Jump to content

(Split from Energy Constants) Were massive clouds of H-Bonds Responsible for the Big Bang?


Recommended Posts

Posted

Continuing from Post50 Energy Constants, Cube & Sphere Formation;

 

 

When I look at the third law of thermodynamics and it says that at absolute zero all motion ceases, rotation/translation, but the nuclei still vibrate - this I think is the bond +/- gluons around quarks [ still spinning from the 208.33ghz super-luminal wave].

 

The first law of thermodynamics states; energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed from one state to another, I really do think our universe is the perfect life support system and retains all its energy eternally. Photons do have a slight magnetic field and so eventually will return to their source(a photons magnetic field maybe small but the Universes' isn't).

 

 

The local energy sources supplying temperature is I think the 432 Hz ! - This gives the rotation/translation.

 

 

 

If the 208.33 ghz wasn't there the hydrogen atoms wouldn't have been able to bond into anything bigger - no power in their quark-phases to attract bond gluons and hence no galaxies or anything.

 

 

How penetrating would the super-luminal wave(ether?) be?;

 

Once the double toroid started spinning and emitting it's 208.33GHz wave, mass could be realised through the quark-phases energising and attracting bond-gluons and subsequent hydrogen bonding.

 

Eventually massive clouds of various H bonds, H2, 2H, O2 etc(but no elements of a higher order than of quad-quark) collapsed in on each other and stars were born.

 

These stars shone in the darkness alone, more and more them appearing, then in time the first star died and super-nova born planets were projected outward from the dead star, some of those planets ended up orbiting other stars in the life zone, not too hot, not too cold which enabled "progress" and evolution to continue on it's journey from energy to mass & frequency. And with this mass/frequency combination the elements could be born.

 

I believe there is more "stuff"around us in where we are - our dual(hexal maybe)-universe.

 

 

 

We've progressed into a complex and technically able life form that seems to be trying to want to head back into the light. There's an eternity of mysteries ahead us and one can only see what's local to him.

 

Quantum mechanics is at the heart of all science and the future will show it's strength. I believe this will be so in breakthroughs on Carbon, H2O and several metals .

 

If all the different sciences were components of a modern car(automobile) then quantum mechanics has got to be it's gps and so has got to travel on the right road for the whole of science to be right!

Posted

Photons do have a slight magnetic field and so eventually will return to their source(a photons magnetic field maybe small but the Universes' isn't).

 

What is the magnetic field of the universe, and where does it originate?

 

Is there evidence of a 208 GHz wave? (and what kind of wave is this - electromagnetic?)

Posted

What is the magnetic field of the universe, and where does it originate?

 

Is there evidence of a 208 GHz wave? (and what kind of wave is this - electromagnetic?)

SwansonT, I'm a little behind and should have had a little more material ready for this split from Energy Constants but the influenza(bad headache with this flu?) put a stop to it. I've started looking at Davids'/Mikes' suggestion on rogue waves, also Iam looking at "positrons" in relation to this wave.

Hopefully it shouldn't be a too long before I can give you correct answers to your queries, thank you for your post.

Posted (edited)

What does energy conservation mean in an expanding universe?

Surely nowerdays we need to concentrate " Energy Conservation " more at a reasonably Local level.

 

What with a sieve like universe which has :-

 

. virtual partials coming into and out of existence , in 'shed loads ' lat a quantum level

. Black holes and singularities doing ' heaven knows what ' inside the event horizon .

. Strange attractors pulling ' bucket loads ' of galaxies to goodness knows where. As dark flow .

. Dark energy of ' gargantuan proportions ' appearing out of nowhere.

Etc

 

We seem to have an almost unidentifiable box of tricks that is difficult to define neatly.

 

Whereas there appears to be a lot of local evidence ,with all the classical laws of physics that show :-

 

Locally at least ENERGY IS CONSERVED .

 

MIKE

Edited by Mike Smith Cosmos
Posted

. virtual partials coming into and out of existence , in 'shed loads ' lat a quantum level

. Black holes and singularities doing ' heaven knows what ' inside the event horizon .

. Strange attractors pulling ' bucket loads ' of galaxies to goodness knows where. As dark flow .

 

All of those conserve energy.

Posted

Local conservation is correct, but not global in an expanding universe. So how does this change, if at all, the opening statements of this post? So over to Ant for comments.

Posted

All of those conserve energy.

How do we know they do ?

 

Who is checking up on how much is going out through Dark flow?

Who is counting all the virtual particles coming into and going out of existence ?

Who can see what goes on inside the event horizon ?

Who is keeping count of the movements of dark energy ?

 

Mike

Posted

How do we know they do ?

 

Because there is no evidence they don't.

 

Who is checking up on how much is going out through Dark flow?

 

That is just movement of mass. Why would it violate energy conservation?

 

Who is counting all the virtual particles coming into and going out of existence ?

 

The whole concept of virtual particles coming and going is founded on conservation of energy.

 

Who can see what goes on inside the event horizon ?

 

It doesn't matter. The mass (and therefore energy) of a black hole is independent of what goes on inside the event horizon.

With no evidence that energy conservation is violated, you just have a series of "what if" questions.

Posted (edited)

Because there is no evidence they don't. ......

.

I take your points , but I am not sure if " no evidence they don't " , can be construed ' that they do ' ?

 

In other words we do not know in these circumstances. Yes we can prove it very effectively at a local bench top level as joule and others have proved .

 

I think we are running into really DEEP water when we take some of those fundamental axioms like " the universe is the same everywhere and the laws of physics hold the same everywhere " . I think we are finding many examples as we look out away from the local environment to far away places, that things are not what we expect.

 

Just now they are perplexed with the Sun it's corona is 'quids upon quids ' higher in temperature 1,000,000 k 's than at the surface approx 6000 k energy flowing the wrong way ? Or whatever ?

 

Mike

Edited by Mike Smith Cosmos
Posted

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant

 

ajb the link above shows dark matter/energy just after the "big-bang" and at present. From these two pie-charts you see the "Dark" "substances", matter/energy(I believe at present this energy/matter are one in the same "substance", the "Ether?").

Now I haven't looked at this gap from the "big bang" to when dark matter/dark energy seemed to greatly swap quanta ratios!(maybe this could lead to fine tuning some parameters?).

 

If you take a look at my post on Energy Constants, Cube & Sphere Formation; Quark Formations Showing An Oxidation Process, when under ideal combustion circumstances the O2 splits to join a Carbon atom, this energy flow through the Quark Formations is the "Dark Energy" that was once "Dark Matter"(Ether?).

This is what Iam looking at the moment and will share more as I can. If you have any good links you could share with Me on Dark Matter/Energy I would be thankful.

SwansonT; I believe the "wave" is made up of this "dark energy" and do have finer details on the wave but would like to try and find it myself first. Whether or not it's an electro-magnetic wave I'm not sure at present but I would GUESS it is.

Posted

What is the magnetic field of the universe, and where does it originate?

There are cosmological magnetic fields, there generation is still a problem. For a recent review see

 

Ruth Durrer and Andrii Neronov, Cosmological magnetic fields: their generation, evolution and observation, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, (2013) 21:62.

 

 

Is there evidence of a 208 GHz wave? (and what kind of wave is this - electromagnetic?)

This really needs addressing; it is a wave in/of what?

Posted (edited)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00723-012-0380-3

 

here is an epr study you may find helpful.

while it is not on the same subject, it is actual research involving a 208 ghz signal injection.

this means there is actual experimental data to some degree that you can start with.

the book is called applied magnetic resonance.

hmm.

 

the point is that i can argue with you all day, but i also cary the same burden of proof on my side of the fence as a critic.

i hope this helps all.

Edited by davidivad
Posted (edited)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00723-012-0380-3

 

here is an epr study you may find helpful.

while it is not on the same subject, it is actual research involving a 208 ghz signal injection.

this means there is actual experimental data to some degree that you can start with.

the book is called applied magnetic resonance.

hmm.

 

the point is that i can argue with you all day, but i also cary the same burden of proof on my side of the fence as a critic.

i hope this helps all.

There appears to be quite a lot going on around the 208GHz in research at the present. I downloaded an article from The Physical Chemistry Letters (vib.pdf) detailing how 4nM water droplets could be made to travel down Carbon Nano-Tubes by exciting the Tubes with 208GHz.

Edited by Ant Sinclair
Posted

There appears to be quite a lot going on around the 208GHz in research at the present. I downloaded an article from The Physical Chemistry Letters (vib.pdf) detailing how 4nM water droplets could be made to travel down Carbon Nano-Tubes by exciting the Tubes with 208GHz.

 

 

You are putting the cart before the horse. Yes, there are going to be processes that have resonances near 208 GHz because on earth we have many, many atoms and compounds, and certainly some of them will have a resonance near there. Your claim was about the universe, and some "208.33ghz super-luminal wave" which had to be present for H to form bonds, so it precedes the existence of any heavier nuclei. Thus any terrestrial research is moot.

Posted

i intended the material as a starting point where you have an actual example of a 208 frequency.

by understanding the experiment, you may or may not find what you want.

Swansont's point is that it is not surprising you can find a physics paper on something to do with a wave of frequency 208 GHz or very close. I am sure you can do the same with almost any frequency; there is nothing special about 208 GHz in this respect. Moreover, the paper you link to has nothing to do with cosmology and super-luminal waves. It only confirms that we can have waves of frequency 208 GHz, but the context is very very important.

Posted

SwansonT is correct in his last post ajb and just as David put up the post about injecting 208GHz and the post I put up yesterday on Carbon Nano Tubes/Water were not inferring a connection to this works. Obviously any research going on around this frequency may have data that might help move this along and so needs at least a little looking at, I think this was Davids angle.

I've been in communication with David via pm on this matter and atomic resonances could very well help understand more about the wave.

Posted

 

I've been in communication with David via pm on this matter and atomic resonances could very well help understand more about the wave.

 

But you claim the wave exists when there are no atoms other than Hydrogen, and thus no resonances (other than hydrogen's)

Posted

But you claim the wave exists when there are no atoms other than Hydrogen, and thus no resonances (other than hydrogen's)

 

 

That was pre-"big bang" SwansonT.

 

The closest description to this 208GHz "dark energy" I've seen so far is "Quark-Plasma".

By looking at all the 208GHz research maybe some kind of signature would be seen of this wave, also Iam looking to the model for help on this.

Posted

 

That was pre-"big bang" SwansonT.

 

 

How would you test for a 208 GHz wave (of what? - that still hasn't been answered) that was present before the big bang?

Posted

And if it was 208GHz before the big bang, wouldn't expansion have made the frequency much lower?

 

Or was it a higher frequency at the big bang that has now been reduced to 208GHz?

 

And why 208GHz, anyway?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.