Weak Tachyon Theory

Reiku

Banned
Banned
Weak Tachyon Theory


Since we know that any type of physical vector field is involved, we usually imagine either two types of solutions. One being that there is a physical field, with physical or energy particles, and then there are the virtual fields, that govern constants like the gravitational potential and the undefined equation of the uncertainty principle. But it is rare whenever one contemplates something about a theory that says that everything in existence flickers in and out of real existence so fast, we don’t even know it.

The reason why is because Bradyons do not interact with Tachyons from their observational view. If ‘’we’’ could see the events of superluminal transition through the hypothetical ‘’hill’’ in spacetime, and ignoring the effects of a zero-dimensional quality to it, we would see the Bradyon possibly pass a Tachyon, whizzing past with a distance of let’s say 10^-6 times smaller than an atom shell, then we would say that they passed each other without a doubt, and both saw each other. But this would be wrong.

From the viewpoints of the particles involved, a tachyon for instance oscillates ONLY through the imaginary time dimension, and if at best, spends very, very little time in the imaginary space dimension – so being a tachyon observer, we don’t see any body existing in real time dimensions, because it doesn’t experience any distortional effects, or by ultimate definition, gravity. The Bradyon involved also experiences the same deficiencies – it cannot observe a Tachyonic system because the Tachyon exists in imaginary time, oscillating from future to past and from past to future.

The following equation will show us solutions to possible wave packets traveling at superluminal, or Tachyonic speeds. They also have an inverse solution, stating that there can be group velocity solutions to the limit of any speed of any particle. But even though these following equations will predict this, there is still the uncertainty principle, and equation upon itself saying that at certain spontaneous times in the universe, photons can travel faster than light for a very short period of time. This means that a particle with seemly no imaginary matter contained within it, can in fact, in peculiar situations seem to have that type of infinite energy that would be required at a speed not higher than ‘’c’’.

.
…d^2u………d^2u
-- - c^2 -- + w^2 u = 0
…dt^2……….dx^2
…has a set of solutions:
u = A cos( ax - bt )

c^2 a^2 – b^2 + w^2 = 0

Which are sine waves propagating with a speed,

V =b/a=√(c^2+(w/a)^2)

The problem here, is that they are moving at a speed which exceeds ''c''. These are normal equations for any wave form or particle. The problem can be removed, by distinguishing this velocity which is known as the phase velocity vpr from another velocity known as the group velocity vgr which is given by,

vgr = c / vph

Now, this basically means that a wave packet will have a velocity at the value of ''c'' when in a group. But here is the problem, we can apply the same values for actual information waves in space and time, and when you measure an entangled photon, the other photon is instantly determined: despite any group variables. We could apply the phase velocity equation to an information wave which would allow instantaneous action at a very spooky distance. The equations just shown, say that is it is only possible to send information with such a wave equation at a group velocity ''c'', but it doesn't account for possible information determining the action at great distances.

The Phase Velocity however, does in itself; describe faster-then-light communication. It begs the question to what kind of information we are dealing with, without resorting to a group factor. If there isn't anything which describes this phase velocity, then the phase velocity is just a lame example of a speed faster than light which cannot carry a message.

This doesn't seem right, especially when we have top physicists, such as Dr Cramer whose interpretations describe faster-than-light travel for certain information, the Wheeler-Choice Experiment, which even proves in itself backwards through time travel, and the well known phenomena of action at spooky distances which could be answered for by superluminal phase waves.

Even the collapse of quantum systems, which can also involve the resolution made upon observing one of two quantum systems and seeing that information of one state to intermediately inform how state two will exist as (in this case, let’s say state of spins), for one to communicate to the other in such an instantaneous fasion would require some form of superluminal form of information. This information can be applied to Cramers Logic, and his TI calculations.

There is a complex-conjugated wave comes from the past, as known as being called an echo wave.

<E |

And the following is a solution showing one of these waves meeting together: a wave, and it’s complex-conjugated factor:

x + | -- y = *

Where the imaginary product has the well-known value of:

√-1

It is stimulated by a probability distribution that will determine a collapse in the wave function. This is namely called the ‘’transaction.’’

<E |O(*)>

We can even solve for situations where the probability distribution and like values will equal absolute zero – but even at this level, it is still found to expand existence in single frames of single spatial and temporal fluctuations so that a thing can be seen as a process of spontaneous tunneling like effects: In other words, existence could pop in and out of existence, displaying the theory again that time has no real flow. Lot of evidence supported this.

There is a rule that any finite number raised to the ‘’zeroeth’’ power is 1. Zero
remains to be not a finite number, so this rule doesn't apply consistantly, The evidence for this lies in the use of natural logarithms abbreviated (ln), if we have that is>

y=ln(x).

Then>

exp(y)=x or e^y=x.

Now take the any number x not equal to zero. x can be positive or negative
or even complex, as highlighted above in the use of imaginary calculations √-1. Then we consider the equation

z=y^x

We can solve ln for both sides, so we have

ln(z)=xln(y)

With x=0 we evaluate ln(z) is also zero, regardless of the
value of y – but that is with a catch. When y=0 things aren’t the same because the ln(0) is not defined.

So we have a new and final solution. We say that

ln(z)=0

So we can make z to have the controvertible value of 1. So we can finally have:

ln(1)=0.

Here we have something from nothing. And if time acts in the matter of discontinuous flashes of momentary existences that are fleeting in nature, We can make a final solution:

ln(z)=xln(y)=1=0

The final part of this can be reversible. The calculations allow these infinitesimal limits are of Planck Scales. First the time limit of how fast these fluctuations of existence to non-existence are given by the equation:

T_pi √(Gh/c^5) ⅓ = 5.3*10^-44

In a small box of space with a value of:

T_di = 1.616*10^-33

But the main paradox of this, is to treat these rules, or might be more appropriately said, ‘apply these rules,’ to the entire size of the universe, it’s admittedly very difficult to even comprehend a universe with 15 billion years to expand at near light speed and sometimes over, and sometimes the same. There’s simply a lot of spacetime and matter and energy to simply squeeze out of existence like the flick of a light bulb…

It has been speculated that is was theoretically possible to infinitely compress a particle. Planck Theory states that the most amount of energy and matter together is about 10^93 grams then this is a finite amount. However, there are calculations that are used to describe infinite curvature, with infinite amount of degrees of freedom.

The singularity of spacetime, which would have surrounding it a worm-like vortex where spacetime becomes positive. I assume that our universe has a negative vacuum that is homogenous, since Hawkings presumes that the gravitational field is really negative in nature, Past the boundary of a black holes, everything becomes negative, using yet again the simple and yet famous square root of minus one equation √-1 and the result is a change of fundamental laws. Space and time for one instance switch roles through a mechanism of a very high gravitational barrier. This makes a person moving through the black holes move more in imaginary time than in real time. This means that an observer will move through it’s time as though you where moving through space. Because in space, you can move backwards and forwards, so time would take this law on. Space would then become timelike.

Matter in this reversed region of now timespace, experience major gravitational sensations: It’s matter will be being dragged closer and closer to the speed of light. If a particle is already moving at superluminal speeds, psuedoparticles called Tachyons that have a mass of M2 that would be negative. This makes the energy of that system:

E^2 = P^2 - |M^|2 or P^2 = E^2 + |M|^2

This means that the energy E of a system can be as small as zero (when only P = |M|) and that P is always greater than E and cannot be less than |M|. These quantities are related to the relativistic velocity ß. These particles would travel through this constant spacelike and timelike reversals in an oscillating manner; in effect, it wouldn’t even be slowed down, or infinitely speeded up because this particle oscillates throughout the imaginary time dimension. Even if they did exist, there is no way we would be able to detect one. They move off the observable map due to their quantized speeds.

But unfortunately, if matter is being squeezed in and out of existence, then an even strange theory can arise. This essay was to change the rules of the String Luxen Theory to make a new theory equally consistent. For matter and all-spacetime to flash in and out of existence, then it NEEDS to do this through the process of tunneling. In other words, the only way for any type of physical system to simply disappear from the spacetime map at any time, it can ONLY do so through a process of moving at superluminal speeds under a subspacetime dimension, which as far as we could know, could be an existence of nothing, with zero-dimensional qualities, which I suggest independently as the correct and logical assumption of the structure of the where a particle goes if not contained within spacetime in an infinitely small time through possibly a massive distance in space.

In a ‘’Hill Potential Equation V(x) ,’’ we can calculate the probability of how far a particle can move through spacetime Now there are a few ways to interpret this type of existence.:

1) – That matter-energy-space-time can disappear (1) from the spacetime map, because there is no such thing as a distinctive flow at small levels, which are much more fundamental than what we can comprehend. But somehow, the energy of distribution divided by the probability factor and gamma shows a negative result. It would suggest that the existence of moving faster than light. This can only be a result of tunneling (2).
2) – That there is more to this. Combining these conditions with the theory that time flashes, and results in a discontinuous reality and not flow-like. It was Professor Tipler, mathematical professor and physicist who postulated the first evidence of such an existence where everything flickered between the real and the non-existent.

To humor the most interesting here, obviously take 2), if it is true, then it would need to move out of existence at superluminal speeds so there is no power affect at all upon the compound and ordered bodies of spacetime. Basically meaning that things happen so quickly, no time can really pass at all for any measurement to prove this process of time nature hypothesis.

The model I suggest, also requires some type of model consisting of an imaginatative way to define matter now. In Strong Luxen Theory, I proved that we can trace all types of matter, from the quark, to the electron right back to only electromagnetic fluctuations. But the implications of recent speculations when applying Professor Tipler’s time theory, matter behaves more like Tachyons (3).

Bold statement? You can make your own mind up. But just consider the evidence; there can be successful solutions to a relativistic time resulting in the imaginary dimension of space being infinitely fragmentized. There is a chance that the Time Theory is resulting in matter fluctuating in a type of distribution field which is analogous to oscillator function of an electron, where when it is not being observed has an infinite amount of degrees of freedom. The theory of everything being in such an oscillation may seem weird, but it seems to be a perfectly scientific interpretation of physics.

However, I am also willing to see a flaw in how one might interpret, ‘’everything acts like Tachyons’’ – this does not necessarily imply that everything really is made of imaginary matter, because this is simply not true. So, matter might be in indirect conditions of Tachyonic matter through the way it behaves when moving superluminal in temporal processes of tunneling, than to ignorantly hint that matter as we see it really are Tachyons, and contain imaginary matter, for there is absolutely no logical sense of this, nor any physical and observational proof of this either.

The matrix I developed for the system N of infinite degrees of freedom, as shown in the equalization that x ≡ ∞ and that y ≡ ∞, because the matter and energy is said to jump in and out of existence in the shortest time possible T_pi √(Gh/c^5) ⅓.



(1)-- Can sub-atomic particles be infinitely compressed? – Dr. S. Odenwald, 1997

(2) --I must involve all these properties: space, time, matter and energy, because of a simple equation of (Gab=kTab) – I find personally the master of all General Relativity Equations. This equation is very important, where the Gab Einstein Tensor Factor, and the Stress Energy Tensor is given as and Tab and k is a constant. This equation relates to the curvature of space and time, saying that stress energy is what causes the disturbance of spacetime. Without this equation, energy could not relate to matter in any way (E=Mc^2). Without this equation, nothing has a constant speed, so they couldn’t or wouldn’t have been able to make any ‘’Cartesian Rotated Systems’’ (given through the equation – s^2 = (∆x)^ 2 + (∆y)^2 → s^2 = (∆x′)^2 + (∆y′)^2 – and then motion couldn’t even occur, because ‘’Geometry,’’ would not be described in any way. The real importance of (Gab=kTab) was the confirmation that geometry, distortions, matter, energy, space and time, curvature and acceleration where all inter-joined into one theory: The Equivalence Principle. This means you cannot have energy without time, and matter without space, and space without time.

(3) -- (1/√ (2))(|01>-<10) is the equation identifying a process of superluminal interactions. In this case, it is the instantaneous results of quantum entanglement.
 
…d^2u………d^2u
-- - c^2 -- + w^2 u = 0
…dt^2……….dx^2
…has a set of solutions:
u = A cos( ax - bt )

c^2 a^2 – b^2 + w^2 = 0

Which are sine waves propagating with a speed,

V =b/a=√(c^2+(w/a)^2)

The problem here, is that they are moving at a speed which exceeds ''c''.
You might want to relearn basic differentiation.

For a start, your wave equation is wrong. The "c" terms, which represent the velocity of the wave, go infront of the spacial derivative. Putting 'c' infront of the time derivative is going to end up being incorrect.

Suppose you have your modified wave equation as $$A\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial t^{2}} = B\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial x^{2}} $$.

This is equivalent to the usual wave equation $$\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial t^{2}} = v^{2}\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial x^{2}} $$ if you have $$v^{2} = \frac{B}{A}$$.

Obviously if you set A=c and |B|<1 then you'll end up, without even having to solve the equation, with |v|>c. This doesn't tell you that the speed of light can be exceeded, you're just playing with a mathematical equation. Relativistic restrictions haven't been applied to the system yet.

Also, your demonstration of how $$\cos(ax-bt)$$ leads to a solution was wrong.

$$u = \cos(ax-bt)$$ implies $$\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial t^{2}} = -b^{2}u$$ and $$\frac{\partial^{2}u}{\partial x^{2}} = -a^{2}u$$ where the wave velocity v = b/a.. Putting these into your equation gives that

$$c^{2}b^{2}-a^{2}w^{2} = 0$$
$$v = \frac{b}{a} = \frac{w}{c}$$

Just as I said, except this demonstrates you got the 'c' in the wrong place. If you just decide to put in that b=c and |a|<1 then you'll get v>c. This isn't some magical result, it's obvious. And you don't even have to solve the equation to do it! Which you couldn't even do properly!

And if you cannot grasp that, your use of the Dirac bra-ket notation is just further demonstration you haven't got a clue.
 
Hey, look AN, if that is your reply, all i can say they are simplistic equation that i had learnt about superluminal tendancy's, but how the group value changed the odds of the equation so that ''c'' has a constant of value.

Temur

Yeh, i made it so that there was a link. The Strong Luxen Theory is ''strong'' in the sense it is backed by really strong proof that the matter we observe, is only trapped frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. The weak in Weak Tachyon Theory, is that things can behave like tachyons, but it seems irrational to propose that they are tachyons. Basically, there is no need for material particles to exist of v>c, but instead normal matter can because they can tunnel under space and time... but not any time would they have an imaginary mass. It even applied to the theory of existence squeezing in and out, to and fro. I made this so through the logic assumption and basis that if anything was to go below what we know as smallest physical and temporal scales, and appears back just as fast, then we might be talking c^2 or multiples of ''c'' for how fast the occurance is. Existence at any time frame, exists usually for only 5.3 x 10^-44, which is the billionth part of the billionth part of the billionth part of the billionth part of the billionth part of one second, and we call it a chronon. What happend in between happens faster than light.
 
(3) -- (1/√ (2))(|01>-<10) is the equation identifying a process of superluminal interactions. In this case, it is the instantaneous results of quantum entanglement.

Why does this equation identify superluminal interactions?
 
Ben

I never defined the result of simplifying the equation, but it stands to reason that when we put an new variable into the equation, giving instead not a positive result, but a nagetive one, whilst keeping at least one of the (x,y=1/2) coordinates of degrees of freedom: Basically the ''up'' spin or ''down'' spin that can be determined for Fermion Fields, the result of two photons with one having a spin tha is up |01> is instantaneous to a complex-conjugate -<10. So if we observed the state of an electron that is entanged with another electron, then will determine not only particle A, but its entangled partner's B spin. This occurance happens at superluminal speeds, because there seems to be no restrictions between the observed and the affected, since they will happen at exactly or just off exact times. The ''just off'' factor i would be talking about a difference from what we would expect of something like the 0.000,000,000,000,000,000,067th billionth power. That's wouldn't be a lot of difference.

The equation (1/√ (2))(|01>-<10) on th right with paying our attention to (|01>-<10) the bra-cket equation shows that they are proportional in any length scale: >-<. This also means how fast both events occur. The left-hand side describes the normal relativistic vectors required for such a completion.
 
Just reading back, this might have sounded decieving:


''a positive result, but a nagetive one, whilst keeping at least one of the (x,y=1/2) coordinates of degrees of freedom: Basically the ''up'' spin or ''down'' spin that can be determined for Fermion Fields, the result of two photons.''

I am not saying here that photons are Fermions, for they are Bosons. Instead i am saying that a rsolution upon a Fermion can hold the same results upon a resolution of photon particle that is entangled.
 
The equation (1/√ (2))(|01>-<10) on th right with paying our attention to (|01>-<10) the bra-cket equation shows that they are proportional in any length scale: >-<. This also means how fast both events occur. The left-hand side describes the normal relativistic vectors required for such a completion.

You are aware that this is not how this expression is typically interpretted?

So are you changing the bra-ket notation?
 
The equation (1/√ (2))(|01>-<10)
But this is not, of course, an equation; equations are equalities and as such, require an "=" in there somewhere. Plus I can make no sense of the following:
paying our attention to (|01>-<10) the bra-cket equation
Is this a typo? Do you mean |01>-<10|? Although it is well-known that I dislike Dirac's notation, nevertheless I do understand it. So much so, in fact, I can assure you that the operation of "subtraction", whatever that might mean here, is not defined for bras and kets. That is, |a> - <b| is not defined, since they "live" in different spaces - one is dual to the other.
This is some sort of smiley, right?
 
So much so, in fact, I can assure you that the operation of "subtraction",
How come you don't like Dirac's notation? It makes so many otherwise unpleasant expressions simple to work with.
is not defined for bras and kets. That is, |a> - <b| is not defined, since they "live" in different spaces - one is dual to the other.
The notion of spaces and dual spaces is going to be lost on Reiku. He doesn't know any of the QM relating to bra-ket notation, hence his 'abuse' of it. Just as he doesn't get basic differentiation but talks about the wave equation.
 
I don't like the Dirac notations either. I like to use just one letter to denote elements from vector spaces, and then use angle brackets for duality pairing.
 
Is this a typo? Do you mean |01>-<10|?

Well, he most likely means

$$\left|01\rangle - \left|10\rangle$$

which looks like the spin-spin singlet (i.e. anti-symmetric combination of 2 SU(2) fundamentals). I was giving him the benefit of the doubt.
 
How come you don't like Dirac's notation? It makes so many otherwise unpleasant expressions simple to work with.
Well I grant you, almost no notation is without its ambiguities. I don't like it because it tends to obscure the distinction between the inner product, which a sesquilinear form, and the action of a linear functional on a vector.

Likewise, given that <v|w> is a bra-ket pair, and that A is an operator, what is the vector argument on A in <v|A|w>?

On the other hand, using my (usually sloppy) notation, is (v, w) an inner product or simply an ordered pair?. The only solution is to use the rather clunky notation g for the sesquilinear form, (v, w) for the ordered pair. For then it is clear that g: V x V --> C, and that g(v, w) is scalar, g(Av, w) and g(v, Aw) are not in general equal etc.
 
Sorry, i haven't been about. Yeh Ben, your right. It is a spin-spin singlet. I only pasted and copied that typo.
 
QH
Your'e right. Equation is the wrong terminology because it should contain at least a ''='' sign.
 
So....how is it that a tachyon is a spin singlet?

A hydrogen atom can form a spin singlet. Why are hydrogen atoms not tachyonic?

An electron/positron can form a spin singlet. Why is positronium not tachyonic?
 
Oh... i never said a tachyon was a spin singlet. The [[equation]] was created (not by me :) ) to display the instantaneous action of quantum entanglement... Some physicists interpret these spooky actions at a distance to be the shadow of some theory suggesting that certain information (not tachyons) might travel at superluminal speeds.
 
I suspect he's referring to the fundamental rep of SU(2), being a 2 dimensional vector which transforms under the 2x2 rep of SU(2), ie the Pauli matrices.
 
Back
Top