Idea about a big bang theory!
- Thread starter discusfish99
- Start date
discusfish99
Registered Member
WLminex, is there any chance that the SQR matrix of high energy could be dark matter? Or something like it? Because going with what you are saying, the energy in SQR can interact with both MR and SQR. Could this interaction be gravity then?
I tried to find a link to it in an older post but was unsuccessful (SciForums started giving me zero results after looking beyond page 40 of my posting history). You are welcome to try.
I would not even consider dividing something by zero. It's an invalid math operation; however, if you are using asymptotic values then I would first ask what formula are you using? It *appears* like the formula for EM energy but that would be E(energy)=h(planck constant)f(cycles per second).
Close waves, distant waves, light still doesn't spontaenously gain mass. Additionally, I am not aware of a method of giving photons mass without utilizing existing mass.
This is incorrect. EM raditation is only one of many transport mechanisms for heat. Additionally your theory is outside of space-time. EM radiation requires fields to exist (which are intrinsically part of space-time). Then there is chemical energy, sound energy, electrical energy, nuclear energy, kinetic energy, etc... all out of bounds of light speed travel (not to mention they also require space-time in order to exist).
discusfish99
Registered Member
I realize this but I am talking about in a vacuum devoid of any particles, it has to exist only as IR radiation!
A vaccum devoid of any particles still has length, width, height, time, and fields (i.e. space-time). On top of that the fields naturally jiggle around and those disturbances render self-cancelling temporary particle pairs.
If you are talking about outside of space-time (assuming that such an entity is real), that is not a vaccum.
discusfish99
Registered Member
:wallbang: Can we just agree that infrared light travels at c and leave this part of the discussion alone?
Discus: Thanks for your discussions!. I have speculated about this (your query) in some other thread posts on sciforums and in the EEMU Thread . . . Perhaps, SQR "IS" Dark Energy and Dark Matter is a resultant intermediary state between SQR and mass. One might also speculate that Dark Matter is the CMB source . . . this being an alternative interpretation (speculation) to the Standard Model interpretation of CMB as a BB left-over.
IMPO, SQR is omnipresent. It pervades MR and MR constituents, but is (as of yet) not observable (i.e., not detectible) by our MR current technologies. I hint at some (IMPO) innovative detector technologies. SQR (IMPO) does interact with MR . . . . particularly at the quantum and subquantum level . . . but our 'detectors' don't weem to work well at such scales (Planck scale).
I don't think that SQR "IS" gravity, since gravity seems (as we now understand it, at least) dependent on mass; but SQR may contribute (or be the source) gravity precursors (e.g., gravitions?, gluons?)
Regards, wlminex
Last edited:
discusfish99
Registered Member
WLimex, I like your theory, it definitely ties into what I was thinking about the original post in this thread, you just summarized in a very interesting way. Also, in your idea, how would you explain wormholes and black holes?
discusfish99:
You were asking about what happens to E = hν as t approaches zero from the right. You were speculating that E tends to infinity.
I want to point out that space compresses "at the same time" (going backwards that is) so ν is going to hell in a handbasket, too, as both space and time are converging to zero.
I suppose you could go back as early as you wish and you could reason that E remains constant, simply by assuming that time and space follow the same law of "reverse compression". Obviously, there can be no vibration without space and time, so E is increasingly moot as you look backwards closer and closer to t[sub]0[/sub]. The whole universe is moot, it would seem. This would seem to be the case when you reach one Plank time, or around 10[sup]-43[/sup] s.
You were asking about what happens to E = hν as t approaches zero from the right. You were speculating that E tends to infinity.
I want to point out that space compresses "at the same time" (going backwards that is) so ν is going to hell in a handbasket, too, as both space and time are converging to zero.
I suppose you could go back as early as you wish and you could reason that E remains constant, simply by assuming that time and space follow the same law of "reverse compression". Obviously, there can be no vibration without space and time, so E is increasingly moot as you look backwards closer and closer to t[sub]0[/sub]. The whole universe is moot, it would seem. This would seem to be the case when you reach one Plank time, or around 10[sup]-43[/sup] s.
I've never seen a wormhole (or a black hole) . . . . others may claim that they have. IMPO, black holes make a bit more sense than wormholes. Black-holes have a role in my hypothesis. The represent local regions of intense gravity wherein MR mass may be reconstituted to SQR. Perhaps SQR --> mass is an all-pervasive (everywhere, at every point, all the time) mechanism, whereas black holes are more localized (point-specific) MR --> SQR loci. Interesting that ypu previously mentioned white holes (didn't you, not sure) . . . I've never seen one of these either. One could speculate that a white hole is what a black hole would appear from an SQR point-of-view, where MR --> SQR
Thanks for your continued interest, clarifying input, and constructive discussions/criticism.
wlminex
discusfish99
Registered Member
I've been thinking about this. So what you're saying is that reaching a certain time frame in the past, this one Plank time, the universe wasn't even started yet.
What I am generally confused by is what you mean by things being moot because moot could mean they don't matter anymore or never mattered in the first place, just some clarification please!?!
Personally, I think I saw Elvis once
, so let people think they saw a black hole.On to your point, I don't think white holes would be what a black hole would appear to be from a SQR pov because as you say in your EEMU hypothesis,
"Thus, the material, or observable, universe (i.e., MR) is directly and continuously derived from SQR by an disequilibrium thermodynamic process (which I call quantum evaporation) in which total energy (Esqr) fluctuations in SQR tend toward a loss of quarkal components from SQR through a quantum evaporative process "
So I would think that the black holes would look the same because they would still be taking in all the SQR and converting it MR, which could be released as something along the lines of Hawking Radiation? Just an idea, let me know!
Reasonable idea, Discus . . . . . what I'm envisioning is that black holes primarily accumulate mass and anything else (photons?) that pass through the event horizon in response to the super-intense gravity-well of the BH . . . headed for the 'singularity' (albeit, some may argue that to an outside-the-BH observer's POV, nothing 'appears' (to the observer) to ever get to the singularity!). If SQR is included (i.e., interacts with the BH's gravity), yes it would 'get-sucked-in' also. But I'm not sure that SQR interacts with gravity, but it simply proffers the constituents (gravitons, gluons, etc) that contribute to gravity, by creating mass (from energy). I referenced the scenario in which a BH would appears as a white hole (from SQR's POV), because in a BH, accumulated mass is 'going somewhere'. The 'somewhere' it (mass in BH) goes to follows: (IMPO) Accumulated mass is compressed by increasing BH gravity . . . first to single atoms . . . then particles that comprise the atoms . . . then to subatomic particles (e.g., quarks, gluons, etc.) that comprise the subatomic particles, thence to quantum scale (virtual vacuum) . . . essentially the 'reverse' of the SQR --> MR (mass creation) process . . . . BUT happening only locally (at BH's in MR). I am relatively sure that there is some loss, or conversion, to something else in this circuitous SQR -> mass --> BH --> SQR process . . . I'm just not sure what it IS . . . might involve dark matter, or CMB . . . . . from the SQR POV, I think this would be 'observed' as a spontaneous, randum burst (perhaps 'twinkle') of energy that would quickly incorporate into the SQR high-energy matrix. There is most likely a net entropy increase for the entire system.
Discus, does this make any sense to you? . . . . probably NOT to resident detractors.
Regards,
wlminex
Discus, does this make any sense to you? . . . . probably NOT to resident detractors.
Regards,
wlminex
Last edited:
I can agree tha photons travel through space at c, anything else you have asserted I can't agree with because it's incorrect.
Ahh, I just noted that this thread finally got booted out of the science subfora into the fringe subfora. speculate away!
discusfish99
Registered Member
Any reason why you're always so negative and angry about subjects such as this. This thread really doesn't need your input to continue. Also, if you try and help people understand without the insulting tone, it would be great, thanks!
discusfish99
Registered Member
WLminex, it actually does make a lot of sense to me.
It would seem that you are talking about some sort of Hawking Radiation which is how Black Holes radiate energy!
It would seem that you are talking about some sort of Hawking Radiation which is how Black Holes radiate energy!
I don't know. It depends how you are defining negativity or anger. I don't think either is in this thread, but if you clearly define your terms then maybe I will have a better understanding of what you are talking about.
I willl however offer this bit of information that might be feeding your interpretation. You originally opened this thread up in the science subfora and it was scrutinized via higher standards than the fringe fora. It ultimately didn't qualify as science and was moved here.
That is correct, but keep in mind that you have zero say in the matter. IMO, this thread is now in the best place for it to continue as this subforum is a great place for wild speculation and creative writing.
If a sequence of words on your screen that arent disccussing you (the person) can make you feel insulted then that's your problem. If you think that other people are going to should your problem then I suspect that you will quickly find this to not be the case.
discusfish99
Registered Member
Merely trying to get answers and not have someone just say you're wrong. But thank you for explaining your side to me, I appreciate it!