Is vacuum energy in fact spinning magnetic [magnoflux] energy ?

[acsinuk]

If vacuum energy can be increased or decreased by changing the angular momentum of the spinning flux-current field by applying a voltage at right angles to that field then it will have nothing to do with electron particles which only tie the voltage reference point; but be a spinning volume of 3D power existing in unit time. Thus [V*ICos Ø]dt or energy in Watt-seconds/cubic metre will define a unit of magnoflux vacuum energy. As the spin increases per unit volume then the temperature goes up.

 

For a demonstration take a look at

[Mordred]

All particle interactions contribute to temperature. ( This includes the strong, weak, gravitational and chemical potential) As well as pressure to energy density temperature relations. Though non relativistic matter has a negligible contribution.

 

These can be found via the equations of state :

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_state_(cosmology)

 

What your describing in the electromagnet field can be modelled specifically under the electromagnetic stress energy tensor. (Includes relavistic)

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor

 

GR however (Einstein field equations)

Accounts for any form of energy momentum. See stress energy tensor.

 

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor

 

The vacuum also can have scalar only influences on pressure/energy density relations. One notable example is the Higgs field. Another being the inflaton used in inflation.

 

Both these examples are modelled via the scalar modelling equation (see that section under the First wiki link.

 

These articles will fill in the blanks.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0503203.pdf"Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology" by Andrei Linde

http://www.wiese.itp.unibe.ch/lectures/universe.pdf:"Particle Physics of the Early universe" by Uwe-Jens Wiese Thermodynamics, Big bang Nucleosynthesis

 

 

In GUT theories, there is a specific temperature where each force becomes indistinguishable from one another, or more accurately teach thermal equilibrium.

 

In this state the system can also be modelled as a vacuum.

 

Then you have the vacuum expectation value, which is related to the above.

 

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

Edited May 31, 2015 by Mordred

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

 

Rule 2.7 says (in part) Advertising and spam is prohibited. We don't mind if you put a link to your noncommercial site (e.g. a blog) in your signature and/or profile, but don't go around making threads to advertise it. Links, pictures and videos in posts should be relevant to the discussion, and members should be able to participate in the discussion without clicking any links or watching any videos. Videos and pictures should be accompanied by enough text to set the tone for the discussion, and should not be posted alone

 

You speak of the magnoflux effect but don't explain what you think it is, or why the effect of a magnet on a cathode-ray tube isn't adequately explained by well-established physics (it is) or how this is allegedly connected to vacuum energy.

 

Also, pet theories belong in speculations. The guidelines there (soon to be "here") cautions one to clearly explain what the new ground you're covering, and why it's new ground — you need to be familiar with the mainstream science. Stop posting "magnoflux" material in the main forums, until such time that it becomes application of the Lorentz force law.

 

[acsinuk]

OK Swansong,

I accept that Lorenz force when beta=5/8; is a near approximation to the magnoflux effect. But if this is applied to a whole galaxy by magnetising it surely you can agree that the spin force; will be the force that rotates the stars in spiral or bar spiral .

Further that if the matter or in the case of stars anti-matter; then the overall charge is positive and as such like charges repel and there you have an expanding universe.

Happy to have it in speculations at present.

[Strange]

But if this is applied to a whole galaxy by magnetising it surely you can agree that the spin force

 

Please provide some evidence that galaxies are (significantly) magnetised.

 

Further that if the matter or in the case of stars anti-matter

 

Please provide some evidence that stars consist of antimatter.

 

then the overall charge is positive and as such like charges repel and there you have an expanding universe.

 

Please provide some evidence that stars and/or galaxies are positively charged.

 

Please explain why the stars in these positively charged galaxies do not repel one another and destroy the galaxy.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Strange

[swansont]

I accept that Lorenz force when beta=5/8; is a near approximation to the magnoflux effect. But if this is applied to a whole galaxy by magnetising it surely you can agree that the spin force; will be the force that rotates the stars in spiral or bar spiral .

Further that if the matter or in the case of stars anti-matter; then the overall charge is positive and as such like charges repel and there you have an expanding universe.

 

If you apply it to the whole galaxy as an explanation for the rotations you'd need to present evidence that such application would be appropriate.

[acsinuk]

Thanks for your responses, but whereas magnoflux effect is possible, even probable, you can be sure that dark matter does not exist; as astronomers can't see it and particle physicists in their mines can't see it either.

Dark matter is not even speculative it is nonsense and we need new physics based on the known but mis-understood magnetic effects; so that physics can start to move forward again.

[Strange]

Thanks for your responses, but whereas magnoflux effect is possible, even probable

 

You consistently fail to produce any evidence or other support for your claims. So the safest assumption is that they are wrong.

 

you can be sure that dark matter does not exist; as astronomers can't see it and particle physicists in their mines can't see it either.

 

There is a large amount of evidence for dark matter. (If you want to discuss that, you could start with a question in the mainstream physics section.)

 

Dark matter is not even speculative it is nonsense

 

As an absolute worst case, it is hypothetical. However, the evidence is pretty overwhelming in favour of it being matter.

 

and we need new physics based on the known but mis-understood magnetic effects; so that physics can start to move forward again.

 

Please provide some evidence that (a) these effects are misunderstood and (b) that you have a better understanding.

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

 

This thread is to discuss magnoflux not to display your failure to understand the mass of evidence for dark matter. Please stick to your topic - if the evidence and explanations requested are not provided soon then the thread will be locked.

 

Do not respond to this moderation - and if everybody else could stick to Magnoflux.