where the mother is the comforter to the child. Each individual to contribute to continued existence is a child, spouse( comforter to your spouse) and parent. Each role demonstrating unselfish love. God created you personally as his image through the roles you experience and within the marriage covenant for the Indvividual personally and within their family to understand unselfish love.

 

Now turning to the universe, for life to exist, we ha one universe which is three dimensional, and on the periodic table the elements come in three forms, solid, liquid and gas for life to exist. The atoms also consist of three things protons, nutrons and electrons. Protons and nutrons also can be broken down into three quarks each. Water on Earth naturally comes in three forms, solid, liquid and gas and God used that for baptism in the name of the Father, son and Holy spirit.

Again science has proved science wrong when they found out there is no big crunch and the universe will expand forever and not be a rubber band perpetually motion machine.

So then, how does gravity work? Let's look at the errors of science again. God shows that waves need a medium and yet we think there is no medium in space because science can not find one.

It the bible and history, the Temple was considered a microcosm of the Universe and the universe a macrocosm of the temple. In the new testament, Jesus Christ made YOUR BODY THE TEMPLE. You are the center of God's spiritual universe. The one place that Michelson and Morley did not look for the aether was within all mass and energy.

Even Stephen Hawkins believes the singularity contained everything, including space itself. So according to Stephen Hawkins, mass, energy and space were contained in the singularity.

I suggest that space, mass and energy are the three forms of matter. I further suggest that time, space and gravity are actions of measurable wave interactions as mass and energy continue to decay into the monopole gravitational wave, space itself.

So imagine a universe that decays from particle to wave and as space increases, mass and energy decrease. Any evidence? Yes- review the 1993 Nobel Prize in Physics.

I suggest the overall actions of time and space are wave actions of this process.

So the first error I mentioned was the Michelson and Morley aether detection experiments which never took into account the possibility of the aether generated from within all mass and energy. The second error actually happened first around 400 years ago, the Huygens principle. It is a principle and not a law because Christopher Huygens could not explain a missing back action reaction of wave formation from expanding in phase waves of different sources. With the Huygens principle, each point on a wave becomes a wavelet with a forward and backward motion.

Here is what he missed. When you have a wave generated in a forward direction the forward aspect of the wavelet expands outward and is visible but the wavelets inward are continually trying to reform because the sources are closer and closer a stress tension developes and the sources move closer and closer to reduce the exerted force between the sources generating the waves. This is the mechanism of Gravity, it is a contact force. Waves, of the same energy, to each other, act as solids. Time, space and gravity are three actions of this process.

This is turning everything upside down by clarifying the laws of physics. For example, with this understanding you could take two balls of Yarn place them on the floor 20!feet apart and tie the two attached strings together at 10 feet between the two. This represents mass, the ball of yarn and the gravitational wave, the strings. Holding both strings as a representation of the wavefront formation and walk away at a constant VELOSITY and watch the two actions.

1). The first action is the balls of yarn move with you as it unwinds, this is dark energy. They will continue to accelerate increasingly until they become all string(space).

2). The second action you will notice is that the balls of yarn come together as the waves form the wavefront. This is gravity. So in simple terms dark energy is a constant force on a decreasing mass. Gravity is the opposite reaction to the action of wavefront formation.

 

So does God play dice? No and God is the one who told Einstein to pass it on, he wasn't telling God, God was telling him. Quantum gravity is false because the fundamental aspect of space is a wave and not discrete packets of anything.

One universe, three dimensions.

-CMT

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

Nobrainer, proselytizing is against our "no preaching" rule. Making assertive statements with no supportive evidence to back them up is also against our rules. Bringing religion into a speculative science thread is, you guessed it, against our rules. You agreed to follow these rules when you joined. Please review them here before any further posting.

If you have any objections to this note, please report this post or PM a staff member about it. Do NOT further derail this thread by voicing objections here.

[illuusio]

I think you speak truth. There's a REASON General Relativty can't absorb quantum gravity. We are missing something about gravity. I propose gravity is a dimension and not a field.

 

 

Why dimension? Why gravitation should be dimension, is strong interaction dimension? I would look answer by searching mechanism which would be common to all forces.

[JvNrocks]

Why dimension? Why gravitation should be dimension, is strong interaction dimension? I would look answer by searching mechanism which would be common to all forces.

 

The forces of physics just don't seem to relate to gravity in the same basic quantum way they relate to each other. For instance gravity is much weaker than even the weak force. In the macro world we see ungodly gravity wells and think this is universal. But in the micro world gravity is just flat missing. This cannot be said of any of the forces. Einstein's beautiful equation for Special Relativity is gravity independent, which created the necessity of a theory of gravity, General Relativity. But GR doesn't survive quantum physics. So we look to the quantum forces for answers, with not much to show for it. I'm just fishing for a brain bigger than mine that's considered the dimensionality of gravity.

[illuusio]

The forces of physics just don't seem to relate to gravity in the same basic quantum way they relate to each other. For instance gravity is much weaker than even the weak force. In the macro world we see ungodly gravity wells and think this is universal. But in the micro world gravity is just flat missing.

I disagree. I think all forces are due to same phenomenon but in different scale.

 

 

 

[JvNrocks]

But the point of this thread is to either compare or contrast gravity with spacetime (3+1 dimensions.) Is it more related to them OR to the forces?

I disagree. I think all forces are due to same phenomenon but in different scale.

 

 

 

[JvNrocks]

Time is not a spacial dimension, but rather an emergent one--emergent from fundamental spacetime. Gravity may not be a fundamental but an emergent dimension of spacetime, as is time. Gravity may be a "band" of spacetime that manages the balance of the very large, reconciling it with the expansion of spacetime, and ultimately with the repacking of matter for the next bang.

[chrizcrozz]

"M" Theory. And Edward Witten. May help to shed light on the subject.

 

http://www.sns.ias.edu/~witten/

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/view-witten.html

[JvNrocks]

Thanks!

"M" Theory. And Edward Witten. May help to shed light on the subject.

 

http://www.sns.ias.edu/~witten/

 

http://www.pbs.org/w...iew-witten.html

[pantheory]

JvNrocks,

 

Witness the "God particle." Why are people calling it that?

When Lederman submitted his book to his editor, they thought the title he submitted, "The G D Particle" was a little bit too controversial, so they dropped the "Damned" from the book title. His idea was based upon all the trouble particle physics were going through trying to find this key piece of the standard model.

 

Can a theory of quantum gravity unify physics for mankind? Your opinions please.

Since we are in the Speculation Forum and you are asking opinions, mine is simply NO.

 

Quantum Gravity is an attempt to join principles and equations of General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics in a unifying theory of gravity. If GR and QM are both fundamentally wrong concerning their premises, which I think they are, then I think there could be no chance for either theory surviving in the long run, or for any theory attempting to unify them.

Edited September 27, 2012 by pantheory