Wednesday, July 05, 2006

Aether Wave Theory Introduction

Aether Wave Theory (AWT) is chaos based model of observable Universe based on luminiferous Aether model of Rene Descartes ("Principia Philosophiae", 1642), who proposed the Aether as an inertial particle environment, capable of energy spreading in waves. It's based on the assumption, the observable reality is recursively formed by scale invariant density gradients of hypothetical particle environment - so called the Aether. It's an extrapolation of "Boltzmann brain" concept: the complexity of density fluctuations in particle system can increase with mass/energy density of this system up to level, they may be able to interact/observe it's own environment by less or more conscious way. AWT follows ideas of discordian monism and pantheistic solipsism.

With compare to other Aether theories, AWT uses the assumption of (supposedly infinitely) high mass/energy density of Aether, which was proposed originally by Olivier J. Lodge ("Electric Theory of Matter", Harper Magazine. 1904), but if was later abandoned on behalf of formal theories, like relativity or quantum mechanics. The dense Aether concept follows from the fact, the light of very short wavelength cannot be mediated by sparse inertial environment in transversal waves.

The physical model of AWT is based on the assumption, the only observable portion of sufficiently dense inertial environment are the density gradients/fluctuations/waves of it - by the same way, like during observation of condensing supercritical fluid.
Inside of dense particle systems these fluctuations are similar to foam or sponge, being formed by heavily compacted density fluctuations of ideal Boltzmann gas. Most of energy is spreading along density gradients of such environment in transversal waves, i.e. by analogous way, like the light is spreading through vacuum.
These fluctuations can form a less or more continuous phase, which can exhibit another level of density fluctuations in the narrow range of conditions, when it behaves like foam or fluid, composed of fluctuations of another fluid. This Lifshitz point, which is used to model the triple point in condensed matter physics has increasing importance in renormalization of quantum gravity and various cosmology models.


The AWT extrapolates such observation to the infinite mass/energy density under assumption, whole Universe is composed by infinite number of recursively nested levels of Aether density fluctuations. By AWT the level, which we are living in, is forming the observable generation of Universe. In certain sense is dual to whole contemporary physics, which is atemporal due its adherence to formal math language: "Physics is not about the 'why' of things but the 'how'". In comparison with physics, AWT is trying to explain origin of observable thing and phenomena in logical way and it doesn't care about formal regressions of reality.

Max Planck: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

If it's true, then the another progress in physics just waits for your death impatiently, dear colleagues....;-)  Remember it, while valuing your contribution to contemporary physics..

24 comments:

Paul said...

This theory is either right or wrong, but I think is crank ;)

Anonymous said...

Zephir,

Your comment about Emergent Gravity post in Back-Reaction is great. I have laughed a lot when I've read it. I will write here again because It can be deleted:

"The only working case of emergence phenomena I know is the phase transition of many particles, everything else is mythology."

I agree with you, emergent gravity is pseudosciencie, only. I advise you the Lubos's post in Reference Frame.

http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/08/emergent-gravity-positive-and-negative.html

Maybe the best post ever written.

Curious-AWT said...

Prof. Zephir,

I have many questions about your theory of everything. You wrote:




"Aether Wave Theory explains both relativity theory, both quantum theory and explains, how these theories are connected together. Explains the mutual positions of string theories, twistor and Quantum Loop Gravity theories too"

but you did not write anything about if your theory could explain E8 Garret theory too.

I'm worried because maybe your theory can't account for E8 Theory. Maybe E8 theory is wrong but if it is the correct theory of everything and Aether Wave Theory can't explain it then Aether Wave Theory would be wrong. Isn't it?

In your web you wrote:




"there is a lot of work to do on the background of math"




But you didn't write about what types of math it must be used to explain your theory. Maybe it must be invented new mathematical tools or it's sufficient with the tools that we already exist. But if we need some new mathematical tool i wonder if there are enough good mathematicians. I want to say that if someone be able to do such work.

I hope your response


Thank you.

curious-awt said...

Dear Paul,

I'm afraid that you're a crackpot. Everything you have said is nonsense on stilts.
First, you would have to understand AWT and then you write here.
Prof. Zephir, I think that you should not get angry for this comment. Unfortunately, AWT seems to attract too little serious scientific discussion, and too much idiotic, unprofessional behaviour.

curious-awt said...

Dear Paul,

Albeit my work is not offered you the explanations about like the AWT works, in your case I'm going to make an exception ;-). First Let me to put the problem in a proper manner.

AWT is a theory of everything based on pure and classical geometry. It's based on the great idea of the classical physics (XIX century). Namely the Aether. The Aether is the medium that makes up the space and the matter. But there is some precise mechanisms that achieve this task. The great idea of Zephir was to explain the Aether by means of the wave mechanics. Well, we must be careful with the wave concept. The waves what we are talking about are not like the waves that we can obtain from Maxwell theory of electromagnetism. They are another sort of waves. Like waves of the water surface. They aren't electromagnetic waves but rather mechanics waves. So AWT is closely related with the geometry, (nearest than General Relativity too) . Better AWT is geometry itself ;-). How space and time arise from AWT is clear:
1) The space dimensions arise from liquid surface in a process called condensation of supercritical vapor. The vapor is the same stuff that the aether ;-). The space dimensions have a curvature. From this curvature arise the gravity interaction.
2) Each convolution of the gravity interaction generates a new temporal dimension too.
Clearly we have a space of 12 dimensions. If you want more details about this topic you would see the Zephir's page:

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/

where you can found all this matter and it provide a marvellous physics picture.

But the most important, we can explain another fields of physics using AWT. For example the Lorentz contraction can be explained from the mechanics of AWT. We not need additional postulates unlike Special Relativity ;-). Moreover we can explain Uncertainty principle by means of AWT too. Indeed, so far we have seen that the space has a wave nature. But the particles arise from the space. Therefore, particles manifest a wave behaviour themselves. This is nothing but Uncertainty principle. As you can see, we deduce QM (and QFT and Standard Model too), Special Relativity and General Relativity (i.e. Gravity) from AWT in a simply way. It can be shown that all physic known to date is particular case of AWT ;-).

Zephir said...

../*if your theory could explain E8 Garret theory too*/...
Mr. Garett’s E8 group model can be derived from Aether theory as well. Lie group is not just void geometrical structure. It’s root system is describing the tightest structure of kissing hyperspheres (”unparticles”), where the kissing points are sitting at the centers of another hyperspheres, recursively. The Aether Wave Theory proposes at least two dual ways, how to interpret such structure.

The cosmological one is maybe easier to realize: it considers, the current Universe generation is formed by interior of giant dense collapsar, which behaves like black hole from outer perspective. This collapse was followed by phase transition, which proceeded like crystallization from over-saturated solution by avalanche-like mechanism. During this, the approximately spherical zones of condensing false vacuum have intersect mutually, and from these places the another vacuum condensation has started (a sort of nucleation effect). We can observe the residuum of these zones as a dark matter streaks. The dodecahedron structure of these zones should corresponds the E8 group geometry, as being observed from inside.

The second interpretation of E8 is relevant for Planck scale, i.e. for outer perspective. The dense interior of black hole is forming the physical vacuum, which is filled by spongy system of density fluctuations, similar to nested foam. Such structure has even a behavior of soap foam, because it gets more dense after introducing of energy by the same way, like soap shaken inside of closed vessel. Such behavior leads to the quantum behavior of vacuum and particle-wave duality. Every energy wave, exchanged between pair of particles (i.e. density fluctuations of foam) is behaving like less or more dense blob of foam, i.e. like gauge boson particle. Every boson can exchange its energy with another particles, including other gauge bosons, thus forming the another generation of interacalated particles.

Therefore the E8 Lie group solves the trivial question: which structure should have the tightest lattice of particles, exchanged/formed by another particles? And such question has even perfect meaning from classical physics point of view! Such question has a perfect meaning in theory, describing the most dense structure of inertial particles, which we can even imagine, i.e. the interior of black hole.

Zephir said...

Thank you all for your interest about AWT. Further questions concerning the AWT can be answered in "real time" here in specialized (and noncenzored) public forum here:

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=27167

This blog was visited very rarely, so I didn't checked it too often.

curious-awt said...

Prof. Zephir

Thank you very much for you response. I also think that AWT is the correct theory of everything. Unfortunately, there is a lot of excepticism on this theory in the physics community. The origin of this reticence is none other but the Cophenage Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (also call the Orthodox Interpretation). The Cophenage Interpretation tell us that our better knowledge of the physics reality is only probabilistic. It is a completely misunderstood. I am not saying that the Orthodox Interpretation is wrong. I'm just saying that it is unfinished. Great physicist like Einstein try to finalize this task using the hidden variables theories. Despite many physics laughed him, he continued to work towards the unification of the basic concepts of physics. But many of them stopped laughing when David Bohm construct the first hidden variables theory. Namely the Bohmian mechanics (also known like de Broglie-Bohm theory) . In Wikipedia is said:

"The Bohm interpretation can be thought of as taking its cue from what one sees in the laboratory, say, in a two-slit experiment with electrons. We can see localized flashes whenever an electron is detected at some place on the screen. The overall pattern made by many such flashes is governed by a pattern closely matched by simple wave dynamics. Bohm and de Broglie posited that in the world of quantum phenomena, every kind of particle is accompanied by a wave which guides the motion of the particle, hence the term pilot wave."

AWT is a concrete realization of Bohmian mechanics. AWT also is a great breakthrough in the correct way. Indeed, Bohmian mechanics was unable to explain the gravity interaction unlike AWT. I think that Zephir's insight about AWT can lead us toward the final answer. His main breakthrough in this matter are:

1) The concrete realization of Bohmian mechanics.
2) The unification of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity in a self-consistency theory.
3) Zephir showed us that moderm physics is a different interpretation of classical physics. And he showed us that the classical physics arises from the classical geometry.

Thanks to Zhepir the Einsten's dream can be achieved. Prof. Zephir is the great Czech physicist of XXI Century.

Thanks Prof. Zephir :-).

curious-awt said...

Prof. Zephir,

Sorry for my poor English, I am from Spain and I don't speak English very well.

But the important thing is that today is a great day:

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=Vlci-kCEaKE&feature=related

;-).

Zephir said...

My English is even much worse..;-) Anyway, I can read your posts quite well. BTW I'm not professor (I've only gymnasium teaching qualification) and technically I'm not even physicist, because the science isn't my profession, just a free time hobby.

The probabilistic interpretation of quantum physics isn't really necessary, because we know about deterministic analogies of quantum phenomena already - for example double slit experiment. They can show us, how the QM is really working and how it can be modeled by particle field.

http://www.physorg.com/news78650511.html

curious-awt said...

Zephir,

No matter if you are not porfessor, even better. Many physics schools (i.e. universities) only accept an orthodox point of view on the physics. We are living in a dark age of the physics. Unfortunately in this Middle Age many excellent ideas are burned. There are many great physicists that they are forced to do physics in a orthodox way. If they follow other way then they are forced to leave his academic positions.
On the other hand, I disagree that you aren't a physicist because you have had an excellent idea to construct the TOE. And you are much more advanced than other physicists who they are in the higher academics positions at the better Universities. This situation is not the first time that happens as everyone know. And the best physicists left the orthodox way and they developped many of their best ideas, for example

- Michael Faraday, in Wikipedia is said:

/*Although Faraday received little formal education and knew little of higher mathematics, such as calculus, he was one of the most influential scientists in history
(...)
Near the end of his career Faraday proposed that electromagnetic forces extended into the empty space around the conductor. This idea was rejected by his fellow scientists, and Faraday did not live to see this idea eventually accepted. Faraday's concept of lines of flux emanating from charged bodies and magnets provided a way to visualise electric and magnetic fields. That mental model was crucial to the successful development of electromechanical devices which dominated engineering and industry for the remainder of the 19th century*/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday

Zephir, Let me remind you that Faraday was one the best Physicists in the history.


- Your compatriot, Ernst Mach in wikipedia is said:

/*'In theoretical physics, particularly in discussions of gravitation theories, Mach's principle (or Mach's conjecture[1]) is the name given by Einstein to a vague hypothesis first supported by the physicist and philosopher Ernst Mach. The broad notion is that "mass there influences inertia here". This concept was a guiding factor in Einstein's development of the general theory of relativity. In many respects, this is a true statement in the general theory. However, because this principle is so vague, many distinct statements can be (and have been) made which would qualify as a Mach principle.'
(...)

Albert Einstein seemed to view Mach's principle as something along the lines of:

"...inertia originates in a kind of interaction between bodies..." */

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle

Ernst Mach said:

/*"In mentally separating a body from the changeable environment in which it moves, what we really do is to extricate a group of sensations on which our thoughts are fastened and which is of relatively greater stability than the others, from the stream of all our sensations.
Suppose we were to attribute to nature the property of producing like effects in like circumstances; just these like circumstances we should not know how to find. Nature exists once only. Our schematic mental imitation alone produces like events."*/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Mach

- James Clerk Maxwell, in wikipedia is said:

"Maxwell did not however find his classes at Edinburgh very demanding, and was able to immerse himself in private study during free time at the university"

- Albert Einstein, in wikipedia is said:

/*Youth and schooling
(...)
During this time, Einstein wrote his first scientific work, "The Investigation of the State of Aether in Magnetic Fields".[9]
(...)

Patent office
(...)
During this period Einstein had almost no personal contact with the physics community.
(...)*/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_einstein

So, I think that you are a superb physicist, too.

At this moment I am trying to found a mathematical background to AWT. I am trying to model the aether fluid in a 12D Riemannian manifold and I'm trying to explain the diffusion of aether in this space by means of Laplace-Beltrami operator. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion [Brownian motion on a Riemannian manifold]

For the details.

But I need know your point of view. Maybe I am misunderstood the AWT.

As thanks for your contributions let me:

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftd8tIdiYq4&feature=related

Manuel de Falla was a Spanish composer.

Zephir said...

/*..I am trying to model the aether fluid in a 12D Riemannian manifold..*/

As the AWT is quite common, it doesn't use any particular metric or number of dimensions. So you can start the AWT modelling by particle fluctuations of fluctuations... in just 3D dimensions providing every particle can move in any arbitrary direction freely.

The number three of dimensions follows from the geometry of particle packing (just 3D hypersheres can achieve most compact surface packing) - not from some postulates.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/HyperspherePacking.html

It means, in the nested field of colliding particle fluctuations just the 3D fluctuations and their interactions will be prefered, because they can lead to the most effective geometry with respect of the energy spreading via surfaces.

Zephir said...

Remark on energy density of vacuum

http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.3381

Zephir said...

Reference to Oliver Lodge early work about dense aether concept

Zephir said...

Ernst Haeckel coined the term “dysteleology” to describe the idea that the universe has no ultimate goal or purpose.

Zephir said...

Why substance-views are attractive tools also for modern physics - Supporting abstract relational space-time as fundamental without doctrinism against emergence

Zephir said...

The AWT is based on the Occam's razor principle: the more general some theory should be, the lower number of postulates it should use. The minimal number of postulates is, the Universe is random inertial matter of unparticle character of nested density fluctuations of infinitesimally dense Boltzmann gas (aka dense aether model of Robert Hooke and Oliver Lodge), the observable part of which is driven with wave equation in infinite number of dimensions.

Zephir said...

Richard Feynman  “The next great awakening of the human intellect may well produce a method of understanding the qualitative content of the equations.”

Zephir said...

Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University, had this to say about ether in contemporary theoretical physics:
"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." [Laughlin, Robert B. (2005). A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down. NY, NY: Basic Books. pp. 120–121. ISBN 978-0-465-03828-2.]

Zephir said...

Early Atomic Models - From Mechanical to Quantum (1904-1913)
The mechanical atoms of J. J. Thomson
Rings of Saturn and ethereal vortices
A corpuscular theory of matter
he number of corpuscles in the atom

Zephir said...

"Nature, it seems, is the popular name/ for milliards and milliards and milliards/ of particles playing their infinite game/ of billiards and billiards and billiards." -Piet Hein

Zephir said...

According to Mathematician from Harvard University (who doesn't want to publish his name since he doesn't want his E-mail to be "spammed") Science is built upon the axiom "0 exists". But we don't and cannot define 0 or {}. In the same way, in AWT the question of universe origin has no good meaning, because the Universe can be naturally only in random state, not a zero or any other ad hoced particular state invented with people from Occam razor perspective.

Zephir said...

Condensed matter (dense aether) model for the standard model of particle physics: Schmelzer, I.: A Condensed Matter Interpretation of SM Fermions and Gauge Fields,

arXiv:0908.0591
, published in Foundations of Physics, vol. 39, nr. 1, p. 73 – 107 (2009),
DOI: 10.1007/s10701-008-9262-9

Zephir said...

"A generalization of the Lorentz ether to gravity with general-relativistic limit", arXiv:gr-qc/0205035, published in Advances in Applied Clifford Algebras 22, 1
(2012), p. 203-242
;