Sylwester's 'Everlasting theory'
- Thread starter Sylwester Kornowski
- Start date
There as well is the big problem in the mainstream theory of proton concerning the radius of proton.
Within the Everlasting Theory, applying the very simple mathematics, I obtained following results: 0.87673 fm for proton interacting with electrons and 0.84074 fm for proton interacting with muons (see my paper 1301.0174 on vixra, 2 pages only). The obtained results are perfect i.e. they are consistent with experimental data.
The second experimental result was and is inconsistent with the SM but probably in future some “scientists” will add new free parameters to fit theoretical results to experimental data but as I wrote, it is a childish game. Now they try to involve a gravitoweak theory to fit theory to experiment! You know, a drowning man catches at a straw. But I must emphasize that the Everlasting Theory shows that at the end of the inflation there was the transition from the weak interactions of the Einstein-spacetime components to their gravitational interactions.
BTW,
I wrote about the theories of black holes. I think that Stephen Hawking is the great scientist because he was able to admit that his theory of black holes is incorrect, or more precisely, that his theory of black holes is not realized by Nature.
We cannot say the same about authors of the quark theory of hadrons. They cannot calculate since 1964 within the quark model the exact masses, magnetic moments and spins of nucleons. This suggests (50 years without a success gives about 100% of certainty that such model is incorrect) that the part of the QCD concerning the internal structure of hadrons is incorrect i.e. is not realized by Nature. The assumption that mass of nucleons follows from the relativistic masses of the three valence quarks is nonsensical. It is time to admit it.
The same concerns the equations of motion in QUANTUM physics and the structure of bare particles (electric charge and spins cannot be the sizeless mathematical points). Electric charge cannot be a flexible closed string, and so on.
Can we eliminate the nonsensical assumptions from many mainstream theories? You know, Nature is simple and beautiful and does not need powerful computers to know how it should be built up and how it should behave in interactions.
Within the Everlasting Theory, applying the very simple mathematics, I obtained following results: 0.87673 fm for proton interacting with electrons and 0.84074 fm for proton interacting with muons (see my paper 1301.0174 on vixra, 2 pages only). The obtained results are perfect i.e. they are consistent with experimental data.
The second experimental result was and is inconsistent with the SM but probably in future some “scientists” will add new free parameters to fit theoretical results to experimental data but as I wrote, it is a childish game. Now they try to involve a gravitoweak theory to fit theory to experiment! You know, a drowning man catches at a straw. But I must emphasize that the Everlasting Theory shows that at the end of the inflation there was the transition from the weak interactions of the Einstein-spacetime components to their gravitational interactions.
BTW,
I wrote about the theories of black holes. I think that Stephen Hawking is the great scientist because he was able to admit that his theory of black holes is incorrect, or more precisely, that his theory of black holes is not realized by Nature.
We cannot say the same about authors of the quark theory of hadrons. They cannot calculate since 1964 within the quark model the exact masses, magnetic moments and spins of nucleons. This suggests (50 years without a success gives about 100% of certainty that such model is incorrect) that the part of the QCD concerning the internal structure of hadrons is incorrect i.e. is not realized by Nature. The assumption that mass of nucleons follows from the relativistic masses of the three valence quarks is nonsensical. It is time to admit it.
The same concerns the equations of motion in QUANTUM physics and the structure of bare particles (electric charge and spins cannot be the sizeless mathematical points). Electric charge cannot be a flexible closed string, and so on.
Can we eliminate the nonsensical assumptions from many mainstream theories? You know, Nature is simple and beautiful and does not need powerful computers to know how it should be built up and how it should behave in interactions.
There appeared many nonsensical papers in scientific journals concerning the quantum physics. Generally, scientists do not understand this field of knowledge so I will describe the foundations of quantum physics that follows from the Everlasting Theory.
1.
For me it is obvious that the virtual particle-antiparticle pairs that appear spontaneously in the Einstein spacetime must be built up from physical objects the Einstein-spacetime consists of. It leads to conclusion that the Einstein spacetime cannot be continuous - it is granular (discrete). On the other hand, the experiments with entangled photons show that Nature can be non-local i.e. that information between different parts of an entangled photon can be carried with superluminal speed i.e. speed higher than the speed of light in vacuum c i.e. than the speed of the Einstein-spacetime components. Both the grainy spacetime and superluminal information lead to conclusion that between the Einstein-spacetime components can be exchanged some superluminal physical objects which I refer to as the entanglons.
2.
Many entangled Einstein-spacetime components can behave as a wave but such wave consists of the Einstein-spacetime components so its upper limit of speed is equal to c - it cannot be superluminal due to the superluminal entanglons. This means that information between different parts of an entangled photon can be carried with superluminal speed but the entangled photon cannot be superluminal.
3.
Due to the quantum entanglement, i.e. due to the exchanged superluminal entanglons, whole energy of a wave materializes in the point of interaction of a part of the wave with a detector i.e. during the interaction the wave behaves as a particle. We can see that a quantum object, i.e. object which different parts exchange entanglons, can behave both as wave or particle but never simultaneously.
4.
Detectors consist of the Einstein-spacetime components so they cannot “see” the exchanged superluminal entanglons i.e. detectors can see the effects caused by the exchanged superluminal entanglons (for example, a change in polarization of a part of an entangled photon) but cannot see the causes i.e. cannot “see” the exchanged entanglons. It leads to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The Everlasting Theory shows that the superluminal entanglons are the binary closed strings composed of tachyons the modified Higgs field consists of. Their imaginary spin is 1 [h-bar]. It leads to the lower limit in the Uncertainty Principle.
So once more: The quantum physics follows from the fact that detectors cannot “see” the causes i.e. the exchanged superluminal entanglons.
5.
We can see that there are two spacetimes i.e. the modified Higgs field that is directly associated with gravity and the Einstein spacetime in which can appear the virtual electron-positron pairs i.e. the second spacetime is associated with electromagnetism. The Everlasting Theory shows that density of the modified Higgs field is in approximation 4*10^42 times lower than the Einstein spacetime – it is the reason that gravity is so weak in comparison with the other three forces i.e. electromagnetic, weak and strong.
We can see that supersymmetry (so supergravity as well) and higher dimensions are not needed to explain the relations between the different interactions.
We can see that energy of a quantum particle can be simultaneously in different entangled places but it is not true that the same electric charge or spin can be simultaneously in different (or the same) places i.e. there cannot be simultaneously many electric charges and many spins associated with a single quantum particle. The many-worlds interpretation of the quantum physics is nonsensical.
NATURE DOES NOT NEED QUANTUM PHYSICS.
QUANTUM PHYSICS NEED PEOPLE TO DESCRIBE NATURE - IT IS BECAUSE OUR DETECTORS NEVER WILL SEE THE SUPERLUMINAL ENTANGLONS AND TACHYONS.
If you have any questions concerning presented here interpretation of the quantum physics, I will answer them on base of the Everlasting Theory.
1.
For me it is obvious that the virtual particle-antiparticle pairs that appear spontaneously in the Einstein spacetime must be built up from physical objects the Einstein-spacetime consists of. It leads to conclusion that the Einstein spacetime cannot be continuous - it is granular (discrete). On the other hand, the experiments with entangled photons show that Nature can be non-local i.e. that information between different parts of an entangled photon can be carried with superluminal speed i.e. speed higher than the speed of light in vacuum c i.e. than the speed of the Einstein-spacetime components. Both the grainy spacetime and superluminal information lead to conclusion that between the Einstein-spacetime components can be exchanged some superluminal physical objects which I refer to as the entanglons.
2.
Many entangled Einstein-spacetime components can behave as a wave but such wave consists of the Einstein-spacetime components so its upper limit of speed is equal to c - it cannot be superluminal due to the superluminal entanglons. This means that information between different parts of an entangled photon can be carried with superluminal speed but the entangled photon cannot be superluminal.
3.
Due to the quantum entanglement, i.e. due to the exchanged superluminal entanglons, whole energy of a wave materializes in the point of interaction of a part of the wave with a detector i.e. during the interaction the wave behaves as a particle. We can see that a quantum object, i.e. object which different parts exchange entanglons, can behave both as wave or particle but never simultaneously.
4.
Detectors consist of the Einstein-spacetime components so they cannot “see” the exchanged superluminal entanglons i.e. detectors can see the effects caused by the exchanged superluminal entanglons (for example, a change in polarization of a part of an entangled photon) but cannot see the causes i.e. cannot “see” the exchanged entanglons. It leads to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The Everlasting Theory shows that the superluminal entanglons are the binary closed strings composed of tachyons the modified Higgs field consists of. Their imaginary spin is 1 [h-bar]. It leads to the lower limit in the Uncertainty Principle.
So once more: The quantum physics follows from the fact that detectors cannot “see” the causes i.e. the exchanged superluminal entanglons.
5.
We can see that there are two spacetimes i.e. the modified Higgs field that is directly associated with gravity and the Einstein spacetime in which can appear the virtual electron-positron pairs i.e. the second spacetime is associated with electromagnetism. The Everlasting Theory shows that density of the modified Higgs field is in approximation 4*10^42 times lower than the Einstein spacetime – it is the reason that gravity is so weak in comparison with the other three forces i.e. electromagnetic, weak and strong.
We can see that supersymmetry (so supergravity as well) and higher dimensions are not needed to explain the relations between the different interactions.
We can see that energy of a quantum particle can be simultaneously in different entangled places but it is not true that the same electric charge or spin can be simultaneously in different (or the same) places i.e. there cannot be simultaneously many electric charges and many spins associated with a single quantum particle. The many-worlds interpretation of the quantum physics is nonsensical.
NATURE DOES NOT NEED QUANTUM PHYSICS.
QUANTUM PHYSICS NEED PEOPLE TO DESCRIBE NATURE - IT IS BECAUSE OUR DETECTORS NEVER WILL SEE THE SUPERLUMINAL ENTANGLONS AND TACHYONS.
If you have any questions concerning presented here interpretation of the quantum physics, I will answer them on base of the Everlasting Theory.
Why unification of gravity and quantum physics within the same methods is impossible?
In my previous post, I motivated the statement that we need quantum physics to describe Nature because detectors do not “see” the exchanged superluminal entanglons responsible for the quantum entanglement i.e. detectors do not “see” the causes of the changes in angular momentum caused by the exchanged entanglons which spin is unitary and imaginary. It leads to the Uncertainty Principle. On the other hand, Nature does not need the quantum physics.
Detectors can see only bare particles that produce field(s) entangled with them. The tachyons are bare so they are imaginary for detectors. Detectors can “see” only the effects of interactions of fields composed of tachyons (i.e. the effects of interactions of a gravitational field), for example, detectors can see that masses curve trajectories of photons but cannot “see” the components of the gravitational fields i.e. the tachyons. The same concerns the entanglons - an entanglon produces only two antiparallel jets composed of tachyons so spin of entanglon is imaginary for detectors. Detectors can “see” only the total angular momentum of a bare particle that can produce a field. Such bare particle and its field consist of entangled Einstein-spacetime components.
I wrote that existence of two spacetimes causes that we do not need higher spatial dimensions and supergravity to explain why gravitational interactions are so weak in comparison with the three other interactions i.e. strong, electromagnetic and weak. Here I will try to explain why unification of gravity and quantum physics is impossible i.e. I will show that we cannot apply the same methods to describe gravity and the three other interactions.
The first spacetime is the modified Higgs field composed of tachyons. Due to the internal helicities of the entanglons they transform the chaotic motions of the tachyons the modified Higgs field consists of, into the jets. The components of the second spacetime, i.e.the Einstein-spacetime components, consist of the entanglons so each Einstein-spacetime component produces a set of divergently moving jets composed of tachyons. The set of jets transforms the modified Higgs field into gravitational field. Masses consist of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components so masses produce gravitational fields which are directly associated with the modified Higgs field. We can see that gravitational fields consist of tachyons.
On the other hand, the quantum particles are built up of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components i.e. between the Einstein-spacetime components (their speed is equal to the c) are exchanged the superluminal entanglons. In the quantum fields (i.e. electromagnetic, weak and strong) there can appear particle-antiparticle pairs.
We can see that properties of the two spacetimes are very different and it is the reason that we cannot unify gravity with quantum physics applying the same methods. So what are the basic reasons that we cannot unify the two basic theories?
1.
Today, due to the tremendous difference in mass density of the two spacetimes, the particle-antiparticle pairs can appear ONLY in the quantum fields. Today, from the free tachyons the gravitational fields consist of cannot be created pairs (it was possible only during the inflation).
2.
Speed of tachyons differs from speed of the Einstein-spacetime components and both speeds differ from the superluminal speed of the entanglons. Due to the different speeds and due to the different mass densities of the quantum fields TIME is not going the same.
3.
The gravitational fields consist of the bare/imaginary tachyons (they have only inertial mass) whereas quantum fields consist of the Einstein-spacetime components which are the Principle-of-Equivalence particles and produce gravitational and weak fields.
We can see that we cannot unify gravity and quantum physics applying the same methods but we can “unify” these two basic theories via the succeeding phase transitions of the modified Higgs field (which is directly associated with gravity). Just the phase transitions lead from the classical gravitational field (the gas composed of tachyons) to the quantum fields composed of particles built up of the Einstein-spacetime components - the quantum fields are responsible for the strong, electromagnetic and weak interactions.
Why the Universe is simultaneously both curved and flat?
The observational facts lead to conclusion that our Universe is both curved (the masses curve the trajectories of photons) and flat (the spacetime is Euclidian i.e. sum of angles in triangle is 360 degrees). How it is possible? It is because there are the two spacetimes with different mass densities. Masses curve the modified Higgs field (there appear gradients in the gas composed of tachyons). This field curves trajectories of the Einstein-spacetime components. On the other hand, the Einstein-spacetime components, which are moving with the speed c, are the carriers of photons and gluons. The photons and gluons are the rotational energies of the Einstein-spacetime components. Masses do not curve the Einstein spacetime i.e. cannot produce gradients in this spacetime. Since mass density of the Einstein spacetime is in approximation 4*10^42 times higher than the modified Higgs field so the sum of the two spacetimes, i.e. the curved modified Higgs field which is the gravitational field, and the flat Einstein spacetime, is practically flat i.e. no one detector is able to see the curvature of the modified Higgs field.
In my previous post, I motivated the statement that we need quantum physics to describe Nature because detectors do not “see” the exchanged superluminal entanglons responsible for the quantum entanglement i.e. detectors do not “see” the causes of the changes in angular momentum caused by the exchanged entanglons which spin is unitary and imaginary. It leads to the Uncertainty Principle. On the other hand, Nature does not need the quantum physics.
Detectors can see only bare particles that produce field(s) entangled with them. The tachyons are bare so they are imaginary for detectors. Detectors can “see” only the effects of interactions of fields composed of tachyons (i.e. the effects of interactions of a gravitational field), for example, detectors can see that masses curve trajectories of photons but cannot “see” the components of the gravitational fields i.e. the tachyons. The same concerns the entanglons - an entanglon produces only two antiparallel jets composed of tachyons so spin of entanglon is imaginary for detectors. Detectors can “see” only the total angular momentum of a bare particle that can produce a field. Such bare particle and its field consist of entangled Einstein-spacetime components.
I wrote that existence of two spacetimes causes that we do not need higher spatial dimensions and supergravity to explain why gravitational interactions are so weak in comparison with the three other interactions i.e. strong, electromagnetic and weak. Here I will try to explain why unification of gravity and quantum physics is impossible i.e. I will show that we cannot apply the same methods to describe gravity and the three other interactions.
The first spacetime is the modified Higgs field composed of tachyons. Due to the internal helicities of the entanglons they transform the chaotic motions of the tachyons the modified Higgs field consists of, into the jets. The components of the second spacetime, i.e.the Einstein-spacetime components, consist of the entanglons so each Einstein-spacetime component produces a set of divergently moving jets composed of tachyons. The set of jets transforms the modified Higgs field into gravitational field. Masses consist of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components so masses produce gravitational fields which are directly associated with the modified Higgs field. We can see that gravitational fields consist of tachyons.
On the other hand, the quantum particles are built up of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components i.e. between the Einstein-spacetime components (their speed is equal to the c) are exchanged the superluminal entanglons. In the quantum fields (i.e. electromagnetic, weak and strong) there can appear particle-antiparticle pairs.
We can see that properties of the two spacetimes are very different and it is the reason that we cannot unify gravity with quantum physics applying the same methods. So what are the basic reasons that we cannot unify the two basic theories?
1.
Today, due to the tremendous difference in mass density of the two spacetimes, the particle-antiparticle pairs can appear ONLY in the quantum fields. Today, from the free tachyons the gravitational fields consist of cannot be created pairs (it was possible only during the inflation).
2.
Speed of tachyons differs from speed of the Einstein-spacetime components and both speeds differ from the superluminal speed of the entanglons. Due to the different speeds and due to the different mass densities of the quantum fields TIME is not going the same.
3.
The gravitational fields consist of the bare/imaginary tachyons (they have only inertial mass) whereas quantum fields consist of the Einstein-spacetime components which are the Principle-of-Equivalence particles and produce gravitational and weak fields.
We can see that we cannot unify gravity and quantum physics applying the same methods but we can “unify” these two basic theories via the succeeding phase transitions of the modified Higgs field (which is directly associated with gravity). Just the phase transitions lead from the classical gravitational field (the gas composed of tachyons) to the quantum fields composed of particles built up of the Einstein-spacetime components - the quantum fields are responsible for the strong, electromagnetic and weak interactions.
Why the Universe is simultaneously both curved and flat?
The observational facts lead to conclusion that our Universe is both curved (the masses curve the trajectories of photons) and flat (the spacetime is Euclidian i.e. sum of angles in triangle is 360 degrees). How it is possible? It is because there are the two spacetimes with different mass densities. Masses curve the modified Higgs field (there appear gradients in the gas composed of tachyons). This field curves trajectories of the Einstein-spacetime components. On the other hand, the Einstein-spacetime components, which are moving with the speed c, are the carriers of photons and gluons. The photons and gluons are the rotational energies of the Einstein-spacetime components. Masses do not curve the Einstein spacetime i.e. cannot produce gradients in this spacetime. Since mass density of the Einstein spacetime is in approximation 4*10^42 times higher than the modified Higgs field so the sum of the two spacetimes, i.e. the curved modified Higgs field which is the gravitational field, and the flat Einstein spacetime, is practically flat i.e. no one detector is able to see the curvature of the modified Higgs field.
Origin, I should not respond to your nonsensical posts. You just try to increase number of your nonsensical posts. Do you assume that number of your nonsensical posts fortifies your influence?
For others it is not important what you are reading. You can read the nonsensical papers published in the scientific journals that concern, for example, the unification of gravity with quantum physics or about the higher spatial dimensions to explain the weakness of gravity in relation to the three other interactions or about the internal structure of nucleons that does not lead to experimental data (mass, magnetic moments, spins). It is your choice. Just some/many people are non-reformed and very weak thinkers. It causes that it is very easy to manipulate them (sometime it lasts a half of century or longer).
This Section is titled “Alternative Theories”. On the other hand, you still write the same posts about the peer reviewed papers. It means that you still are trolling and baiting.
For others it is not important what you are reading. You can read the nonsensical papers published in the scientific journals that concern, for example, the unification of gravity with quantum physics or about the higher spatial dimensions to explain the weakness of gravity in relation to the three other interactions or about the internal structure of nucleons that does not lead to experimental data (mass, magnetic moments, spins). It is your choice. Just some/many people are non-reformed and very weak thinkers. It causes that it is very easy to manipulate them (sometime it lasts a half of century or longer).
This Section is titled “Alternative Theories”. On the other hand, you still write the same posts about the peer reviewed papers. It means that you still are trolling and baiting.
Not in the least...Peer review is the culmination of the scientific method.
Any alternative theory, if it wishes to replace or extend on the Incumbent theory, needs to run the gauntlet, so to speak.
What are you afraid of?
Paddoboy, as usually you are trolling.
In this Section you should discuss the alternative theories.
But I can see that to understand it you need next 3 or more days.
In this Section you should discuss the alternative theories.
But I can see that to understand it you need next 3 or more days.
No, I'm not trolling, I'm stating it as it is.
If you are a professional, and if you have an alternative theory that you 100% believe in, and have irrefutable evidence for, then as a professional with a supposed legitimate alternative theory, you would get it professionally peer reviewed.
That is common sense.
Some recapitulation that follows from my posts is as follows.
1.
There are two spacetimes that properties differ very much. One is the ground for gravity (the modified Higgs field which is the gas composed of tachyons) whereas the second is the ground for quantum physics (the Einstein spacetime composed of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs built up of the superluminal entanglons; the Einstein-spacetime components can be entangled due to exchanged entanglons; entanglons are the pairs of ideal circles with opposite internal helicity and are built up of the tachyons; the Einstein spacetime was created during the inflation).
2.
The bare fermions have internal structure (except neutrinos they consist of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components and there are torus plus condensate in its centre; similarly look the active galaxies; the tori define the spins and charges of fermions whereas the condensates are responsible for weak interactions).
Scientists neglect both existence of the two spacetimes and internal structure of bare particles or, as it is in the string/M theory, assumed structure is incorrect (bare particles are not the flexible/vibrating closed strings). This causes that within the mainstream theories there are many nonsensical attempts and nonsensical conclusions. Some of them are as follows.
A.
Scientists try to unify within the same methods gravity and quantum physics. It is impossible because these areas of knowledge concern different spacetimes which properties differ very much. Existence of two spacetimes causes that the Universe is both curved and flat.
B.
Experimentalists try to find the gravitational waves. They are not in existence since gravity is associated with the gas composed of tachyons. Tachyons are the bare/imaginary objects so they are invisible for detectors. Detectors can see only the effects of interactions caused by gravitational fields. They cannot see the causes.
C.
Experimentalists try to find the free quarks. The sham quarks appear as the quark-antiquark pairs. The sham quarks have the same masses as the mainstream quarks but the other properties are different. The assumption that masses of protons and neutrons follow from relativistic masses of three valence quarks is incorrect and such model never will lead to exact masses, magnetic moments and spins of nucleons.
D.
The conclusion that neutrinos can oscillate is incorrect. Just the Einstein spacetime consists of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs so, due to the weak interactions, there are the exchanges of the free neutrinos on the neutrinos in the Einstein-spacetime components.
E.
The Higgs mechanism is not associated with production of the discovered Higgs boson. The discovered Higgs bosons appear due to the weak interactions of the Einstein-spacetime components which ALREADY HAVE GRAVITATIONAL MASS. The real Higgs mechanism acted during the inflation and due to this mechanism, groups of gravitationally massless tachyons transformed into the Principle-of-Equivalence Einstein-spacetime components.
F.
Experimentalists try to find the superpartners of known particles. They are not in existence. Nature does not need them because there are the two different spacetimes.
G.
Experimentalists try to find evidences that there are higher spatial dimensions. The Everlasting Theory shows that we can describe origin of the physical and mathematical constants applied in physics and calculate all basic quantities without this nonsensical assumption.
H.
The dark energy consists of the additional Einstein-spacetime components. It means that we never will able to separate the dark energy from the Einstein spacetime. Existence of the dark energy follows from the indirect observations ONLY.
I.
Many paradoxes described within General Theory of Relativity follow from the fact that this theory neglects existence of the gas composed of tachyons and neglects the grainy structure of the two spacetimes and internal structure of bare particles.
J.
Many paradoxes described within Quantum Physics follow from the fact that this theory neglects existence of the gas composed of tachyons and neglects the grainy structure of the two spacetimes and internal structure of bare particles. For example, it concerns the many-worlds interpretation of the quantum physics. Quantum Physics is needed to describe Nature because detectors cannot see the exchanged superluminal entanglons (their spin is unitary but imaginary for detectors).
And so on…..
Some recapitulation of above recapitulation is as follows.
The mainstream theories are incomplete: there are the two different spacetimes which are grainy and there are the structures of the bare particles that follow from the phase transitions of the gas composed of tachyons. It is described within the lacking part of ultimate theory i.e. the Everlasting Theory and in my papers. Some phenomena were able only during the inflation so today gravity and quantum physics are the two very different and incomplete theories which unification within the same methods is impossible.
1.
There are two spacetimes that properties differ very much. One is the ground for gravity (the modified Higgs field which is the gas composed of tachyons) whereas the second is the ground for quantum physics (the Einstein spacetime composed of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs built up of the superluminal entanglons; the Einstein-spacetime components can be entangled due to exchanged entanglons; entanglons are the pairs of ideal circles with opposite internal helicity and are built up of the tachyons; the Einstein spacetime was created during the inflation).
2.
The bare fermions have internal structure (except neutrinos they consist of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components and there are torus plus condensate in its centre; similarly look the active galaxies; the tori define the spins and charges of fermions whereas the condensates are responsible for weak interactions).
Scientists neglect both existence of the two spacetimes and internal structure of bare particles or, as it is in the string/M theory, assumed structure is incorrect (bare particles are not the flexible/vibrating closed strings). This causes that within the mainstream theories there are many nonsensical attempts and nonsensical conclusions. Some of them are as follows.
A.
Scientists try to unify within the same methods gravity and quantum physics. It is impossible because these areas of knowledge concern different spacetimes which properties differ very much. Existence of two spacetimes causes that the Universe is both curved and flat.
B.
Experimentalists try to find the gravitational waves. They are not in existence since gravity is associated with the gas composed of tachyons. Tachyons are the bare/imaginary objects so they are invisible for detectors. Detectors can see only the effects of interactions caused by gravitational fields. They cannot see the causes.
C.
Experimentalists try to find the free quarks. The sham quarks appear as the quark-antiquark pairs. The sham quarks have the same masses as the mainstream quarks but the other properties are different. The assumption that masses of protons and neutrons follow from relativistic masses of three valence quarks is incorrect and such model never will lead to exact masses, magnetic moments and spins of nucleons.
D.
The conclusion that neutrinos can oscillate is incorrect. Just the Einstein spacetime consists of the neutrino-antineutrino pairs so, due to the weak interactions, there are the exchanges of the free neutrinos on the neutrinos in the Einstein-spacetime components.
E.
The Higgs mechanism is not associated with production of the discovered Higgs boson. The discovered Higgs bosons appear due to the weak interactions of the Einstein-spacetime components which ALREADY HAVE GRAVITATIONAL MASS. The real Higgs mechanism acted during the inflation and due to this mechanism, groups of gravitationally massless tachyons transformed into the Principle-of-Equivalence Einstein-spacetime components.
F.
Experimentalists try to find the superpartners of known particles. They are not in existence. Nature does not need them because there are the two different spacetimes.
G.
Experimentalists try to find evidences that there are higher spatial dimensions. The Everlasting Theory shows that we can describe origin of the physical and mathematical constants applied in physics and calculate all basic quantities without this nonsensical assumption.
H.
The dark energy consists of the additional Einstein-spacetime components. It means that we never will able to separate the dark energy from the Einstein spacetime. Existence of the dark energy follows from the indirect observations ONLY.
I.
Many paradoxes described within General Theory of Relativity follow from the fact that this theory neglects existence of the gas composed of tachyons and neglects the grainy structure of the two spacetimes and internal structure of bare particles.
J.
Many paradoxes described within Quantum Physics follow from the fact that this theory neglects existence of the gas composed of tachyons and neglects the grainy structure of the two spacetimes and internal structure of bare particles. For example, it concerns the many-worlds interpretation of the quantum physics. Quantum Physics is needed to describe Nature because detectors cannot see the exchanged superluminal entanglons (their spin is unitary but imaginary for detectors).
And so on…..
Some recapitulation of above recapitulation is as follows.
The mainstream theories are incomplete: there are the two different spacetimes which are grainy and there are the structures of the bare particles that follow from the phase transitions of the gas composed of tachyons. It is described within the lacking part of ultimate theory i.e. the Everlasting Theory and in my papers. Some phenomena were able only during the inflation so today gravity and quantum physics are the two very different and incomplete theories which unification within the same methods is impossible.
I see this Everlasting Theory thing is actually just a conjecture and not really a theory, or even a hypothesis, and as such cannot stand up to peer review.
OK, got it, thanks. Enjoy your discussions....
Can you prove it? Of course, you are unable to do it. Just dunces write nonsensical posts without scientific arguments. You are the victim of the applied today methods of teaching the physics.
Number of the nonsensical peer reviewed papers concerning theoretical particle physics and theoretical cosmology increases exponentially. Soon no one will read such papers.
To fit theoretical results to experimental data there appear many approximations, mathematical tricks and free parameters. Such messy physics is not for me. For me such “scientific methods” are hideous. It is not honest physics.
For example, there is the nonsensical conclusion accepted by Scientific Boards that today the Universe accelerates its expansion. It is so easy to see that the conclusion is nonsensical.
1.
Gravitational constant is constant so the two spacetimes in our Cosmos, which contains the universes, cannot expand. Only expansion of the dark energy is possible.
2.
On the other hand, the dark energy consists of the additional Einstein-spacetime components which are moving with the speed of light in “vacuum” c. This means that radial speed of the front of the expanding dark energy must be equal to the c and cannot increase!
3.
So where is the mistake? Just the GR neglects the grainy structure of the spacetimes so the relativistic formula for redshift is incorrect.
Soon the vixra and Sciforums will be the most important places in Internet for correctly thinking physicists. There is the lacking part of ultimate theory i.e. the Everlasting Theory.
The open access Internet without political peer reviewed papers will dominate.
Well, good luck and if you enjoy what you are doing, more power to you.
Physical infinities and physical zeros in our Cosmos?
I try to teach scientists and laymen the good physics but it is very difficult. Why?
Here I will try to describe the basic mistakes in physics concerning infinities and zeros.
We know that gravitational constant and spin of particles in our Cosmos is constant. On the other hand, the gravitational constant is directly proportional to inertial-mass density of the gas composed of tachyons i.e. of the modified Higgs field (see formula (11) in my book). It leads to conclusion that our Cosmos is finite (see my paper [16] on vixra). We can see that boundary of our Cosmos, not the Universe, must be non-transparent for the very small tachyons (size is about 10^-64 m). The boundary should be the timeless space composed of tachyons packed to maximum.
The boundary of our Cosmos causes that in it should not appear any infinities. If in some physical theory appear infinity or infinities then it follows from incompetence of the authors. Infinities can be only external to our Cosmos i.e. there probably is in existence infinite nothingness and eternally (infinite time) moving pieces of space. But exact definition of unit of time is impossible.
Generally, people cannot see difference between the artificial mathematical definitions that can lead to infinities and the natural physical quantities which in our Cosmos must be always finite. For example, electromagnetic energy of an electron cannot be infinite even in absence of the boundary. Density of a black hole cannot be infinite. Range of interactions cannot be infinite, and so on. Emphasize that the physical infinities follow from incompetence of their authors whereas physical theories containing physical infinities and physical zeros are incomplete.
Consider the mainstream QED. There appears the indeterminate form “infinity minus infinity”. So why within this theory we obtain perfect results? It is because within this theory to fit the theoretical results to experimental data there appear three free parameters i.e. the mass and electric charge of electron and the normalization Z. The three free parameters cause that due to the mathematical trick which we refer to the renormalization, we are going from the indeterminate form to the determinate form. But all can see that such theory cannot be mathematically coherent. The mathematical formulae applied in physics that lead to physical infinities and/or zeros cause that there appear the nonsensical conclusions and nonsensical attempts. Just Nature in our Cosmos is free from physical infinities and physical zeros. In the mainstream QED appear the sizeless bare electrons and infinite energy of two fields. To eliminate the indeterminate forms there appear the free parameters. But such childish game causes that we still have the sizeless bare electron (i.e. mathematical point) which has mass, electric charge and spin. On the other hand, in reality, the mass, electric charge and spin must have an internal structure so it cannot be mathematical point. Similarly is with the infinite energies of fields. Why energy of field is infinite? It is because we neglect internal structure of the bare electron and internal structure of the Einstein spacetime which is the ground for creation of the virtual electron-positron pairs responsible for the electromagnetic interactions.
Recapitulation
Can you see that the free parameters cause that we sweep the unsolved problems under the carpet? Can you see the childish game? On the other hand, the QED presented within the Everlasting Theory is free from free parameters. It is because this theory starts from the complete and correct set of initial conditions. The free parameters applied in the mainstream theory fit the distribution of energy to the distribution realized by Nature but say nothing about origin of such distribution.
Due to the wrong teaching of physics (there are not pointed the fundamental differences between mathematics and physics and there is silence that the free parameters and indeterminate forms in physics play very destructive part), people write the nonsense concerning physics but mathematics as well.
Mathematics can be sometimes indeterminate whereas our Cosmos never. In complete theories of our Cosmos should not appear the indeterminate forms. When there appear the indeterminate forms then there appear the free parameters to fit theoretical results to experimental data but such mathematical tricks do not solve the basic problems – it is a childish game. We must change the applied methods to know how in reality behaves Nature and it is in the Everlasting Theory. This theory is free from physical infinities and physical zeros.
I try to teach scientists and laymen the good physics but it is very difficult. Why?
Here I will try to describe the basic mistakes in physics concerning infinities and zeros.
We know that gravitational constant and spin of particles in our Cosmos is constant. On the other hand, the gravitational constant is directly proportional to inertial-mass density of the gas composed of tachyons i.e. of the modified Higgs field (see formula (11) in my book). It leads to conclusion that our Cosmos is finite (see my paper [16] on vixra). We can see that boundary of our Cosmos, not the Universe, must be non-transparent for the very small tachyons (size is about 10^-64 m). The boundary should be the timeless space composed of tachyons packed to maximum.
The boundary of our Cosmos causes that in it should not appear any infinities. If in some physical theory appear infinity or infinities then it follows from incompetence of the authors. Infinities can be only external to our Cosmos i.e. there probably is in existence infinite nothingness and eternally (infinite time) moving pieces of space. But exact definition of unit of time is impossible.
Generally, people cannot see difference between the artificial mathematical definitions that can lead to infinities and the natural physical quantities which in our Cosmos must be always finite. For example, electromagnetic energy of an electron cannot be infinite even in absence of the boundary. Density of a black hole cannot be infinite. Range of interactions cannot be infinite, and so on. Emphasize that the physical infinities follow from incompetence of their authors whereas physical theories containing physical infinities and physical zeros are incomplete.
Consider the mainstream QED. There appears the indeterminate form “infinity minus infinity”. So why within this theory we obtain perfect results? It is because within this theory to fit the theoretical results to experimental data there appear three free parameters i.e. the mass and electric charge of electron and the normalization Z. The three free parameters cause that due to the mathematical trick which we refer to the renormalization, we are going from the indeterminate form to the determinate form. But all can see that such theory cannot be mathematically coherent. The mathematical formulae applied in physics that lead to physical infinities and/or zeros cause that there appear the nonsensical conclusions and nonsensical attempts. Just Nature in our Cosmos is free from physical infinities and physical zeros. In the mainstream QED appear the sizeless bare electrons and infinite energy of two fields. To eliminate the indeterminate forms there appear the free parameters. But such childish game causes that we still have the sizeless bare electron (i.e. mathematical point) which has mass, electric charge and spin. On the other hand, in reality, the mass, electric charge and spin must have an internal structure so it cannot be mathematical point. Similarly is with the infinite energies of fields. Why energy of field is infinite? It is because we neglect internal structure of the bare electron and internal structure of the Einstein spacetime which is the ground for creation of the virtual electron-positron pairs responsible for the electromagnetic interactions.
Recapitulation
Can you see that the free parameters cause that we sweep the unsolved problems under the carpet? Can you see the childish game? On the other hand, the QED presented within the Everlasting Theory is free from free parameters. It is because this theory starts from the complete and correct set of initial conditions. The free parameters applied in the mainstream theory fit the distribution of energy to the distribution realized by Nature but say nothing about origin of such distribution.
Due to the wrong teaching of physics (there are not pointed the fundamental differences between mathematics and physics and there is silence that the free parameters and indeterminate forms in physics play very destructive part), people write the nonsense concerning physics but mathematics as well.
Mathematics can be sometimes indeterminate whereas our Cosmos never. In complete theories of our Cosmos should not appear the indeterminate forms. When there appear the indeterminate forms then there appear the free parameters to fit theoretical results to experimental data but such mathematical tricks do not solve the basic problems – it is a childish game. We must change the applied methods to know how in reality behaves Nature and it is in the Everlasting Theory. This theory is free from physical infinities and physical zeros.
Betelgeuse
I must emphasize that this post is a speculative one. It is a mixture of my perfect theory that leads to hundreds theoretical results consistent or very close to experimental data and the inexact observational facts concerning distance and mass of the star Betelgeuse.
The distance is 643 +- 146 light-years (ly) whereas mass is from 7.7 M to 20 M, where M is the solar mass i.e. a standard unit of mass in astronomy. In 2011, Hilding Neilson and colleagues calculated the central value for mass 11.6 M, upper limit 16.6 M and lower limit 7.7 M.
It is assumed that soon Betelgeuse should explode as Type II supernova. According to the mainstream theory of supernovae there should be a time distance between the neutrino and photon fronts observed on Earth. The theoretical results suggest that the time distance should be in approximation one hour. So there are made some preparations by people working with neutrino detectors to inform mankind about the photonic explosion of Betelgeuse. According to the mainstream theory there as well should be a remnant i.e. a neutron star.
What can I say about the Betelgeuse explosion on base of the Everlasting Theory?
As I wrote many times, the superluminal neutrinos appear ONLY in the weak decays inside the strong fields i.e. inside baryons so inside neutrons and protons as well (the neutrinos from the weak decays outside the strong fields are moving with the speed of light c). Before the explosions of the supernovae, the nucleons are packed to maximum so practically all neutrinos from the W-boson decays are superluminal and their speed is only 2*10^-9 m/s higher than the speed of light c (see my book) - it is the maximum speed whereas the central value is sqrt(2) times lower. Since the time distance is directly proportional to distance of supernovae so within the Everlasting Theory we obtain for Betelgeuse in approximation 40 +- 9 seconds for the fronts (or about 29 +- 7 seconds for the central value i.e. for the maximum intensity of the neutrino flux), not one hour as it follows from the mainstream theory. This means that there will not be time to inform mankind about the photonic explosion. But I must emphasize that the obtained results are correct only on assumption that mass of Betelgeuse is about 11.2 M i.e. in approximation the central value calculated by Neilson. Why?
The theory of supernovae described within the Everlasting Theory shows that the Type Ia supernovae explode when there are produced the weak condensates that are in centres of muons. Their mass is about 53 MeV. Production of such condensates causes that energy from central parts of a star is very quickly transported to its surface so there appears the gravitational collapse. Production of the weak condensates causes that in the explosion there is not produced a neutron star i.e. a remnant. Mass of a star to produce the muon condensates should be 1.4 times greater than mass of Sun (see my book). On the other hand, there is characteristic for the weak interactions the four-component symmetry (see my book). Since the mass of the supernova SN1987A was about 4 times greater than the mass of the Type Ia supernovae so as well we should not observe a neutron star as a remnant of the supernova SN1987A explosion. And it is consistent with the observational facts. Moreover, the calculated time distance is consistent with the observational facts.
The Everlasting Theory shows that in centre of a star with a mass 11.2 M, there are created the weak condensates which are in centres of nucleons (their mass is 424 MeV). This means that such star can very quickly collapse gravitationally. Moreover, the mass 11.2 M is 8 = 4*2 times greater than mass of the Type Ia supernovae i.e. after explosion of star with mass 11.2 M, we as well should not observe a remnant i.e. a neutron star.
Recapitulation
The different conclusions obtained within the Everlasting Theory and the mainstream theories of supernovae are for Betelgeuse as follows.
Time distance between the neutrino and photon fronts observed on Earth:
Everlasting Theory: 40 +- 9 seconds (or about 29 +- 7 seconds for the central value).
Mainstream theory: about one hour.
Existence of neutron star after explosion when mass is about 11.2 M:
Everlasting Theory: no neutron star.
Mainstream theory: there should be a neutron star.
When mass of Betelgeuse differs significantly from the 11.2 M then the conclusions obtained within the Everlasting Theory are different. The time distance can be longer and there can appear a neutron star.
Assume that the explosion observed on Earth will be in 2016(?). We will compare the results.
I must emphasize that this post is a speculative one. It is a mixture of my perfect theory that leads to hundreds theoretical results consistent or very close to experimental data and the inexact observational facts concerning distance and mass of the star Betelgeuse.
The distance is 643 +- 146 light-years (ly) whereas mass is from 7.7 M to 20 M, where M is the solar mass i.e. a standard unit of mass in astronomy. In 2011, Hilding Neilson and colleagues calculated the central value for mass 11.6 M, upper limit 16.6 M and lower limit 7.7 M.
It is assumed that soon Betelgeuse should explode as Type II supernova. According to the mainstream theory of supernovae there should be a time distance between the neutrino and photon fronts observed on Earth. The theoretical results suggest that the time distance should be in approximation one hour. So there are made some preparations by people working with neutrino detectors to inform mankind about the photonic explosion of Betelgeuse. According to the mainstream theory there as well should be a remnant i.e. a neutron star.
What can I say about the Betelgeuse explosion on base of the Everlasting Theory?
As I wrote many times, the superluminal neutrinos appear ONLY in the weak decays inside the strong fields i.e. inside baryons so inside neutrons and protons as well (the neutrinos from the weak decays outside the strong fields are moving with the speed of light c). Before the explosions of the supernovae, the nucleons are packed to maximum so practically all neutrinos from the W-boson decays are superluminal and their speed is only 2*10^-9 m/s higher than the speed of light c (see my book) - it is the maximum speed whereas the central value is sqrt(2) times lower. Since the time distance is directly proportional to distance of supernovae so within the Everlasting Theory we obtain for Betelgeuse in approximation 40 +- 9 seconds for the fronts (or about 29 +- 7 seconds for the central value i.e. for the maximum intensity of the neutrino flux), not one hour as it follows from the mainstream theory. This means that there will not be time to inform mankind about the photonic explosion. But I must emphasize that the obtained results are correct only on assumption that mass of Betelgeuse is about 11.2 M i.e. in approximation the central value calculated by Neilson. Why?
The theory of supernovae described within the Everlasting Theory shows that the Type Ia supernovae explode when there are produced the weak condensates that are in centres of muons. Their mass is about 53 MeV. Production of such condensates causes that energy from central parts of a star is very quickly transported to its surface so there appears the gravitational collapse. Production of the weak condensates causes that in the explosion there is not produced a neutron star i.e. a remnant. Mass of a star to produce the muon condensates should be 1.4 times greater than mass of Sun (see my book). On the other hand, there is characteristic for the weak interactions the four-component symmetry (see my book). Since the mass of the supernova SN1987A was about 4 times greater than the mass of the Type Ia supernovae so as well we should not observe a neutron star as a remnant of the supernova SN1987A explosion. And it is consistent with the observational facts. Moreover, the calculated time distance is consistent with the observational facts.
The Everlasting Theory shows that in centre of a star with a mass 11.2 M, there are created the weak condensates which are in centres of nucleons (their mass is 424 MeV). This means that such star can very quickly collapse gravitationally. Moreover, the mass 11.2 M is 8 = 4*2 times greater than mass of the Type Ia supernovae i.e. after explosion of star with mass 11.2 M, we as well should not observe a remnant i.e. a neutron star.
Recapitulation
The different conclusions obtained within the Everlasting Theory and the mainstream theories of supernovae are for Betelgeuse as follows.
Time distance between the neutrino and photon fronts observed on Earth:
Everlasting Theory: 40 +- 9 seconds (or about 29 +- 7 seconds for the central value).
Mainstream theory: about one hour.
Existence of neutron star after explosion when mass is about 11.2 M:
Everlasting Theory: no neutron star.
Mainstream theory: there should be a neutron star.
When mass of Betelgeuse differs significantly from the 11.2 M then the conclusions obtained within the Everlasting Theory are different. The time distance can be longer and there can appear a neutron star.
Assume that the explosion observed on Earth will be in 2016(?). We will compare the results.
How long before your thoughts, your theoretical models and you predictions take hold?
There appeared evidences
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140306/ncomms4300/full/ncomms4300.html
that structure of photons described within the Everlasting Theory is correct.
In the presented paper, the basic conclusion from the experiments is that a photon except the longitudinal spin determined by circular polarization of photons “possesses a spin component, which is independent of the polarization and is ORTHOGONAL to the wave vector.”
On the other hand, the Everlasting theory leads to following structure of a photon/wave-packet. The total energy of a photon is the sum of rotational energies of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components. Spins of all Einstein-spacetime components in a wave packet are unitary and orthogonal to the wave vector. These spins are invariant (i.e. unitary) and rotate around the wave vector. This leads to conclusion that there are two resultant spins i.e. longitudinal which depends on angular velocities of the invariant spins of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components, and orthogonal associated with the invariant spins.
I wrote many times that it is very difficult to detect directly the Einstein-spacetime components because their mass is in approximation 6.7*10^-67 kg. But we can see that now experimentalists can indirectly measure their invariant spin.
We can see that indeed the Einstein-spacetime components which have very small gravitational mass, are the carriers of the gravitationally massless photons i.e. of the rotational energies of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components. We can see that the Einstein-spacetime is indeed grainy.
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140306/ncomms4300/full/ncomms4300.html
that structure of photons described within the Everlasting Theory is correct.
In the presented paper, the basic conclusion from the experiments is that a photon except the longitudinal spin determined by circular polarization of photons “possesses a spin component, which is independent of the polarization and is ORTHOGONAL to the wave vector.”
On the other hand, the Everlasting theory leads to following structure of a photon/wave-packet. The total energy of a photon is the sum of rotational energies of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components. Spins of all Einstein-spacetime components in a wave packet are unitary and orthogonal to the wave vector. These spins are invariant (i.e. unitary) and rotate around the wave vector. This leads to conclusion that there are two resultant spins i.e. longitudinal which depends on angular velocities of the invariant spins of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components, and orthogonal associated with the invariant spins.
I wrote many times that it is very difficult to detect directly the Einstein-spacetime components because their mass is in approximation 6.7*10^-67 kg. But we can see that now experimentalists can indirectly measure their invariant spin.
We can see that indeed the Einstein-spacetime components which have very small gravitational mass, are the carriers of the gravitationally massless photons i.e. of the rotational energies of the entangled Einstein-spacetime components. We can see that the Einstein-spacetime is indeed grainy.
Here
http://iopscience.iop.org/2041-8205/783/1/L14/
you can find new evidences that the Everlasting Theory is correct.
The Everlasting Theory shows that the very early Universe was a cosmic loop built up of protogalaxies composed of the neutron black holes (see my book). They already at the beginning of the expansion of the Universe were grouped in the larger structures so there is not needed a time for their formation. The inflows of the dark energy (it is the thickened Einstein spacetime that appeared already before the expansion of the Universe (see my book)) caused the exit of the protogalaxies from the black-hole state. Moreover, due to the decay of the entangled photons, brightness of the cosmic objects considerably increased about 13.2 and 5.7 billion years ago (1billion = 10^9).
Many protogalaxies were carried by the protuberances produced in the Einstein spacetime due to the inflows of the dark energy - their redshift was greater than 1. This causes that we observe the red galaxies with redshift z > 1 just at the beginning of the expansion of the Universe.
The regions near and inside the protogalaxies activated by the inflows of the dark energy were filled with very dense dust so the star formation is obscured.
http://iopscience.iop.org/2041-8205/783/1/L14/
you can find new evidences that the Everlasting Theory is correct.
The Everlasting Theory shows that the very early Universe was a cosmic loop built up of protogalaxies composed of the neutron black holes (see my book). They already at the beginning of the expansion of the Universe were grouped in the larger structures so there is not needed a time for their formation. The inflows of the dark energy (it is the thickened Einstein spacetime that appeared already before the expansion of the Universe (see my book)) caused the exit of the protogalaxies from the black-hole state. Moreover, due to the decay of the entangled photons, brightness of the cosmic objects considerably increased about 13.2 and 5.7 billion years ago (1billion = 10^9).
Many protogalaxies were carried by the protuberances produced in the Einstein spacetime due to the inflows of the dark energy - their redshift was greater than 1. This causes that we observe the red galaxies with redshift z > 1 just at the beginning of the expansion of the Universe.
The regions near and inside the protogalaxies activated by the inflows of the dark energy were filled with very dense dust so the star formation is obscured.