Aether Wave Theory

Why Scientific 'Truth' So Often Turns Out Wrong.

2011-01-04T20:06:00.000-08:00

This post is motivated with John Allen Paulos's article The Decline Effect and Why Scientific 'Truth' So Often Turns Out Wrong.

In AWT this phenomena can be of real emergent nature and it manifests itself with switching of intersubjectively accepted opinion into dual perspective, whenever the density of facts increases up to certain level. It's analogous to dispersive spreading of waves at the water surface, which is switching its character with distance from longitudinal into transverse waves and back into longitudinal waves again. It corresponds the layered fractally nested character of Universe and observable reality.

For example, from terrestrial perspective the epicycle model of solar system appears relevant. With increasing scope this model has been replaced with heliocentric model but now the evolution of galactic arms can be described with epicycle model again. It's just the number of observable objects, which makes epicycle or heliocentric model more relevant.

After all, the acceptation/refusal of aether model is of the same emergent evolution. Before some time old Greeks believed in Aether, later (Newton) this concept has been replaced with concept of absolute space. In 19th century the aether based models were quite popular again, but they're were replaced later with relativity model of space-time. Now the aether model is returning into physics again with model of Higgs field, which is responsible for particle mass.

The emergent character of observable reality can be understood by example of compression of gas, which is changing into fluid or even solid during this. The density fluctuations of newly formed phase are behaving like another generation of gas particles and when the compression continues, they're condensing and changing into nested fluid phase and solid again. The newly formed phase is embedded into previous generation of matter and this process can be repeated many times.

I presume, the same evolution occurs during pilling and condensation of facts into theories in hyperdimensional causal space. I Czech we have a proverb: "Stokrát nic umořilo osla" which roughly means "A hundred times nothing killed the donkey". The meaning of this proverb is, even the smallest chores are tiresome (if there is too many).

Global warming and galactic superwaves

2010-12-05T11:45:00.000-08:00

CfA astronomer Doug Finkbeiner, together with two of his students, Meng Su and Tracy Slatyer, used NASA's Fermi Gamma Ray Telescope to study the diffuse gamma ray emission. They revealed humongous bubbles of high energy emission protruding about 50,000 light-years above and below the galaxy, and centered on its nucleus. Recently, it was confirmed independently from IBEX observations, the Sun going to enter soon a million-degree galactic cloud of interstellar gas.

At the time of this prediction, astronomers believed that the cores of galaxies, including our own, become active ("explode") about every 10 to 100 million years and stay active for about a million years. Since our own Galactic core presently appears quiescent, they believed it would likely remain inactive for many tens of millions of years. Although in 1977, astronomer Jan Oort cited evidence that our Galactic core has been active within the past 10,000 years. In Ph.D. dissertation, Paul LaViolette hypothesized that galactic core explosions recur about every 10,000 years and last for several hundred to a few thousand years. He was the first to suggest such a short recurrence time for galactic core explosions and that our own Galactic core undergoes Seyfert-like explosions with similar frequency. In 1983 Paul LaViolette presented evidence to the scientific community indicating that galactic core explosions actually occur about every 13,000 - 26,000 years for major outbursts and more frequently for lesser events. The emitted cosmic rays escape from the core virtually unimpeded. As they travel radially outward through the Galaxy, they form a spherical shell that advances at a velocity approaching the speed of light.

LaViolette's research suggests that the Sun also became highly active as dust and gas falling onto its surface induced extreme flaring activity. Together with the radiation influx from the Sun's dust cocoon, this caused the Sun's corona and photosphere to inflate, much as is observed today in dust-choked stars called "T Tauri stars." These various solar effects caused atmospheric warming and inversion conditions that facilitated glacial growth which brought on ice age conditions. On occasions when the solar radiation influx to the Earth became particularly high, the ice age climate warmed, initiating episodes of rapid glacial melting and continental flooding. There is evidence that one particularly tragic solar flare event occurred around 12,900 years ago during a period when the Sun was particularly active. This involved the release of an immense coronal mass ejection which engulfed the Earth and induced a mass animal extinction. Details of this scenario are described in Paul LaViolette's book Earth Under Fire as well as in a series of journal articles he has published. Astronomical observations show the last major Galactic core explosion occurred as recently as 10,000 to 15,000 years ago.

LaViolette has an analysis of this evidence of a superwave event on his blog (YT video). The geometry of the bubbles coincide with a superwave event occuring approximately 26000 years ago, which is supported by evidence in the ice core record. Data obtained from polar ice core samples show evidence of this cosmic ray event as well as other cosmic ray intensity peaks from earlier times.

Do galaxies shrink with time?

2010-11-28T04:25:00.000-08:00

Albeit Universe is expanding seemingly (Hubble 1929), the astronomers have found recently, the galaxies are actually shrinking with time. Because a true galaxy-size increase would be incompatible with standard cosmology, if not with the laws of gravity, authors indicate the presence of systematical errors in Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Albeit I do believe, this finding is actually consistent with particle dispersion model of Universe expansion, in which objects smaller then the wavelength of CMBR are expanding with time, but the objects larger then the CMBR wavelength are collapsing instead in analogy with capillary wave dispersion at the water surface.

In accordance with this model many phenomena related to red shift actually disappaer for CMBR wavelengths (CMBR photons cannot disperse with itself). Shrinking of galaxies is therefore consistent with AWT model of surface ripples dispersion at the water surface and with time symmetry of omnidirectional Universe expansion, predicted with AWT. The Universe should expand seemingly in light shorter then the wavelength of CMBR, which is known as a red shift (Hubble 1929).

In light of wavelengths larger then CMB wavelength a blue shift and attenuation of light with distance should be actually observed. The attenuation of distant radio source with distance has been already observed, too. Last July, US astronomers announced surprising results from a high-altitude balloon experiment called ARCADE-2, which had made careful measurements of the sky at radio wavelengths. The background radio emission, which is the component smoothly distributed across the whole sky, was several times brighter than anyone was expecting.

Aether Wave Theory cannot predict the absolute value of the gain observed in this moment - but it predicts, at the wavelength of CMBR this gain should be zero, which is what has been actually observed. Actually it's just a consequence of fact, for structures larger then the wavelenght of CMBR the gravity dominates over quantum effects (pressure of CMBR), so that such objects are collapsing. Because these objects are observable only with light of comparable wavelength, the Universe should appear collapsing, when being observed in radiowaves.

Regarding blue shift of radiowave source, it has been observed possibly, too as a Pioneer maser anomaly (compare the LaViolette's blueshifting prediction). Blue shift is notoriously difficult to observe, because of lack or reliable reference sources of known frequency (hydrogen vibration spectra of remote sources are absorbed heavily with interstellar gas). But some man-made objects are already remote enough to observe blueshift with artificial sources of radiowaves.

It means, the time arrow is actually violated, our Universe doesn't travel through time in one direction. One half of Universe expands due the pressure of radiation and its entropy increases. The second part (this one larger then ~2 mm) collapses with its gravity instead and its entropy goes down.

Clever individuals do not make the group smarter

2010-10-03T07:10:00.000-07:00

This post is a reaction to the recent article (more details) in which individual brainpower contributes little to collective smarts. Instead, it’s social awareness -- the ability to pick up on emotional cues in others -- that seems to determine how smart a group can be.

When we write something new in internet discussion, we just get negative voting usually, because people aren't prepared to get new generally valid information from individuals at all. Instead of this, the more irrelevant and widespread is the internet meme in your answers, the higher score you get - because it's considered "witty". Actually you're just repeating things, which most of people are already expecting to listen unconsciously. Most of people don't expect to hear some revolutionary ideas at all - instead of this, they're feeling confounded, if not confused when being confronted with them. It should be pointed out, the poor language skills are making the sharing of emotions much more difficult, then the sharing of logical information. In addition, socially successful people tend to ignore logical arguments.

In another words, if you want to convince people for something clever or good, you have to manipulate them for it emotionally... Emotions, emotions, emotions...

Unfortunately it works in both directions, as Joseph Goebels knew already.

Actually, in dense aether theory a rather simple wave spreading model can be applied to this situation. This model renders human society like particle system, where every particle exhibits it's own surface gradient of information density, i.e. the intelligence. Theories, i.e. well accepted paradigms of human thinking correspond the density gradients at the water surface and the intelligent ideas are corresponding causual, i.e. tranverse waves in causual space, similar to ripples at the water surface. The emotional feelings correspond the longitudinal waves instead, similar to underwater sound waves.

The underwater waves are weaker but they're spreading in much faster way - whereas surface waves tend to bounce from every gradient of information density (i.e. intelligence). Very bright people are behaving like black holes in this model - they're collecting all informations freely, but their experience cannot be shared easily, because of total reflection mechanism at their surface gradient of intelligence density. With compare to it, very dumb people are behaving like mirror-like bubbles with respect to transverse waves instead: they're empty and they're even reflecting all causal information coming from outside.

A well known kind of symmetry between formal (IQ) and nonformal intelligence (EQ) exists here, though: dumb people are often quite sensitive emotionally and they can be manipulated easily in this way, whereas logical argument doesn't count very much for them. Instead of it, formally bright people are rather emotional nuts and they lack EQ and social skills often - compare the Sheldon Cooper character from The Big Bang Theory sitcom.

The only way, in which black hole can radiate it's information to outside is the gravitational waves, which appear like Howking radiation. This mechanism is relatively subtle though, which explains, why really intelligent ideas are propagating slowly to the rest of society. Nevertheless, they can be supported with sufficiently emotional propaganda. For example, string theory (which is actually quite incomprehensible for laymans) is promoted with shots of beauty violinists in play at Nova TV show.

Should journalists second guess the scientific truth?

2010-09-27T04:58:00.000-07:00

This post is a reaction to recent article of Lubos Motl of the same name. It's not surprising, Motl supports his restrictive stance, regarding the rights to expression of private opinion from the side of journalists. But we shouldn't neglect the fact, with respect to climatic science Lubos is just an educated journalist like everyone else and he violates his own rules flagrantly, because he is trying to influent public meaning massively all the time. He is just trying to dispute rights of journalists to the same activity, which he dedicated most of his time - and because he uses Google Adsense on his blog, he's even earning some money for it like professional journalists.

In general, opinion of experts matters from intrinsic perspective only. But just because experts are specialized to narrow area of their private interest, they're not overmuch qualified in judging of their opinions in wider context - on the contrary, they tend to occupy their stances rather blindly - the more, the more they feel being an experts in given area. In this context the reading of articles The era of expert failure by Arnold Kling, Why experts are usually wrong by David H. Freeman and Why the experts missed the crash by Phill Tetlock (in Czech) may be useful not only for Lubos Motl.

Niels Bohr: "An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field".

Higgs boson and fourth generation of quarks

2010-07-17T05:43:00.000-07:00

This post is inspired by recent blog post of Tomaso Dorigo, who announced finding of Higgs boson with mass of about 150 GeV. By official media coverage it's just a rumour, that's got out of hand, as expressed by Fermilab's spokes'girl. More interestingly is, what's behind this rumour - and I don't mean over imagination or exploding ego of Mr. Dorigo, as Fermilab's Twitter post implies spitefully. Or do you really believe, Fermilab would give its official stance through Twitter? Such anonymous message is even much less reliable, then the original blogpost of Mr. Dorigo. But such way of prematurely presentation of results and their vetoing indicates, how mainstream physics maneuvers between less or more opened tendency to announce findings as soon as possible for the sake of publicity and/or grant support ex una parte - and the demonstrative expression of conservative skepticism on the other hand.

IMO Higgs boson is the same fuzzy unparticle stuff, like the virtual bosons responsible for Casimir force - their effective mass depends on surface geometry. Just at the case of Higgs boson the upper bound is limited by mass of top quark, so it can form a fuzzy signal, corresponding the dilepton channel of top quark decay, which was observed already. If even more massive quark exists, then its corresponding Higgs should indeed exist too and the whole concept of unique "God's particle" becomes fringe.

Mr. Dorigo himself putted the nail into coffin of Higgs boson by his previous announcement of fourth generation of quarks in 450 GeV range. Before finding of neutrino oscillation, the Standard Model contained 19 arbitrary dimensionless constants describing the masses of the particles and the strengths of the electroweak and strong forces. After the discovery of neutrino mass the new Standard Model requires 26 fundamental dimensionless constants, whose numerical values are, to the best of present understanding, arbitrary. Currently Standard Model is indeed incompatible with fourth generation of quarks or neutrinos, but thanks so high number of constants flexible enough to implement even higher particle generations. It's sort of regressive epicycle model keeping the Ptolemaic physics of modern era alive.

We can say, this finding is of approximatelly the same relevance like the previous finding of Higgs boson anounced (about three sigma in error level). And quess what? In this time the blog article was handled by NewScientist quite seriously and it got full coverage in media. The whole trick here is, most of physicists actually do not believe in concept of Higgs boson on background - despite the massive propaganda in CERN related media, the main purpose is to justify expensive experiments at LHC.

The title of recent another NewScientist article "In SUSY we trust: What the LHC is really looking for" (full version) illustrates clearly, physicists are aware of the conceptual problems of Higgs field concept. The article should be interpreted like: "Uhm, well, ... we actually don't believe, Higgs boson will be ever found at LHC - so we should concentrate to supersymmetry instead. ."

With respect to AdS/CFT duality the success or problems with particle search at Planck scale will be replicated/mirrored at cosmological scales (WIMPs detection) and vice-versa. Therefore it's not so strange, when dual situation recently appeared in media, when scientists started to speculate, (primordial) gravitational waves cannot be found at all due the "quantum-spread", which would render detectors of gravitational waves useless in the same way, like the LHC at quantum scale.

This is an example, how seemingly spontaneous scientific PR is basically working - layman public should trace subliminal messages of it for to get the realistic picture about opinion of this close sectarian community in the noise of PR journalism and propaganda.

Is the Universe Leaking Energy?

2010-06-20T00:36:00.000-07:00

This post is an reaction to recent ScientificAmerican article, in which the idea of mass/energy conservation law for Universe at large scales is impeached.

In Aether Wave Theory (AWT, dense aether theory) Universe is completelly random stuff, similar to nested dense fluctuations of hypothetical dense gas (aether) and its energy content is basically stable at large scales. The red shift in visible light should be compensated with blue shift for radio waves in analogy to dispersion of light at the water surface, i.e. nothing really expands, neither is losing its energy in fact. This doesn't mean, laws of Universe are 100% valid - the Universe just appears like random noise at both quantum, both cosmological scales - so we cannot observe any trend in it at sufficiently global scale.

Because the effect of Universe expansion compensates with contraction just at the wavelength about 2 cm (human observer scale), we're observing the lack of dark energy and dark matter phenomena just during observation of Universe in microwaves (compare the post about cosmological time arrow and reddit comment).

Quantum theorist explaining gravity is an ox(y)moron

2010-06-19T02:28:00.000-07:00

This post is an reaction to ArXiv blog article New Quantum Theory Separates Gravitational and Inertial Mass. A typical problem with theoretical physicists is that they think that by presenting an alternative interpretation of a contradiction one can remove the contradiction.

Equations of quantum theory cannot describe gravity at all - on the contrary. By Schrödinger equation all wave packets of free particles should expand into infinity, not to collapse by gravity. We cannot switch 1 = 1 to 1 = -1 by any causal math because quantum theory reverses time arrow of general relativity.

In AWT we can reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics in two main ways:

By using of particle simulation of nested density fluctuations inside of very dense gas. At the certain level of condensation the resulting solution inside of dense particle clusters would become close to general relativity, while the solution of outside them would become close to general relativity.
We can solve wave equation in very high number of dimensions. After the solution in inner 3D slice of solution can be compared with quantum mechanics, in outer 3D slice it can be compared with general relativity.

Actually, in AWT the equivalence principle is violated by electrostatic or dipole forces, Casimir force etc. which are acting in extra-dimensions and nothing strange is about it. All these forces depend on different quantities, then just mass.

Higgs boson as an unparticle

2010-02-04T16:52:00.000-08:00

The unparticle concept was proposed by Harward professor Howard Gorgi before few years. AWT introduces unparticles by concept of fractally nested density fluctuations inside of dense gas. For example clouds are scale invariant unparticle stuff, similar to Perlin noise. Recently D. Stancato & J. Terning have proposed unparticle character of Higgs bosone. Prof. Hawking reckons, that a number of "partner" particles will emerge, instead, thus making prof. Higgs upset by his stance.

This is not so difficult to understand, because from common perspective the unparticle hypothesis would effectively mean, no distinct Higgs particle signal will be ever found, until we achieve collider jets, composed of unique particles to demonstrate it - because Higgs field interaction would have a character of kink widespread over ultraviolet part of mass-energy spectrum. Could prof. Higgs deserve Nobel price, if it turns out Higgs boson is just some Unhiggs?

In more illustrative way, Unhiggs field is analogous to coat of virtual quarks, in which all elementary particles are surrounded at small distances. This coat glues particles together at smallest distances. Such unstable particles can still be observed by their collective effects, for example by jet suppression during particle collisions. Just because it's difficult to call them particles they're called an unparticles. It's responsible for so called Yukawa coupling, responsible for pairing and gluing of nucleons and quarks inside of atom nuclei, for formation of top-quark pairs, glueballs, pentaquark and another artifacts, which were observed recently at Tevatron.

From Standard model follows, the product of Higgs boson Yukawa coupling to the left- and right-handed top quarks have nearly the same rest mass (173.1±1.3 GeV/c2) like those predicted for Higgs boson (178.0 ± 4.3 GeV/c2). It means, Higgs boson was observed already at Tevatron as a product of top-quark coupling and identified by dilepton channel of top-quark decay.

In AWT such field exists at all scales and it manifests by Casimir force mediated by virtual photons at micrometer scale, or dark matter at megaparsec scale, for example. It means, Higgs field has a scale invariant character of fuzzy unparticles, which are changing their size accordingly to carrier particles. The combination of trivial and topological band insulators within topological insulators and superconductors is bringing anyons and plektons - unparticles that behave neither according to purely Bose nor Fermi statistics.

The title of recent NewScientist article "In SUSY we trust: What the LHC is really looking for" illustrates clearly, physicists are aware of the conceptual problems of Higgs field concept. The article should be interpreted like: "Uhm, well, ... we really don't believe, Higgs boson will be ever found at LHC - so we should concentrate to supersymmetry, for not being blamed completely before publicity". The question is, whether physicists could admit openly before publicity, LHC is useless with respect to search of Higgs boson even by their own theories, if they wasted so much money in it.

This is a demo, how seemingly spontaneous scientific PR is basically working. Dual situation appeared recently in media, when scientists started to speculate, (primordial) gravitational waves cannot be found at all due the "quantum-spread", which renders detectors of gravitational waves useless. With respect to AdS/CFT duality the success or problems with particle search at Planck scale will be replicated/mirrored at cosmological scales (WIMPs detection) and vice-versa.

The similar U-turn we could expect later regarding estimations of LHC collider safety. The most problematic part of Unhiggs detection at LHC is the strangelet controversy: in contact with terresterial matter it could enable avalanche chain formation of clusters of particles, analogous to stable microscopic black holes predicted by Randall-Sundrum model. Recently A. Choptuik demonstrated, when extra-dimensions are involved, black hole could be formed with compare to existing CERN safety analysis, considering Hawking radiation as the only mechanism of black hole evaporation (1, 2, 3). In addittion, CERN considers, black hole could interact with its neighborhood via gravitational interaction only, thus purportedly neglecting their electromagnetic interaction, which is 10e+41 x stronger.

"Does that mean the LHC will make black holes? Not necessarily", Choptuik says. "The Planck energy is a quintillion times higher than the LHC's maximum. So the only way the LHC might make black holes is if, instead of being three dimensional, space actually has more dimensions that are curled into little loops too small to be detected except in a high-energy particle collision. Predicted by certain theories, those extra dimensions might effectively lower the Planck energy by a huge factor."

Well, if some extra-dimensions could wipe-out one quintillion factor (?!?) of LHC safety expected, can scientists admit, they're openly planning to verify theory, which predicts formation of stable black holes just by formation of black holes at LHC? Could CERN physicists ever admit, it could be qualified as an criminal act by the rest of society?

We should realize, CERN physicists just want to build and operate LHC collider despite of any risk, because it provides them safe and stable jobs and environment for scientific carrier. They're supported in their activities by lobby of private companies involved in technical support of LHC. We could say, high concentration of money in civilization leads to spontaneous formation of dense states of matter in simmilar way, like dense concentration of energy in universe. The desinformed rest of society underestimated these emergent relationships, which resulted into establishing of large groups of people, who are openly ignorant - if not even hostile - to further destiny of civilization.

AWT and CP symmetry violation

2010-01-15T15:41:00.000-08:00

In AWT CP symmetry violation is a consequence of dispersion of energy through Aether foam with increasing number of dimensions. While the energy spread along space-time brane in symmetric way, with increasing mass/energy density the fragmentation of time dimensions occurs. Quantum foam gets more dense with increasing energy density in similar way like soap foam under shaking and it changes itself into foam with small spherical bubbles similar to fluid, which results into collective motion of particles involved. The constituents of quark-gluon plasma are strongly coupled, causing their collective flow. This coupling is basically well known Yukawa coupling, which can be explained by presence of Higgs field. As I explained already here, formation of top-quark pairs can be interpreted like formation of Higgs bosons, which are of the same rest mass and mechanism of dilepton decay channel.

The fragmentation of quantum foam into smaller bubbles leads to fragmentation of time arrows and violation of jet symmetry during RHIC/LHC collisions of heavy atom nuclei. The same fragmentation can be observed near rotating black holes (Kerr solution leads to multiple event horiozons) and polarization of CMB at 40 MPc+ scale. The symmetry violation during jet formation could be explained by omnidirectional space-time expansion during torus spinning - the inner part of ring always rotates faster, so it's dragged into axis direction.

The violation of jet symmetry can be understood as an example of CP symmetry violation, which was observed first at the case of spin polarized and cooled cobalt-60 nuclei (1956), which are emanating electrons in asymmetric way. The same stuff we can observed at the case of jets of black holes (like the famous M87 and Centaurus A, which are asymmetric in similar way, like jets emanated by quark-gluon plasma during collider experiments. The second jet should be formed by jet of supersymetric particles, fotinos in particular. The absorption of jet demonstrates, how easily the QG plasma can be feeded by matter under formation of strangelets or even black holes.

In this connection it may be significant, CMB cold spot is unpaired too (if the observable Universe is formed by black hole, we could see through polar jet into hyper-universe). The observed parity violation of galaxies and CMB Doppler anisotropy should be correlated to CMB cold spot direction, too. Because jets of black holes are exaggerated example of gravity brightening, we could observe CP symmetry violation by difference of polar temperatures and curvatures at the case of giant rotating stars, too. In this connection it's interesting too, even Earth globe has a pear shape, which deforms Earth ellipsoid by elevation of about two hundred meters at north pole. It's interesting, Christopher Columbus considered it in 17th century already, while promoting westward voyage to Cathay (China) or Zipangu (Japan).

Is light of pulsar spreading in superluminal speed?

2010-01-15T12:58:00.000-08:00

This post is a reaction to recent PW article Pulsar bursts move 'faster than light'. It's not true, this phenomenon was described in an astronomical object first - the same effect was disputed before years for motion of bright areas in jet of M87 galaxy, where it has supposedly the same explanation. As a dense aether proponent I appreciate readers, who are trying to think "out of box" - but in this case, this particular observation has really nothing to do with Aether and "violation of Lorentz symmetry" - but with peculiar way, in which light of pulsars propagates through environment filled by particles of interstellar gas. The animation bellow illustrates it by computer simulation:

This phenomena is related to way, in which light is propagating through so-called metamaterials. The uncertainty about exact source position is the reason, why we cannot talk about information exchange between observer and object, because the amplitude of light travels through interstellar gas in noncausual way. After all, it's not wave itself (group velocity), but an amplitude of light (phase velocity), which is traveling here by superluminal speed in analogy to motion of laser spot along surface of moon. The supersonic sound wave "spreading" was observed during spreading of ultrasound pulses through dense polystyrene dispersions in water, too.

A more intriguing question could be, whether longitudinal component of CMB noise - i.e. superluminal gravitational waves could be interpreted by analogous dispersion of light waves on Higgs field forming vacuum. In this moment I'm unable to decide, whether such perspective is relevant to reality and if it could lead to some new testable predictions. It could be somehow related to so called block-universe concept, by which reality in motion occurs by inhomogeneous spreading of information through Aether lattice at rest - which I personally consider biased toward atemporal perspective of Universe.

Lie E8 group and quantum criticality

2010-01-12T11:14:00.000-08:00

Exceptional Lie E8 group shot to fame in 2007, when the US freelance physicist Garrett Lisi posted a paper on the arXiv preprint server suggesting that E8 could map out all known particles and their mutual interactions. However a well before in 1988 the Russian physicist Alexander Zamolodchikov showed that E8 symmetry could also describe the spectrum of spin excitations that occur in 1D Ising ferromagnets. Radu Coldea of Oxford University and colleagues at the Helmholtz Zentrum Berlin (HZB) have measured the energies of several of these quasiparticles by cooling the cobalt niobate to 40 mK and firing neutrons at it. When the experiment was done at zero magnetic field, five quasiparticles were spotted. Their energies are described by a mathematical formula derived three decades ago by Barry McCoy and Tai Tsun Wu.

Density of magnetic domains increases with increasing magnetic field in simmilar way, like density of gas fluctuations under pressure. At certain moment, the nested density fluctuations are formed in similar way, which we can observe during condensation of supercritical vapor. As the strength of the field was increased to the quantum critical value of 5.5 T, the ratio of energies of the first two quasiparticles approached 1.618. This number is the "golden ratio" and is precisely what should be measured if the quasiparticles are described by E8 – a prediction that was made more than 20 years ago by prof. Zamolodchikov.

As explained previously by concept of quantum foam, root system of E8 Lie group solves trivial question: "Which structure should have the tightest lattice of particles, formed by energy exchange of another particles?". And such question has perfect meaning even from classical physics point of view! Such question has a perfect meaning in theory, describing the most dense structure of inertial particles formed by energy exchange between another particles, which we can ever imagine, i.e. the interior of black hole, which is forming the vacuum. Therefore it's not so strange, both one of heterotic string theories, both Garretts E8 theory is dealing with E8 group and Horava's theory deals with quantum critical point. The animations bellow are illustrating, how most compact particle packing is related to golden mean ratio observed in critical point. By AWT the E8 is based on the geometry of most compact packing geometry possible and most dense particle packing happens when packing density along surface and volume becomes exactly balanced.

Golden mean ratio is closely related to densest particle packing in similar way, like the E8 group geometry. We can expect, certain random arrangement of particles is more compact, then another ones, so energy spreads in slowest way and the cosmic space appears largest in it. In natural systems golden mean minimizes the surface/volume ratio, i.e. it defines most effective object packing in situations, where many particles are involved. In such objects energy spreads in slowest possible way (because they're so compact), which means, these objects are most stable and atemporal, i.e. they're of highest fitness and they can survive easier. Human brain is just an engine for particularly slow but atemporal energy spreading (i.e. without dispersion). Solitons (not just those in human brain) consist of waves, where frequency and energy of components follows golden mean ratio, too. Evolution is analogous to travel in dispersive environment, so we can imagine particles and planets as a most compact solitons, which survived the travel through CMB noise in most successful way.

The most compact arrangement or repulsing particle corresponds so called Wigner phase inside of cold plasma crystals. Another system, which could exhibit E8 symmetry are nested density fluctuations, which occurs inside of condensing supercritical vapor temporarily. During this the nested density fluctuations of mutually repulsing particles should be formed, which leads into compact structure of kissing hyperspheres, described just by root vector system of Lie's E8 group.

We can apply the above principles to area of scientific research too. Research follows both information spreading along well defined gradients/surfaces of knowledge, i.e. formal theories, both intuitive holistic thinking through bulk of knowledge independently to existing theories (so called "crackpottery", but I rather call it a "mutations" in evolution of knowledge). After then the most effective strategy is just the approach, where the formal and intuitive approaches are balanced in golden mean ratio. So we shouldn't expect, only blind combinations of equations will lead to some TOE fast - intuitive insights and ideas are important here, too.

AWT and cellular automata model

2010-01-12T09:04:00.000-08:00

This post is a reaction to recent NS article 'I'm an information pack rat', which deals with personality of Stephen Wolfram. But who first had the idea that the universe is a cellular automaton? Konrad Zuse? Edward Fredkin? Certainly not Stephen Wolfram. Apparently it's not the first case of foreign ideas "packed" by Wolfram [Jim Giles, Nature 417, 216 - 218 (2002)].

In 1969 Konrad Zuse published a book called Rechnender Raum (translated later as "Digital space") theorizing, that the universe was a cellular automaton. Juergen Schmidhuber discusses this on his website: Zuse's Thesis: The Universe is a Computer, that Konrad Zuse had the idea that the universe is running on a grid of computers as early as 1967. On the other hand, Plamen Petrov, being unaware of Zuse's work at the time, earlier dubbed this idea Fredkin's Thesis. Recently Schmidhuber observed, "Even earlier, Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (who not only co-invented calculus but also built the first mechanical multiplier in 1670) caused a stir by claiming that everything is computable". Although it's clear, that Leibniz did not formulate the notion of a cellular automaton as such.

On the other hand, apparently Wolfram does not intend to imply that the universe is a classical cellular automaton--at least if you read the fine print. In the Notes for Chapter 9 on pages 1026 and 1027 of his book Wolfram does acknowledge the work of Zuse and Fredkin in a single sentence. Then he goes on to say that "no literal mechanistic model can ever in the end realistically be expected to work." I take this to refer to classical cellular automata. In his usual modest way he says, "...what must happen relies on phenomena discovered in this book--and involves the emergence of complex properties..."

It is not the first time that Wolfram has annoyed complexity researchers, who feel that he routinely fails to recognize the contributions made by others. "He tends to acknowledge people in two-point type," says one researcher. Indeed, A New Kind of Science lacks conventional references to prior work - although scientists and mathematicians including Cook are acknowledged in the book's notes section.

No doubt, Stephen Wolfram is reinnnesance personality of modern era. But I don't share ideas concerning cellular automata model of reality - in my opinion the appearance of Universe follows from principles of energy & information spreading in completely random particle system, i.e. it's randomness at its very very best. The problem of Stephen Wolfram is, he is overspecialized and biased to complexity perspective - so I'm perceiving his ideas as abstract and ad-hoced. After all, completely random Universe requires less strong postulates from Occam's razor perspective.

But we still could understand such stance from perspective of Simillia simillibus observatur theorem of AWT: every expert tends to see Universe in the light of its own specialization. Relativist would see it relativistic, aetherists like me would see it through particle field and computer scientist and mathematician would see it as a huge simulation or cellular automata model. It's logical, because every density fluctuation of Aether would interact with another fluctuations, which are similar in shape, size, energy density and so on.

Does gravity not exist on behalf of holografic memory?

2010-01-10T20:45:00.000-08:00

This post is a reaction to recent article On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton of dutch theorist Erik P. Verlinde. Albeit Verlinde is string theorist, his finding has basically nothing to do with string theory and it's logical connection to holographic model proposed is extremely vague here. When random gas exhibits entropic behavior, it still doesn't make it a hologram, some memory the less and it requires a huge portion of fantasy to interpret it in such a way.

Maybe string theory or holographic theory are related to entropy quantity in some abstract way (albeit I can see nothing entropic in their postulates with exception of vagueness) - but the connection of Aether gas concept to entropy is still much more straightforward and transparent (entropy quantity original derivation was based on Boltzmann gas concept). This is simply how analogy differs from vague homologies: by absence of additional manifolds in causal space.

"Starting from first principles and general assumptions Newton's law of gravitation is shown to arise naturally and unavoidably in a theory in which space is emergent through a holographic scenario. Gravity is explained as an entropic force caused by changes in the information associated with the positions of material bodies. A relativistic generalization of the presented arguments directly leads to the Einstein equations. When space is emergent even Newton's law of inertia needs to be explained. The equivalence principle leads us to conclude that it is actually this law of inertia whose origin is entropic".

If it smells like entropy, and it behaves like entropy, it's probably a Boltzmann gas...;-) We simply cannot have an abstract entropy quantity existing as such without underlying physical system (usually inertial particle gas or fluid), which maintains the laws of statistics. Emergence is just another postmodern word for ancient Aether model, described by gas (thermodynamics) or by fluid (hydrodynamics) models. Eric expressed it unvillingly in interview with the newspaper de Volkskrant:

"On the smallest level Newton's laws don't apply, but they do for apples and planets. You can compare this to pressure of gas. Molecules themselves don't have any pressure, but a barrel of gas has."

The same, just more vague conclusion former string theorist Lubos Motl got on his blog:

"I find it somewhat unlikely that "bulk physics" may be really derived without any "bulk physics".

While Motl's intuition was exceptionally right in this particular case, the above approach is exactly, what the string theory or quantum gravity did all the time (the formal strings or quantum loops, i.e. Aether density fluctuations are the same temporal aspect of dense gas behavior, like entropic character of energy shielding, i.e. the gravity). We should realize, comments of Mr. Motl aren't Aether theory motivated in any way - but by fact, Verlinde's rather insightful work has nothing to do with string theory. Mr. Motl just feels some competition of his pet string theory in the air. But the true insights concerning formal entropy models of elementary particles were achieved before few years in GUITAR theory of Quantoken.

Concerning "Newtonian physics", Newton believed, gravity force is indirectly proportional to distance with compare to R. Hooke, who claimed the inverse square law on background of former Alhacen's work. Just the Aether model of Newton's friend Nicolas Fatio de Duillier convicted Newton to change his opinion on behalf to inverse square law - we can see, Newton's physical intuition was far not so brilliant, as it's believed usually. Duillier's model was later extended by Le Sage and so far we have no other working theory of gravity based on physical, i.e. not completely abstract ad-hoced model, separated from observable reality.

The apparent inability of physicists to distinguish trivial particle system beneath all these noble abstract ideas about thermodynamics, entropy and emergent holographic scenarios is striking. Even worse, it's a sort of modern religion or political decision - supposedly the both. Other extrapolations of this work assigned to Verlinde (?):

"Gravity does not exist. The whole universe is a giant holographic memory that gets more and more filled with data as time evolves. This filling of the cosmic memory we interpret as gravity. What if the memory gets full? Than you find yourself in a black hole."

are bringing logical questions, whether these ideas are really consistent with present model of black hole as a physical singularity or whether gravity doesn't apply to interior of black hole, or whether it can not exist something, which we can measure reliably. After all, such naively abstract ideas separated from reality are typical for both many formal theorists of present era, both their layman interpreters.

Universe and the rainbow of black holes

2010-01-09T19:58:00.000-08:00

The substantial portion of AWT analogies is based on geometrical convergence of low-energy and high energy density phenomena. Recently metamaterial foam models of vacuum gained a popularity, thus sopporting the AWT model. Concept of foam is quite general in AWT and it can bring a most general understanding of things like rest mass of photon and dependence of photon dynamic mass to wavelength, CPT symmetry breaking and general appearance of the observable Universe.

In AWT foam structure is an emergent result of incoming light dispersion by field of CMB fluctuations (i.e. gravitational waves) and as such it depends on observational perspective - the more, the more is distant from local human scale. From AWT perspective Universe is quite random environment, and extremely low portion of energy can spread through it in pure transversal way, thus raising the existence of causal observational perspective of human creatures. This perspective is sampling the causal portion of Universe in such way, it ignores dispersion of radiation nearly completely.

In real life such perspective corresponds the observation of heavy rain, where droplets get so densely arranged, they could be considered a foamy system consisting of mixture of density gradients with both positive, both negative curvatures. This geometry corresponds the geometry of density fluctuations inside of dense gas or supercritical fluid, the structure of CMB noise and the graviton foam expected in early Universe (in AWT graviton foam is the CMB noise observed from sufficiently distant perspective - compare the Big Bang model of AWT).

Under normal circumstances, the outer surfaces of rain droplets with positive curvature are more pronounced, so that normal dispersion prevails and one rainbow is formed. But at the case of heavy rain the anomalous dispersion on inner surfaces of rain droplets becomes dominant and the secondary rainbow is formed.

Between primary and secondary bows the dark Alexander's band is formed. This dark are is named after Alexander of Aphrodisias, who first described it. It occurs due to the deviation angles of the primary and secondary rainbows. Both bows exist due to an optical effect called the angle of minimum deviation. Light which is deviated at smaller angles than this can never reach the observer. The minimum deviation angle for the primary bow is 137.5°. Light can be deviated up to 180°, causing it to be reflected right back to the observer. Light which is deviated at intermediate angles brightens the inside of the rainbow. The minimum deviation angle for the secondary bow is about 230°. The fact that this angle is greater than 180° makes the secondary bow an inside-out version of the primary. Its colors are reversed, and light which is deviated at greater angles brightens the sky outside the bow.

From AWT perspective the observation of primary rainbow corresponds the observation of large massive body, white hole surface in particular. The secondary bow corresponds the inner surface of foamy streaks of dark matter, consisting mainly of antimatter particles, heavily expanded during inflation. This perspective renders dark matter streaks as a symmetric phenomena of black hole surfaces. The Alexander band with no apparent dispersion itself corresponds the observation of space-time brane (a "transparent window"), forming cosmic space from insintric perspective. This model explains, the dispersion is restricted to narrow band, forming the physical surfaces of massive bodies, so that vacuum appears basically dispersion-less, but it appears dark (Olbers' paradox) at the price.

The absorption and refraction coefficients are related by Kronig-Kramers equations, named in honor of Ralph Kronig and Hendrik Anthony Kramer. By these equations dispersion is volume phenomena of longitudinal waves and refraction the product of surface gradients, where transversal waves are involved. These functions are dependent to dimensional scale (i.e. wavelength) and phase shifted by half-period in causal space due the Lorentz/Wick rotation. Because hypersphere surface is first derivation of its volume, it basically means, dispersion curve is first derivation of absorption spectrum.

This simple dependence explains the symmetry breaking observed inside of our gradient driven reality, because the minimal speed (the position denoted by red circle on the above graph) of transversal energy spreading in dispersive spreading isn't exactly symmetric to position of absorption maximum. The requirement of minimal speed of transversal wave spreading follows from nearly infinite size of observable Universe. This effectively mean, symmetry violation is a consequence of the large space-time observed via density fluctuations of inhomogeneous environment and we can observe these fundamental connections even during rainy weather.

Is dark matter of large gallaxies supersymmetric to black holes?

2010-01-09T19:49:00.000-08:00

This post is a reaction to recent NS article "Missing dark matter mystery in small galaxies". It's well known, large galaxies and galactic clusters are relatively abundant to dark matter with compare the smaller ones. This finding could have certain meaning in AWT cosmology, in which large gallaxies were formed by evaporation of central black holes, whereas smaller ones were formed rather by accretion (i.e. by classical mechanism with respect to contemporary cosmology). Another ideas presented in connection with this model was dark star origin of gallaxies and the shielding effect of dark matter. This effect is understandable with respect to AWT mechanism, because of large content of antimatter considered in dark matter, which could have antigravity action at large distances. Presence of heavily ionized atom nuclei trapped makes dark matter detectable by X-ray telescopes, like Chandra.

It would mean, dark matter is in fact super-symmetric effect of black holes inside of galaxies. Without presence of central black holes the galaxies cannot contain material particles around it, because of no evaporation. This idea could have some meaning in holographic theory of Universe, too. This could explain both absence of dark matter outside, both black holes outside of small galaxies.

But the whole subject is still quite speculative in this moment and additional observational data are required. Recently Hubble has found another evidence of dark matter presence near small galaxies. This study demonstrated, that the low-velocities of stars observed around dwarf galaxies are infact compatible with galaxy formation in dark-matter haloes. Stellar orbits in the outer regions of the resulting elliptical are very elongated, which can explain the observed velocities even in the presence of large amounts of dark matter.

AWT and theory of human conscioussness

2010-01-09T06:31:00.000-08:00

This post is a reaction to recent NS article "You won't find consciousness in the brain". In AWT perspective human brain is essentially a condensate of consciousness. This is because every atemporal particle exhibits a traits of conscious behavior: they're moving accross density gradient of vacuum while sniffing for another density gradients via gravitational force/waves like for food, while avoiding the anti-gravity (pressure of radiation). In similar way bacteria or protozoa are following the density gradients of chemical energy concentration, while avoiding heat and another dangers. Analogously, human brain maintains number of solitons, i.e. selfreinforcing wave packets, which are spreading through it like particles of observable reality, which they simulate in advance - so we can say, human brain is sort of simulator of quantum foam, which manifest itself by foamy structure of dark matter at large scale. Therefore it's nothing strange, structure of neurons in simmilar to structure of dark matter streaks and the wavelength of neural solitons (so called human scale) correspond the wavelength of CMB radiation, into which is adopted for by "Similia simillibus observatur" principle.

The insintric property of solitons is, they're making their foamy environment more dense in similar way, like soap foam condenses under shaking temporarily. By Schrodinger equation the mass density of quantum string is proportional by its energy in each space and time interval by E=mc2 equation. You can play with this quantum wave aspect of foamy environment behavior by using Java applet hereing. So when two or more solitons met together, the third soliton will use this place preferably.

By recent studies neural solitons are sound waves supported by electrochemical activity of neural cell membranes. The membrane potential contracts the membrane, which is in elastic liquid crystal state. After sound wave arrival the membrane potencial is discharged by diffusion of ions via ion channels and the membrane surface follows a self reinforcing wave, i.e. a soliton. The whole process repeats itself in ~100 Hz cycle.

At the case of highly nonlinear neurons of vertebrates the foamy, extradimensional character of sound wave propagation is forced by internal structure of microtubules in analogous way, in which soliton character of signal in modern hollow-core optical cables is maintained. These fibers served for recent demonstration of quantum phenomena, like event horizons of black holes and Hawking radiation. It means, neuron wave is spreading like evanescent wave in this environment through whole diameter of neuron, thus increasing its nonlinear character under slowing of neuron speed at the price. This mechanism requires to keep temperature of nerves in a quite close range (corresponding the Lifshitz point of quantum criticality), where the liquid crystal nature of membranes is maintained. The cold blooded marine invertebrates are using different strategy and they're increasing speed and eliminating dispersion of solitons by huge diameter of neurons.

By excellent Hebbian theory of synaptic plasticity this aspect of soliton behavior is represented by principle "cells that fire together, wire together". When one cell repeatedly assists in firing another, the axon of the first cell develops synaptic knobs (or enlarges them if they already exist) in contact with the soma of the second cell. In this mechanism the principle of associative learning and long-term memory is realized. The process of synapses building is maintained during REM phase of sleep, because its based on dream simulation, where perceptions from outside are suppressed due the strong positive feedback of learning phase. In this way, our brain is gradually becoming terminal board hard-wired for optimal solutions of individual problems, represented by preferred paths of soliton spreading. Maybe the artificial W.I.K.I brain from famous I, robot movie isn't the matter of so distant future.

Schrödinger 1958: A physical scientist does not introduce awareness (sensation or perception) into his theories, and having thus removed the mind from nature, he cannot expect to find it there.

Mainstream physics and Cargo Cult science.

2010-01-01T23:12:00.000-08:00

From Richard Feynman’s “Cargo Cult Science” (also included in Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!):

"There have been many experiments running rats through all kinds of mazes, and so on–with little clear result. But in 1937 a man named Young did a very interesting one. He had a long corridor with doors all along one side where the rats came in, and doors along the other side where the food was. He wanted to see if he could train the rats to go in at the third door down from wherever he started them off. No. The rats went immediately to the door where the food had been the time before.
The question was, how did the rats know, because the corridor was so beautifully built and so uniform, that this was the same door as before?
Obviously there was something about the door that was different from the other doors. So he painted the doors very carefully, arranging the textures on the faces of the doors exactly the same. Still the rats could tell. Then he thought maybe the rats were smelling the food, so he used chemicals to change the smell after each run. Still the rats could tell. Then he realized the rats might be able to tell by seeing the lights and the arrangement in the laboratory like any commonsense person. So he covered the corridor, and still the rats could tell.
He finally found that they could tell by the way the floor sounded when they ran over it. And he could only fix that by putting his corridor in sand. So he covered one after another of all possible clues and finally was able to fool the rats so that they had to learn to go in the third door. If he relaxed any of his conditions, the rats could tell.
Now, from a scientific standpoint, that is an A-number-one experiment. That is the experiment that makes rat-running experiments sensible, because it uncovers that clues that the rat is really using– not what you think it’s using. And that is the experiment that tells exactly what conditions you have to use in order to be careful and control everything in an experiment with rat-running."

The similar mistake was done before 130+ years when comparing Michelson-Morley experiments concerning light spreading in vacuum to spreading of waves in material fields. By using of these experiments was deduced, vacuum doesn't behave like material field, because it doesn't exhibit a reference frame for motion (in fact it does it via weak Lense-Thirring effect in Aether density gradients and/or various supersymmetry phenomena due space-time expansion - but this is another story). But the conditions of both experiments weren't equivalent. The observation of light wave spreading by using of light waves in Michelson-Morley experiment is NOT an equivalent of observation of material wave by using of light waves, because two kinds of waves are involved in later experiment with compare to former one.

In such way, mainstream science did the similar mistake when interpreting M-M experiment, like Mr. Young did, because these two experiments weren't done in analogous way, i.e. under consistent arrangement. The physicists just believed, they're doing analogous experiments in similar way, like native people engaging in imitative behavior of "cargo cult". Only one person in Einsteinian era was supposedly capable to spot the difference, i.e. Oliver Lodge - but his opinions were widely ignored both by aetherists, both by mainstream science due his tendency to occultism and paranormal phenomena in his later age.

Anyway, it's crazy situation - at least from present perspective of the future of science history..

Don't Blame Cows for Climate Change

2009-12-12T14:35:00.000-08:00

Global warming (GW) is well proven complex of climate changes, which manifests mainly by increase of area of deserts and by glacier melting in latest 50 - 70 years.

Because thermal capacity of oceanic water is at least 5.000x higher, then this one of atmosphere, global mean temperature of atmosphere is much less relevant, then the global mean temperature of ocean. And this temperature is still raising in accordance to increase of carbon dioxide concentration, despite the weak slow down of warming of atmosphere in recent decade.

Other phenomena, like increase of global temperature of atmosphere aren't so relevant for GW, because they undergo El-Nina / El-Nino cycle and solar cycle due the wobble of center of mass in Sun-Jupiter system (because mean solar cycle is faster then Jupiter period, it's probable, some other planets are affecting it, too). The center of mass controls the direction of global current of plasma beneath surface of Sun, which affects the frequency of sun spots (i.e. magnetic bubbles in plasma, raising to surface) and solar eruptions. The charged particles of solar wind penetrating the atmosphere of Earth are serving like condensation nuclei of fog and snow and they're making Earth surface more reflective.

The effect of ocean heating is not so straightforward. In general, it increases the number of convective cells in our atmosphere and frequency of their switching in similar way, like during heating of water in open vessel. Note that this change increases continental character of the weather, so that above continents the global warming may even lead to temperature records on both sides of temperature scale.

At the moment, when convective circulation switches from horizontal to vertical, an ice age period may occur, because Earth becomes intensively cooled. This is forced by hysteresis, because snow-white surface of Earth becomes more reflective at the same time. Just after cooling of oceans (which takes some time due their thermal capacity) the warm period is restored. Here are some indicia, the start of ice age can be very fast (compare the disaster movie Day after tomorrow) and period of fast paced global warming had preceded this event in younger dryas period, so maybe we are facing ice age soon.

Concerning the hypothesis of man made global warming, it's proven statistically, people are making weather warmer and drier on per week basis (1, 2), so no further evidence is necessary - we can just extrapolate these weekend fluctuations to decades of years. During last warming periods the rise of carbon dioxide followed warming with delay of many decades with compare to present situation - so we can see this argument of many skeptics rather as another evidence for man-made origin of global warming. In addition, we can consider for example September 11, 2001 climate impact study. Measurements showed that without contrails, the local diurnal temperature range (difference of day and night temperatures) was about 1 degree Celsius higher than immediately before.

In my opinion, human activity started irreversible process, which couldn't be reversed so easily due the hysteresis described above. Nevertheless, we should save money from carbon dioxide taxes for faster research of alternative energy sources to replace fossil fuel as soon, as possible. This would be useful with respect to both prevention of ice age period, both prevention of another rise of carbon dioxide concentration. Carbon dioxide dissolves the shells of coral and plankton, thus destroys the fishing grounds and diversity of biosphere.

But the main risk of fossil fuel depletion is the global nuclear war for the rest of their sources. It's generally ignored, the reason of the recent oil & food price crisis was always lost USA war. These wars are very expensive and at the case of global nuclear conflict the things would get even way, way worse.

Concerning the rise of carbon dioxide, assigned to farming of poor countries, often neglected point is, many animals are able to collect proteins from life environment more efficiently, then the agricultural plants by using of solar radiation, because they can consume even the plants growing in wild, which people cannot. Which is the reason, why people in rain forests, deserts or arctic areas are feeded by meat preferably - the farming of moose is apparently more economical and therefore ecological(!) there, then the growing of plants.

For example, for production of rice it's required 2552 m³ of water/ ton rice, whereas for production of one ton of poultry 3809 m³ of water its required. Therefore the consumption of poultry may sound like ineffective waste of water for someone - but the content of proteins in rice is ten times lower, then in chicken meat! This explains, why people from deserts in Chad or Mongolia are living from pasturage, instead of agriculture. I even suspect, farming is more ecological then the agriculture as a whole, providing it doesn't use agricultural products (which usually does). Methane released by cows on pastures is negligible with compare to amount of methane, released by annual decomposition of plants without cows.

"Those who do not think about the future, do not deserve to have one."

AWT and cyclic evolution

2009-12-12T04:02:00.000-08:00

This post is an reaction to recent study of thousands of species of plants and animals, which suggests, that new species may arise from rare events instead of through an accumulation of small changes made in response to changes in the environment. This is basically an emergent mechanism of AWT, so we can find many analogies of this finding in both social, both physical systems.

It's well known, human society is evolving "in circles", too. Many human inventions (Antikythera machine and gear mechanism), theories (plenum or Aether theory) or social arrangement (the constitution and voting systems) were forgotten and reinvented and subsequentially abandoned later again. We can see it as an analogy with spreading of energy in particle system, for example in ripples at water surface, which transforms gradually from longitudinal (Brownian noise) into transversal (capillary waves) and back into longitudinal (gravity waves) again.

A dual model consist in nested particle condensation: the effects of tiny density fluctuations are cumulating in emergent way, until it transforms into new homogeneous phase, in which density of fluctuations increases gradually until it forms nearly homogeneous phase in which... etc... Note, that we can observe a dark matter or supersymmetry phenomena here: the chaotic portion of quantitative models can ofter serve for formulation of new qualitative models and vice versa in simmilar way, like electric field transforms into magnetic one and back again during light wave spreading through vacuum.

This transform corresponds incident structure of Leaky Quantum Gravity (LQG) theory related to Möbius transform, which is isomorphic to restricted Lorentz group - so if Universe or black hole appears like doughnut, it becomes broken in symmetry (i.e. sliced) in recursive way of Möbius strip of Klein bottle. We can met with this geometry in Möbius strip structure of electron or inside of atom nuclei in structure of hadrons (see the previous post). In archetypal and sacred geometry we can met with this concept in Ouroboros archetype (based supposedly on Cordylus giganteus scink observations).

For example, mainstream physics is now in the phase, when the number of various theories developed in formal models in rather ad-hoced way increased above critical level, so that new meta-theories started to emerge. These meta-theories are now in their protoscience state like vague density fluctuations forming inside of dense gas - but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water too soon, because the formal approach apparently reached its limits. We can call it an informational singularity, but I'd prefer rather gradualistic view of this process, in which phase-shifted boundaries of both formal, both non-formal approaches are fuzzy and they traveling together in duality like zone of crystallization through block universe (1, 2), or - even better - like the light wave spreading through vacuum.

The model of EM wave spreading is consistent with Red Queen Theory of co-evolution, based on constant evolutionary arms race between competing species. For example the high number of insects or deep sea species can be explained by adaptation to predators or parasites, which are specialized to its prey, where we can find many examples of co-evolution. During this genotypes oscillate over time in waves phase-shifted by their half-period, as if they were "running" in circles and informational event horizons are formed in accordance of paleobiological theory of punctuated equilibrium. It means, from local perspective we can see certain steps in gradualist evolution, which corresponds nested phase transforms in AWT.

This model has its analogies in social systems, too. Frozen plasticity theory (article in Czech), which is based on game theory and selfish gene model considers, only portion of population can evolve freely, after certain time it becomes unable of further evolution and after catastrophic change it will not survive. This character of evolution, which occurs when natural conditions are changing fast (as the result of impact of asteroids, global volcanic or man-made fossil fuels burning activity) could be explained by reservoir of sleeping genes in so called the "junk" DNA", which are activated in poor life situation of organisms (i.e. infection by virulent agents), where horizontal gene transfers via RNA takes place.

The basic point here is, "junk" DNA is not junk at all, but it doesn't serve for production of proteins, but various RNAs, which are serving both like enhancers or suppressors of transcription of proximal genes, which are used by immune system for production of antibodies, for example. This is particularly because fylogenetic evolution is too slow to accommodate changes in life environment, represented by various infections and parasites. We can expect, at the very beginning of fast-paced organic life, whole genetic variability was represented just by RNA, as DNA is more advanced stuff. This flexibility can explain Lamarckian offspring of fast adaptation to large infections or environmental catastrophes.

Because these events can repeat, we can find many traits of cyclic evolution in repetitive occurrence of many genes observed in "junk" DNA. Recently, experimental results by Gariaev et al indicate that some, and perhaps important, aspects of genetic regulation are mediated at a quantum level (1, 2 - possibly via quantum mirage mechanism).

AWT and quark model of hadrons

2009-12-12T01:18:00.000-08:00

Using precise data recently gathered at three different laboratories and some new theoretical tools, Gerald A. Miller, a UW physics professor, has found that the neutron has a negative charge both in its inner core and its outer edge, with a positive charge sandwiched in between to make the particle electrically neutral.

This finding can be explained easily by particle model of AWT, in which more energetic/massive down-quarks (3.5–6.0 MeV/c2) are concentrated bellow up-quark (1.5–3.3 MeV/c2) near the center of neutron, like inside of gravitationaly coupled Eefimov state of three massive bodies of different mass, predicted in 1970. We can consider it a quantum gravity effect at low scale - compare the AWT's knot model of neutron and proton. The same structure, just inverse one is relevant for proton, where uncompensated isospin charge of up quarks manifests itself by electrostatic charge at distance.

Efimov states exists on every dimensional scale, for example inside of hadrons and boson condensates or superconductors. Note, that Efimov trimer state becomes flat, when all particles involved are of the same mass - so its responsible for fractional Hall charge (quantum Hall effect) in thin layers of graphene or Hahn purpur BaCuSi2O6, where path of electrons is geometrically degenerated (frustrated) into flat structure by external magnetic field. Analogously, higher - just less stable/probable - Efimov state exist in four-body systems of boson condensates.

Efimov trimers are analogy of chaotic double pendulum, the rods of which are mediated by gravity force (N-body problem). It just illustrates the limits of formal math to describe even conceptually quite simple systems, which belongs into realm of Aether theory and must be solved by particle simulations in iterative/recursive way.

Does weak equivalence break down at the quantum level?

2009-12-08T16:40:00.000-08:00

This post is motivated by PhysOrg comment of article Light-pulse atom interferometry in microgravity. It's surprising, how deeply scientists are surprised by fact, pair of dual theories (relativity and quantum mechanics) are inconsistent mutually. Especially if they know already, these theories are giving quite different predictions, concerning energy density of vacuum or cosmological constants. I mean different in more than one hundred orders of magnitude.

Weak equivalence is indeed violated by Casimir force, which is proportional to cross-sectional area of massive objects instead of their mass, so that equivalence principle of general relativity doesn't apply here / and no large speculations are required about it, question marks the less.

This insight basically means, quantum scale begins at Casimir force scale, which roughly corresponds the wavelength of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), which roughly corresponds the size of transversal waves inside of human brain. Photons of CMB are manifestation of gravitational waves, which are of longitudinal character, so that their shielding resulting in Casimir force is proportional to cross-sectional area (compare the Duillier/LeSage theory of gravitation). Note that the violation of equivalence principle is manifestation of violation of dimensionality of 4D space-time, i.e. the manifestation of extradimensions and nonzero rest mass of photon at the same moment. This force is in fact supersymmetric effect of relativity, i.e. the quantum mechanics effect, too.

AWT and supersymmetry

2009-11-13T16:33:00.000-08:00

This post is motivated by recent New Scientist article about possibility to validate string theory by observation of s-tauons, or another supersymmetric particles. But such interpretation is not exact, as 4D space-time superalgebra was first discovered by soviet physicists Yuri Gol'fand and E. Likhtman, who extended the Poincaré algebra into a superalgebra and discovered supersymmetry in four spacetime dimensions in 1970 (published in 1971) together with Akulov-Volkov (1971/72) independently to string theory. At the same year, in 1971 Pierre Ramond, André Neveu and John Schwarz develop a string theory with fermions and bosons and Gervais and Sakita recognized a version of 2D world-sheet supersymmetry in the new fermionic string theory, i.e. supersymmetry algebra in two dimensions. This led to Wess and Zumino rediscovering 4D supersymmetry in 1973 (consider this concise review of SUSY history). In general, superalgebra is spinor extension of quantum mechanics, which can be incorporated into whatever else quantum field theory including Standard Model and LQG (for example, Lee Smolin promoted it for advanced version of loop quantum gravity LQG II) - which effectively means, it cannot serve as an evidence of whatever particular theory, including large group of various string theories.

In context of AWT, supersymmetry is special stuff, it shouldn't be mixed with symmetry as such. We can observe it at water surface, just in quite limited scope. At the water transversal surface waves (so called capillary waves) are dispersing gradually, thus changing itself into longitudinal waves (so called the gravity waves - don't confuse it with gravitational waves, albeit they've similar nature in AWT). We can see, how undulation in one plane shears in complex way, until it becomes undulation in perpendicular complex plane. This rotation is closely related to Poincaré transforms in relativity and Wick rotation in quantum mechanics and Weyl spinors in Cartan composite geometry.

Whereas waves in one plane could be considered as a bosons, the another waves resulting from dispersion are fermions and vice-versa. Note that the dispersion is symmetric with distance scale around distance scale of CMB wavelength - the very small waves of Brownian noise are longitudinal too! Therefore we can postulate general gauge group, which transforms bosons into fermions and vice-versa, infinitely on both sides of dimensional scale. In real world SUSY gauge symmetry remains broken heavily due the dispersion and subsequent lost of information, though - so we can observe only few members of it. More illustratively, you wouldn't see very much of longitudinal waves at water surface, while observing it via transversal waves and vice versa.

If the surface waves couldn't disperse into density fluctuations of water, then the bosons and fermions (energy and matter carriers) would be destined to forever remain distinct. But in 1975 Haag-Lopuszanski-Sohnius theorem named after Rudolf Haag, Jan Lopuszanski, and Martin Sohnius pointed out, that if one allows anticommuting operators as generators of the symmetry group, then there is possibility of unification of internal and space-time symmetries. Such a symmetry is called supersymmetry by now and it constitutes a large part of current research into particle physics. It means, SUSY is just another case of Aether dispersion phenomena at short scales.

In addition, supersymmetry gauge group is closely connected with E8 Lie group and famous Lissi Garret's E8-theory: 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 intercalated s-particles. After then the E8 Lie group solves the nontrivial question: "Which structure should have the tightest lattice of particles, exchanged/formed by another particles?".

In AWT supersymmetry could be based on idea, inside of gradient driven reality every gradient has its mass. When we pile a huge amount of lightweight particles, such pile would have a larger mass, then the simple sum of original particles, because it creates more pronounced gradient of mass density/space-time curvature along surface of resulting pile. The difference can be assigned to virtual particles, whose nature depends on the composition of original clusters. For example surface waves on large droplet of neutrinos will be formed by so called neutralinos. If we broke resulting cluster, we wouldn't find them in their individual state, as they evaporate into gravitational waves, i.e. tachyons.

The same result follows from relativity theory as well, if we think a bit about it. From GR follows, every curvature of space has it's own energy density - this is basically, what Einstein's field equations are about. But as we know from E=mc^2 formula, every energy density can be assigned to its corresponding mass energy density, which should exhibit it's own additional gravitational field and resulting additional curvature of space. This idea can be applied ad infinitum onto resulting solution, which would make relativity recursively nested, implicit theory of geometrodynamics. The supersymmetry concept is just a small distance scale application of the above implicit property of general relativity. It could be demonstrated, analogous recursive principle can be applied to quantum mechanics too - and resulting fractal foam solution would be quite similar and forming general solution of quantum gravity.

Aether is not supposed to replace quantum and/or relativity religion. In addition, there are many concepts and models, which could be derived from Aether concept in a much more straightforward way, then just SUSY concept. It took me some time, when I realized, what the SUSY is all about. In this way, SUSY theory is achievement of mainstream physics - although Aether concept could help in its understanding substantially. SUSY theory has it's analogies even in context of biological sciences. Specialized parazites and predators could be considered as s-particles related to host organisms in process of energy dissipation. Whenever political situation changes, a new social layer of people emerges. These people are following newly formed gradient of energy density, thus blocking its further evolution, as they're playing for himself preferably. These conjunctural zealots have antigravity behavior and their fanaticism discourages another people, who could be interested about new idea - despite of how useful it could be. It's analogy of dark matter particles, which surrounds large particle clusters (strangelets) or galaxies, thus repulsing ordinary matter on behalf of antimatter.

In AWT supersymmetric particles are surface waves of rather large dense clusters of ordinary particles, which are stabilized by their surface tension. For example, inside of neutron stars neutrons are stabilized against their decay into protons and electrons by huge hydrostatic pressure. But the same pressure exists inside of atom nuclei, which is behaving like tiny dense droplet. It's well known, inside of tiny water droplets high pressure exist due the surface tension of high surface curvature. In this way, the dense clusters of elementary particles can be stabilized against its decay in similar way, like inside of quark stars made of strange matter and they can merge with another particles of ordinary matter into another strangelets via avalanche like mechanism. IMO top quark Yukawa coupling used for Higgs boson detection, nucleons pairing inside of atom nuclei, observation of pentaquarks, glueballs and/or indicia of tetraneutron formation are all stuff of the same category and it could be attributed to SUSY. Recent spooky observation of muon pairs formation well outside of collider tube at FermiLab could serve as an indicia of formation of strangelet and/or s-muons as well.

For example, dark matter is generally believed to be composed of so called WIMPs, some of which are supposed to be supersymmetric particles, predicted by SUSY. But such s-particles must remain very stable to be able to form dark matter - and we didn't observe them in accelerators yet. This is strange, especially in connection to arguments, LHC is indeed safe, because much more energetic cosmic rays doesn't form s-particles, too. Many people argument the risk of black holes formation in LHC by fact, cosmic rays can be way, way more energetic - and we still didn't find any trace of black hole during cosmic ray events yet. But this argument can be reversed easily. If the long-lived s-tau does exist, it should already have been found in secondary cosmic rays. It hasn't, so it probably does not exist - or the LHC safety argument is wrong...;-) Why we are expecting the formation of s-tau in LHC, after then?

Tauon particle is ultraheavy lepton, composed of pair of strange quarks (1/3 and 2/3 of electron charge). Analogously to muon, it could catalyze high temperature fusion of lithium and beryllium atom nuclei - so it was proposed for explanation of seemingly missing lithium problem in Big Bang model. This prediction means, if we collect sufficient amount of tau particles, the resulting cluster of tauons could survive for minutes, thus becoming strangelet. AWT proposes an explanation, based on dense droplet model of strangelet formation. Cosmic rays are always individual particles, mostly protons - whereas LHC jet is dense stream of particles, enabling pilling of particles and formation of microscopic black holes and strangelets. Energy density isn't the only criterion of strangelet formation here - the particle mass density and their collision geometry plays a significant role here too. BTW IMO there are better adepts for strangelet formation, composed of neutral and more stable particles, then just tauons (compare the recent observation of muon pairs in FermiLab, which could be attributed to s-muons).

The problem with s-tau s-particle is, its strangelet should be very stable, being formed by heaviest dense leptons known so far - but the precursor (i.e. tauon) is extremelly unstable stuff. The optimal approach should balance the stability of both strangelet, both its precursors. From this perspective s-muon is a better candidate for SUSY detection and in fact it was observed already in form of spooky muon pairs well outside of collider tube on Tevatron before year - i.e. in simmilar way, like top-quark pairs in 2008, which could serve as an evidence of heavy Higgs. As we can see, formal theory is one thing - the understanding, where to look for its confirmation is another one. Interesting point of these extrapolations (predictions of postdictions) is, I'm foreshadowing the future interpretation of the past events. Couldn't it be an example of situation, in which future affects the past - which was predicted by some quantum theorists recently (compare the critique here)?

AWT connection of SUSY to strangelets brings another problem to popular dark matter models: WIMPS particles are forming surface waves of these droplets - so they shouldn't exist independently to these strangelets. If dark matter is full of WIMPS, it should contain many strangelets as well. Such models really exists for example in context of string theory: Randall-Sundrum braneworlds models considers existence of primordial microscopical black holes, which could play a role of strangelets here. But strangelets aren't very stable in general and currently the only stable strangelets known so far are atom nuclei. So we can expect, dark matter contains atom nuclei in accordance to Alfen's plasma universe model and WIMPS models of dark matter are BS - or strangelets aren't related to AWT model in any way. As we can see, there's still a lotta strange concerns about SUSY.

SUSY is quite general geometrical concept, which could be expressed in proverbs: "Ne quid nimis" (Nothing in excess) or "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" (El infierno está empedrado de buenas intenciones) and it has many social and political analogies. It means, when we advance in technology too fast, we can surpass our social and moral ability to handle it. After then the technology wouldn't help us - on the contrary. We should always ballance practical pros and negatives. In contemporary level of technology and life environment pollution we should orient into cold fusion or room superconductivity research ASAP, because it can save us from geopolitical crisis resulting from fight for remnants of fossil fuel supplies and consequences of global warming droughts. In this moment, LHC research is expensive and dangerous luxury, which can be achieved in much more safe and effective way in cosmic space. In addition, we could save money for vacuum pumps, refrigerators, magnets keeping particles at curved path, isolation against noise, etc...

The stance of contemporary science seems to be quite irresponsible for me. Scientists are like children, who want their toy just now - although they've no idea, how to use it and how dangerous it really may be. We already collected large enough list of experimental evidence, we are rather close to point of spontaneous strangelet formation of many particle types from gluons or quarks to neutrons. In this way, the success of human civilization lead by mainstream science in SUSY detection could become its very last achievement in the same moment.

Can Time-travelling Higgs sabotage the LHC?

2009-10-16T03:23:00.000-07:00

This post is motivated by recent paper by H. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya and related NewScientist article and New York Times essay, in which organized effort in finding of Higgs boson would be inherently predestined to become unsuccessful in laws of thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. Article proposes an explanation, why USA Congress stopped the funding for the USA's SSC in 1993, and why the LHC itself suffered an embarrassing meltdown shortly after starting up last year just by this aspect of time travel behavior. This story illustrates in such way, in contemporary science every nonsense can be promoted, providing its supported by formal math, thus evading the accusation from crackpotism, which obligued some formally thinking bloggers to vindicate this generally accepted difference between speculation and crackpottery. Anyway, as the result of ongoing discussion, arXiv has reclassified related papers to "less serious" General Physics section.

The problem of commonly used reasoning of physical models by abstract math and/or even computer simulations is indeed in violation of causal hierarchy, in which formal models are always based on predicate logics, not vice-versa. Therefore if underlying model is proven logically wrong, then the whole formal derivations based on it becomes wrong as well - as the destiny of some formally brilliant - though logically missunderstood models has demonstrated clearly (hollow Earth theory, geocentric model of epicycles, interpretation of luminiferous Aether model by Michellson-Morley experiments, etc..). In Aether theory Higgs model plays no significant model of casual background, because AWT assumes, there are infinitely many levels of space-time compactification, which manifests in real world by may complex high dimensional interactions inside of complex ecosystems, like Borneo jungle or human society. Constrained string theory models of twelve or twenty six dimensions cannot be considered as ultimate causal background of Universe from practical reasons, Higgs boson background of Standard Model the less, because observable world is apparently more rich and dimensional, then these models are considering.

In addition, Higgs model is too vague to be considered seriously, because it has more then single formulations: Higgs model in classical physics is based on different phenomena, then Higgs-Anderson model in boson condensates and its technical derivation consists in a mere reshuffling of degrees of freedom by transforming the Higgs Lagrangian in a gauge-invariant manner. Well known "hierarchy problem" implies, that quantum corrections can make the mass of the Higgs particle arbitrarily large, since virtual particles with arbitrarily large energies are allowed in quantum mechanics. Therefore in my opinion physicists are just mixing various concepts and mechanisms mutually at each level of physical model derivation from phenomenological to formal one, which leads effectively in prediction of many types of Higgs bosons of different rest mass and behavior, thus making such hypothesis untestable.

We are facing this conceptual confusion clearly at the moment, when mainstream physics presents some discrete predictions about Higgs boson. Each particle that couples to the Higgs field has a Yukawa coupling, too. The mass of a fermion is proportional to its Yukawa coupling, meaning that the Higgs boson will couple to the most massive particle. This means that the most significant corrections to the Higgs mass will originate from the heaviest particles, most prominently the top quark. From Standard model follows, the product of Higgs boson Yukawa coupling to the left- and right-handed top quarks have nearly the same rest mass (173.1±1.3 GeV/c2) like those predicted for Higgs boson (178.0 ± 4.3 GeV/c2). We can compare the way, in which Higgs is supposed to be proved and detected at LHC:

And the way, in which formation of top-quark pairs was evidenced and detected already at Fermilab:

Because the observation agrees well both in Higgs mass, both in decay mechanism expected, it basically means, Higgs boson was observed already as a dilepton channel of top-quark pairs decay and no further research is necessary, investments into LHC experiments the less from perspective of evidence of this particular Higgs boson model - which indeed falsifies the above hypothesis of Nielsen & Ninomiya as well. Of course, conflict of many research interests with needs of society keeps these connections in secret more effectively, then every model of time-traveling Higgs thinkable can do. In another way, physicists didn't recognize the duality of heaviest particle of matter (top quark) and Higgs boson in similar way, in which they didn't recognize the duality of most lightweight photons and gravitational waves at the opposite side of energy density spectrum.

This stance is nothing very new in contemporary physics, which often looks for evidence at incorrect places, while neglecting or even refusing clear evidence from dual view of AWT. We can compare it to search for event horizon during travel into black hole, while it's evident from more distant/general perspective, we crossed it already. The "unsuccessful" research for luminiferous Aether, while ignoring dense Aether model is the iconic case of this confusion, but we can find many other analogies here. For example, scientists are looking for evidence of Lorentz symmetry violation and hidden dimensions by violation of gravitational law, while ignoring Casimir force, or they trying to search for gravitational waves, while filtering out noise from detectors, just because they don't understand their subject at transparent, intuitive level.

Apparently, additional cost of research and general confusion of layman society is the logical consequence of this collective ignorance, while it keeps many scientists in their safe jobs and salaries in the same way, like mysticism of Catholic Church of medieval era - so I don't believe in comprehension and subsequent atonement in real time.

Rachel Bean: GR is probably (98%) wrong

2009-10-12T21:04:00.000-07:00

This post is motivated by recent finding of Rachel Bean, who found, various WMAP, 2MASS, SDSS, COSMOS data concerning the Sachs-Wolfe, galaxy distributions, weak lensing shear field, and the cosmic expansion history doesn't fit general theory of relativity (GR for short). The reactions of Sean Carroll and/or Lubos Motl are careful, as someone may expect : "well, this could be challenging - but probably irrelevant, because GR has proved itself so many times, but the science should care about such details, mumbojumbo..."

Jeez - but how GR was derived before eighty years? This theory puts an equivalence between curvature of space and spatial distribution of energy of gravitational potential, as borrowed from Newton's theory (because we really have no better source for function of gravitational potential with distance, then the forty years old gravitational law). So, if we know the mass of object, we can compute the spatial distribution of potential energy, so we can compute the spatial distribution of space-time curvature - end of story (of GR). Or not?

Not at all, because from the very same theory follows, energy density is equivalent to mass density by E=mc^2 formula - so we are facing new distribution of matter in space, which should lead into another distribution of space-time curvature and energy of gravitational potential curvature, which leads to another distribution of matter, and so on - recursively. Such implicit character of GR was never mentioned in classical field theory of GR and corresponding textbooks - so it's nothing strange, it violates all observations available by now. But it's still prediction of GR postulates and it fits well with fractal implicit character of Universe and AWT - it just requires to derive Einstein's field equations more consequently and thoroughly.

Wow, this could be really breakthrough in physics and challenging task for new Einstein - or not? Of course not - and here we come to real problem of contemporary science - because such approach is fifty years old already and its even used in dark matter theory, in fact. Such modification would lead into quantization of gravity and longly awaited quantum gravity - the only problem for formally thinking physmatics is, it brings a quantum chaos into ordered world of formal relativity too, as there is (nearly) infinite number of ways, how to derive it - and all ways are still only approximations of real situation. The names like Cartan, Evans, Heim, Yilmaz, J. Bekenstein or Rudi V. Nieuwenhove are all dealing with this approach in less or more straightforward form - but this cannot change thinking of incompetent, though loudly blogging people, who invested two or more years of their life into learning of GR derivations, until they become "productive" with it (as measured by number of articles published) - so now they simply have no time and/or mental capacity to understand something new, to extrapolate the less.

Of course it's not just a problem of few desoriented bloggers, but inertia of whole mainstream community, the size of which prohibits introduction of new ideas and which has chosen formal approach to classical theories as a salary generator for their safe life. In this way, every new idea or derivation is simply forgotten, until it's revealed again in another, slightly different connection, when everyone appears surprised, how is it possible, GR isn't working properly?

AWT and gravitational waves

2009-09-29T14:38:00.001-07:00

Concept of gravitation waves (GWs) belongs into subjects, where AWT can bring a substantial insight and testable predictions immediately even from pure qualitative point of view. This is particularly because GWs were subject of controversy from its very beginning before more then fifty years. Even Albert Einstein didn't believe in both black hole concept, both GWs very much (1, 2) and now, after seventy years we still have no direct observational evidence of both phenomena. Who is responsible for it - or isn't whole truth a bit different? AWT proposes a simple explanation of this paradox, following analogy of vacuum with water surface, where transversal light wave corresponds the surface wave and GW's are corresponding the longitudinal waves spreading through hidden dimensions of underwater. This analogy explains too, why we didn't observe gravitational waves already, while ignoring CMB noise in the role of GW's.

This post was motivated by recent articles, announcing null result in search for primordial GWs at frequencies around 100 hertz on LIGO and VIRGO (1, 2, 3). These GWs should be created during the first instants of the Universe's existence. It's somewhat surprising -but still logical with respect to common disbelief in Aether model - that while microwave photons of cosmic microwave background (CMB) were correctly recognized in famous expanding balloon analogy as a remnant of primordial gamma ray photons, covering surface of our Universe expanded during inflation, the same photons weren't considered primordial GW's collapsed during inflation from supersymmetric perspective of AdS/CFT duality.

Such duality points directly to equivalence of primordial photons and gravitons which was transformed into duality of CMB photons and gravitational waves. It means, primordial gravitational waves searched are just the tiny density fluctuations of vacuum density, responsible for CMB noise, which was laboriously filtered out from signal in LIGO/VIRGO detectors! This is funny situation, indeed. The equivalence of CMB photons and gravitational waves could be understood as a manifestation of GUT too, because Big Bang theory is assuming, during Universe formation all interactions were merged into single one. So it's not so strange, we are observing both primordial gravitons, both primordial gravitational waves like primordial photons, i.e. like microwave background (CMB) - every other result would violate GUT.

There are at least three levels of dumbness:

First level is to spend money while trying to find artifacts, which cannot be observed by their very definition. But this is basically, what the research is about by R. Feynman ("Research is what I do when I don′t know what I′m doing".)
Second level is to spend money while trying to find artifacts, which everyone can detect in his TV antenna (i.e. background noise in GWs detectors).
The third level of stupidity is to intentionally ignore / filter / wipe out just these results of observations, which are supposed to be detected.

It's not dumbness of scientists involved though, because these scientists aren't spending their money: these money are going from our taxis. It's just our dumbness.

Gravitational waves are deformations of space-time curvature, i.e. they're manifesting like density fluctuations of space. They shouldn't be confused with CMB photons - CMB photon is component of density fluctuation, which propagates in light speed, but in short distance only. Gravitational waves forming CMB noise at human scale are dual to gravitons at Planck scale: we can say, they're gravitons expanded during big bang in similar way, like CMB photons are form of gamma radiation expanded during inflation of early universe. In addition, GWs shouldn't be confused with gravity waves, which are product of gravity and EM interaction coupling in material environment. As a direct analogy of GWs in AWT model of water surface are underwater sound waves, which are spreading in extra-dimensions with respect to surface waves. Due the low compressibility and high density of water such underground waves can be observed at water surface only during the most intensive explosions, like at the case of underwater nuclear explosions (compare YouTube videos 1, 2, 3). Because sound spread in higher number of dimensions, then the surface waves, it suffers by faster dispersion with compare to surface waves.

Inside of vacuum - which is much more dense phase of Aether, then the water - such effects are even much more pronounced and gravitational waves are dispersing there at the distance scale corresponding the wavelength of CMB (~ 2 cm). As an evidence of GWs dispersion can serve Casimir force, which can be detected at micrometer scale and its distance dependence corresponds the longitudinal wave shielding in six dimensions, thus violating equivalence principle of general relativity, being proportional the area, not by inertial mass of objects. Shielding effect of gravitational waves from CMB manifest even at cosmological scale as a anomalous deceleration of Pioneer and other space-probes (1, 2), which violates equivalence principle, too.

From analogy with underwater wave spreading follows, GWs are way way faster, then the light waves: they would be able to cross whole observable Universe in a moment in the same way, like light wave is able to cross black hole of average size. So GWs are violating causality of information spreading mediated by light waves (radiative time arrow) and they're inherently chaotic, so they're interacting with chaotic matter only, i.e. boson condensates (compare the gravitational waves reflection and shielding during Podkletnov anitgravity experiments with rotating superconductors). Being tachyons, gravitational waves are expected to be primarily responsible for entanglement and "action at distance" phenomena of quantum mechanics.

Highly dimensional character of gravity interaction is the main reason, the intensity of gravitational waves decreases a much faster with distance, being dispersed by membranes of quantum foam, because they're spreading across quantum foam bubbles in longitudinal waves. This effectively means, gravitational waves are of dispersive character, so they cannot be observed at distance even et the case of quite energetic events, like at the case of black hole and pulsar merging. This doesn't mean, dispersion of energy doesn't exist here so we can still consider theory of binary pulsar changes relevant to gravitational radiation.

While AWT explanation of GWs is quite simple and intuitive, general disbelief in Aether concept prohibited scientists to think in such straightforward way for many years, until recently some of them changed their opinion in relation to brane world paradigm and so-called holographic principle. Accordingly, some superluminal GWs models were presented in peer-reviewed journals (1, 2) recently together with observation of random changes in level of gravitational noise, which is attributed to holographic model of GWs (so called the holographic noise). Note that holographic projection at Universe scale requires superluminal speed of GWs for to be able to work at all, thus violating general relativity theory of GWs from its very beginning. But it's not quite clear for me, why just the noise was considered here. If we found a harmonic gravitational wave, it could be interpreted as a part of giant holograph as well. In this way, the finding of gravitational noise appears rather invariant to holographic theory for me and it can still have a more robust and consistent explanation in context of AWT.

Steven Weinberg: "An expert is a person who avoids the small errors while sweeping on to the grand fallacy."

AWT and Big Bang theory.

2009-09-20T04:42:00.000-07:00

In AWT the relevance of Big Bang theory is closely related to the concept of "Observable universe" and the "edge of observable space-time", which depends (as everything in AWT) on duality between insintric and exsintric perspective. According to the theory of cosmic inflation and its founder, Alan Guth, the entire universe could be (at least) 10²³ to 10²⁶ times as large as the observable universe, which roughly correspond the speed of gravitational waves propagation through observable Universe.

From insintric perspective we can apply principle "Similia simillibus observatur" (only things of similar nature can interact mutually in observation) - so we can consider, Universe is composed of many different combinations of Aether states, whereas we are composed from limited number of such states, being only part of Universe. If the probability of occurrence of our particular combination of states decreases with distance, then the probability, we could interact with the rest of Universe decreases with distance as well. Therefore we can observe "edge of space", but we cannot reach it, because we would evaporate first in unfriendly ("hot") vacuum around it.

This is basically anthropocentric "black hole model" of Universe formation, which introduces evolutionary absolute reference frame: if we evolved in certain part of Universe, it's because, the conditions were relatively favorable for us here and if we would travel outside of from this pretty place, we can only face problems there. It's evident, every surface of matter, like hot star or black hole forms such natural boundary of observable Universe for us and it's even possible, matter in remote galaxies evolved into exotic forms of matter, which would annihilate (i.e. explode) less or more completely in direct contact with us.

Exsintric perspective of Universe is less real but more optimistic and it has no apparent boundary: the probability of our particular combination of states decreases, but the number of new combinations increases even faster with distance, so we can always find a some friendly combinations of states there. Until space-time is formed by "friendly combinations" of states, it means, we are observing free space, so we can travel through it without apparent limit and danger - but there's no certainty, we aren't just moving in circles during this, because concept of distance and free space is tautological here. From AWT follows, real appearance of Universe is a formed by nested foam mixture of insintric and exsintric perspective: there are many places, where we can finish in our travel prematurely (planets, stars and black holes) - but in general Universe appears as an empty free space due the Olbers paradox.

Olbers paradox is a consequence of Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), which is behaving like subtle density fluctuations of space (i.e. gravitational waves) violating Lorentz and Poincaré symmetry, which results in gradual dispersion of light into hidden dimensions of space-time in analogy to spreading of splash ripples at the water surface. This analogy follows directly from concept of dense Aether of AWT, but it's not completely new, as it was proposed independently by James Clifford Cranwell between years 2001 and 2007. Mr. Cranvell's concept was bright, but it illustrates clearly, without active (self)promotion no idea has chance to become famous in fast expanding Internet space, if it has no immediate usage for sufficiently large group of people - no matter how brilliant it is. Unfortunately Mr. Cranvell didn't recognize the power of dense Aether concept as such and he turned his attention to derived concept of omni-directional expansion of space-time, which is apparently more abstract and it can be interpreted in dual way by AWT.

For observer of transversal waves at water surface the speed of ripples increases fast with distance (they change into gravitational waves), which can be interpreted from the perspective of this observer as an omni-directional expansion of space-time with distance. The same situation is relevant for observation of distant parts of our Universe via light waves.

At sufficient distance from observer wavelength of transversal waves ceases to zero, which can be interpreted by this observer as an initial singularity of Big Bang theory, or like surface (event horizon) of black hole (cosmic void), which observer occurs. From AWT follows, these models may be of certain relevance from perspective of numerical models - but they're all invariant to observer localtion. We can compare this situation to observation of landscape under haze - visibility scope will be limited by dispersion of light, but it will move accordingly to actual location of observer.

Because this effect is apparently nonlinear, we can explain dark energy phenomena in the same way. From outside we can see, these ripples get more dense gradually, until they disperse completely. The same effect appears at cosmological scale like slowing the speed of light in dense environment, surrounding every source of radiation, so it can be used for explanation of cold portion of dark matter and its connection to Hubble constant as well. Whereas from perspective of insintric observer, Universe appears like we would travel through density gradient, forming event horizon of black hole (some string theorists are talking about "throat of dark brane" in this connection).

From more general view of AWT this evolution is just an illusion, which follows from insintric observational perspective inside of fractal Aether foam, because we are connecting the observation of microscopic scale with the future of Universe expansion, the past with observation of vast cosmic space. Evolution of large objects is the more slow, the larger these objects are and Universe as a whole doesn't really evolve at general scale. The only question is, whether such general perspective is achievable for human creatures by experiments, i.e. by different way then just by pure human imagination.

Nevertheless, from AWT follows, Big Bang theory would suffer by fundamental problems in near future, which are of both of practical, both philosophical (ontological) nature. Observational problem with Big Bang is, we can observe well developed and separated galaxies in the Hubble ultra-deep field, when the Universe was just 2 - 3 billions of years old. And Milky Way galaxy is more then ten billions of years old, so that these ancient galaxies have not enough time to separate and develop. This conclusion was supported by recent observation of well developed galaxies (with very low speed of star formation) in ultradeep field of refurbished Hubble telescope in contrary to standard cosmological model based on Big Bang theory, in which star formation couldn't occur during dark era of universe formation.

Ontological problem of Big Bang theory is, it brings more questions, then answers - not saying about the problem of initial singularity. It can explain red shift, but it cannot explain dark energy. And it requires inflation, which appears like ad-hoced concept from contemporary perspective, although it can be interpreted as a phase transition of Aether easily and it can be reconciled with ekpyrotic cosmology in such way. But from general perspective it seems, all these models are just plural result of dispersive nature of Aether environment. The analogy of Universe evolution with stellar and galactic evolution is just apparent, because from very general and remote perspective Universe behaves like atemporal stuff (perceived mass/energy density of Aether increases ad infinitum).

Michelson–Morley experiment is best yet

2009-09-14T13:10:00.000-07:00

Physicists in Germany have performed the most precise Michelson-Morley experiment to date, confirming that the speed of light is the same in all directions. The experiment, which involves rotating two optical cavities, is about 10 times more precise than previous experiments – and a hundred million times more precise than famous Michelson and Morley's 1887 experiment (MMX).

This zero result still cannot be interpreted as an absence of Aether environment for light spreading (so called luminiferous Aether), though. This is because no (motion/reference frame of) environment can be detected by its own waves locally, and nothing strange is about it. Whether we can observe water surface by water surface waves? Indeed not - with respect to these waves water surface is just a void, empty space. If we would observe something, it would be obstacle for surface waves, but not environment anymore. This is a trivial geometrical insight, independent to character of light wave and or even Aether theory validity: no local object can be observed from insintric and exsintric perspective at the same moment, i.e. locally.

This still doesn't mean, such environment doesn't exist from nonlocal and/or higher-dimensional perspective, mediated by tachyons, like gravitational waves, for example. And because every laser is of finite length, we should observe nonlocal effects, too. The true is, due the quantum phenomena no object is completely local and for microwaves of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) Lorentz symmetry would remain fulfilled even at the case, when these objects would remain relatively large - in distance/size range of CMB wavelength (~2,64 cm at 2,73 K black body temperature), which roughly corresponds human scale (size of brain waves). Therefore for CMB Lorentz and Poincaré symmetry remains violated only at the cosmological scale (Doppler anisotropy of CMB).

For photons of observable light we should detect gradient of CMB photons density (dark matter effect, dual to Casimir force) and Lense-Thirring effect (frame dragging effect) in proper orientation of laser perpendicularly to gravitational field gradient. The later effect will lead to antigravity effects at speed higher then 0,57 c, thus switching the sign of dark matter effect. Such insights renders warped space around moving Earth in rather complex way. The nonzero rest mass of photons would complicate result of MMX even more for light of shorter wavelengths. For example gamma ray photons are insintrically slow and they could be outdistanced even by lightweight part of observable matter (aka neutrinos), whereas photons of longer wavelengths, then the CMB are effectively tachyons and they undergo fast dispersion in CMB field.

Multidimensional character of emergent perspective

2009-09-13T07:29:00.000-07:00

This post is just a copy of few silly comments to ongoing discussion about concept of minimal length in quantum gravity and Lorentz symmetry violation. AWT enables to separate the subtleties of particular quantum field theories from general problem consisting in subconscious mixing of insintric and exsintric perspectives.

In AWT Lorentz symmetry(LS) is direct consequence of observational perspective. When we are observing low dimensional space (like 2D+1T water surface) from strictly 2D+1T perspective, LS is indeed maintained. When we are observing the same situation from higher dimensional perspective, LS can be violated and nothing very special is about it. AWT stance is, every space-time is completely homogeneous from its own perspective by definition and its LS cannot be violated. At the moment, when we are discussing some homogeneities in it, we are applying higher dimensional perspective, which enables LS to become violated. "An Outside View" is always of higher dimensionality, then insider's view, so its LS can be violated by definition. If it wouldn't, we couldn't distinguish it from inside view, after all.

In AWT concept of minimal length doesn't exist from global perspective, because even the tiniest density fluctuations can be formed by some more smaller ones without apparent constrains. But there exist limit in observability of smallest density fluctuations from perspective of larger density fluctuations (like humans) or instrumentation, which was used for their detection. Aether fluctuation at particular dimensional scale cannot interact with fluctuations at all remaining dimensional scales directly in accordance to principle "Simillia simillibus observatur". If we would use more sensitive/large apparatus, the limit of fluctuations on both sides of dimensional scale will increase accordingly and we would observe our Universe larger and quantum fluctuations smaller - but some general limit still persists here.

The philosophical question is, if such dimensional scale is real for people, because it's always interpreted by apparatus. Science answered such question positively already from the time of Galilei and van Leeuwenhoek. The main gnoseologic problem is, outside perspective remains undetectable from insiders, so we are always talking about somehow abstract phenomena, which can be proven by higher dimensional emergent approach only, i.e. by coincidence of two or more indirect evidences - but not by direct observation. Whole evidence of emergent Aether concept is about it, after all.

It should be pointed out, the existence of space-time at sub-Planck scale (i.e. existence of "subminimal length") lies outside of observational perspective scope of insiders too, so we are relating existence of one unprovable phenomena (Lorentz symmetry violation) by existence of another one (sub-Planck length).

Proclamativelly rigorous people, who are working with insintric perspective preferably can say easily, both ideas are BS - whereas other people, who knows, that more is different and really is different and how emergent phenomena are working, can expect, combination of two or more undetectable phenomena (assumption) could still lead to new observable (i.e. testable) predictions, thus fulfilling utilitarian perspective of further evolution. After all, renormalization procedure is quite similar approach based on emergence, because its extrapolating singular function by pair of their derivations from both sides of divergence. In this way, modern physicists just replaced wide-scale philosophical extrapolations by these less-visible formalized ones.

Continental Europe bans USA invention

2009-08-29T14:29:00.000-07:00

Starting from Tuesday, September 1st, 2009, European Union is banning the production of incandescent light bulbs above 80 Watts in a bid to introduce compact fluorescent models, widely known as energy-savings bulbs. In 2012, only "efficient" light bulbs will be allowed and by 2016, they want to ban even the halogen lamps. EU contend that the average family will save $64 per year on electric bills, and carbon emissions could be cut by 15 million tons. On the flip side, some 3,000 jobs could be lost since most incandescent bulbs sold in Europe are made in the region, while the fluorescent variety come from elsewhere.

This can be perceived as temporal victory of energy over matter, as the compact fluorescent models are five to seven times more energy efficient, then incandescent light bulbs. But this balance can be easily reversed in near future, because fluorescent lamps are more demanding on irrecoverable sources in form of rare earth elements (REEs), used in luminophore production. 95% of output production of rare earth elements comes from China and China is now considering a ban on certain rare earth elements. The solution may be organized recycling of these luminophores or the replacement of rare elements by another ones or increased usage of LED-based sources for illumination. This example illustrates, the replacement of power hungry solution is always followed by increasing consumption of material sources, thus demonstrating universal matter-energy duality.

Because younger son of Czech president Vaclav Klaus is top manager of CEZ, main energetic company of Czech Republic, his wife, economist Livie Klaus was member of the CEZ supervisory board until 2002 and another son got four million euros donation from CEZ for his private school last year, it's logical, Vaclav Klaus himself is well known lobbyist of CEZ company and promoter of energetic dependence of Czech Republic to Russian fossil fuel import. Therefore it's very not surprising, Vaclav Klaus boycotts environmental politics of EU and he is openly promoting the consumption of energy hungry incandescent light bulbs in public.

AWT and cosmological time arrow

2009-08-29T11:07:00.000-07:00

Contemporary physics distinguishes many time arrows, which are related mutually, so that no discussion about time can have a deeper meaning without specification of particular time arrow. Contemporary physics handles no generally acceptable model for these time arrows and it doesn't understand time concept from general perspective. In particular description of relativistic space-time from macroscopic perspective remains separated from description of time at microscale, where thermodynamical time arrow is applied. Without consideration of concept of Aether emergence these time arrows cannot be reconciled at predicate logic level.

In AWT most general time arrow is so called cosmological time arrow related to omnidirectional Universe expansion, which is manifestation of dispersive character of energy spreading. While the general understanding is, Universe is facing thermodynamical death, it's not true at all as such conclusion is observer dependent. It's observer, not a Universe, who suffers by entropic processes and entropy of Universe as a whole remains constant from exsintric perspective. Thermodynamical death of Universe is just a consequence of Simillia simillibus observatur principle.

We cannot neglect fact, one half of Universe evaporates and separates by antigravity (radiation pressure), while the second one agglomerates by gravity. In AWT boundary between insintric and exsintric observational perspective is divided by observer distance scale, which corresponds to wavelength of cosmic microwave background (CMB scale) at 1.73 cm. Above such scale thermodynamic time arrow for material object becomes reversed and driven by gravity. So what we are observing are two thermodynamical processes separated by CMB/human scale into exsintric and insitric perspective. Material objects, which are large then 1.73 cm tends to agglomerate in their gravity field into larger ones. This is essentially negentropic process, related to inverse time arrow, whereas object smaller then CMB photons are evaporating into radiation, whis is indeed common entropic process. For particles of energy the whole situation remains reciprocal: large photons are dissolving like tachyons in CMB, while smaller one are condensing into solitons, i.e. material particles. No process violating CPT symmetry was observed so far.

If we consider material particles as the only observable part of Universe, thermodynamical time arrow becomes dual for 3D space-time, so we can propose more general, cosmological time arrow, which is independent to entropy of Universe (which remains the same in this case), but it's defined by the combination of the above processes. At the moment, when we would observe separation of large objects while the smaller ones would condense, we could say, not just thermodynamical, but cosmological time arrow gets reversed, too. It corresponds the propagation of observable objects across space-time brane, composed of mutually interacting gradients of Aether foam density, so that entropic processes are always balanced by these negentropic ones. From macroscopic (the past) or microscopic (the future of space-time expansion) perspective Universe is behaving like randomly undulating Aether gas, where formation of density fluctuations balances their dissolution and Universe appear atemporal, albeit it's still full of random motion. Every time arrow observed is therefore a local effect only.

While thermodynamical time arrow appears broken above CMB scale for material objects, it's just an effect of inverse geometry, in which dispersion of information occurs. Thermodynamical time arrow still remains valid here due the dispersive nature of energy spreading. In AWT gravity is just thermalization as being observed from exsintric perspective of Le-Sage Aether model. All forces are of dispersive nature, which is behaving like shielding Duillier-LeSage force from dual perspective (dual force to gravity is pressure of radiation, i.e. the only force, which can defy gravity). But we are observing universe from both perspectives, so we shouldn't omit gravity when talking about entropy from general perspective. Note that near CMB scale inverse square law for gravity becomes violated due the cosmic microwave radiation and gravity becomes effectively repulsive force bellow this scale, because of prevailing pressure of CMB radiation. This manifests by violation of equivalence principle in 3D and by weak deceleration assigned to dark matter. Again, it's just an result of perspective inversion - as a finite size fluctuation of Aether we're observing the same Le Sage gravitation "from inside". From local perspective time arrow and sign of gravity are related mutually by trivial projective geometry of mutual interactions of density fluctuations via transversal waves.

AWT and GRB090510 photon controversy

2009-08-24T18:45:00.000-07:00

This story was discussed extensively on Bee's and LuMo's blogs. In brief, recent observation of very remote (12.8+ Glyrs) gamma ray burst GRB090510 observed by Fermi observatory (former GLAST satellite) was followed by another lone gamma ray photon of extraordinary high energy (31 GeV), detected be terrestrial observatory MAGIC (Major Atmospheric Gamma Imaging Cherenkov) in the same moment (six seconds window of the whole three minute burst).

While string theory (ST) is based on LS, this result was interpreted by Motl as a confirmation of ST, although in fact it confirms the validity of one of string theory postulates only. Although gamma ray dispersion was considered as one of main tests of quantum gravity theories and the picture bellow was presented in many places, LQG theory in its current state of development has nothing to say very much to this result, because it maintains LS in 3D in the same way, like string theory, as Lee Smolin explained. This picture is a snapshot of article in Scientific American, 59: "Atoms of space and time", which is definitelly worth reading by itself - but it contains desinformation, concerning LQG predictions.

Phenomenological explanation of this controversy is simple in AWT and it's based on the fact, LS is valid only for strictly 3D space, whereas cosmic space is filled by gravitons expanded into gravitational waves during inflation, i.e. tiny density fluctuations responsible for cosmic microwave background (CMB). Therefore cosmic space isn't completely "flat" and it contains "traces of higher dimensions". While LS is indeed valid for all higher hyperspaces, their projection into 3D space isn't invariant with respect to LS anymore. From AWT follows, only microwaves can propagate through vacuum like harmonic wave, thus fulfilling LS at long distances, while longer waves are propagating like tachyons and shorter waves are always composed of photons, which are propagating by subluminal speed. This dispersion can be observed in GZK limit for gamma ray photons and it manifests by delay for gamma ray photons during weak (short distance) gamma ray bursts, like MKN501 event, observed last year. In accordance with this explanation, the dispersion of more close gamma ray flashes is usually much more pronounced, then at the case of these remote ones.

As a pronounced example of light dispersion during spreading through compactified gradient can can serve Hawking radiation of black holes, which can be interpreted like light escaping from glass sphere. Long wavelengths and gravitational waves can penetrate it freely, whereas shorter wavelengths are reflected back again by total reflection mechanism

The reason, why GRB090510 burst (and some others, like GRB 080916C from September 2008) didn't exhibit a pronounced dispersion consist in point, such bursts were very remote and as such they were quite energetic - an energy corresponding mass of Sun is released in form of gamma photons in brief moment! In AWT dynamic mass of photons manifests by real mass with gravitational effects, not just a combination of momentum and kinetic energy, as presented by mainstream propaganda. This is because in AWT photon has a nonzero rest mass, albeit quite minute one. Therefore the gamma ray burst propagates through vacuum like dense cluster of photons, tied their own gravity, or like soliton, similar to vortex rings, which can propagate through fluids and gases without dispersion.

The slowing of ligth in boson condensates is based on the fact, EM wave is spreading in form of much heavier electrons, which are revolving around atoms for most of time. Neverthelles the appearance of single photons in vacuum should correspond the appearance of solitons (quantum vortices) in boson condensates.

Because wave packet cannot contain only fraction of wave (it would violate the eigenvalue postulate of quantum mechanics) both wavelength of light, both size of wave packet is compressed in the same way and the shape of vortices in boson condensates is pretty close to appearance of real photons in vacuum - it's just greatly reduced in scale along path of direction.

The cluster of photon ("photoball") is analogous to glueballs, known from weak force scale and it can serve as a prototype of heavier elementary particles. It's formed by dense swarm of photons, where the most energetic and heaviest photons are propagating at the center, while these lightweight ones are revolving center of soliton along substantially longer path, which corresponds the segregation of matter by particle density at the case of massive bodies. This could have testable impact to the distribution of energies along time axis of gamma ray flash: heavy photons should appear at the center of Gaussian curve, representing the gamma burst observation.

Because photons influence mutually at distance in this model, it may be even possible, the lone photon observed in GRB090510 was actually trapped into gamma ray flash during its travel through wast cosmic space, or it could serve as its condensation nuclei in similar way, like particle of dust enables molecules of water to condense into droplet. It would mean, the occurrence of photons of unexpectedly high energy density inside of gamma ray flashes isn't accidental at all and such model leads to another testable predictions concerning gamma ray photons distributions. The "snowball" mechanism of avalanche-like photon trapping has its analogies at the case of rain or snow condensations, laser pumping or rise of Hitler's power before WWW II.

Because photons inside are moving independently to motion of soliton, they're propagating in hidden dimensions effectively: we can say, higher dimensionality of space-time, i.e. symmetry breaking of mass density (inhomogeneity) converts into higher dimensionality of particle motion during sufficiently large space-time interval, i.e. into symmetry breaking of energy density (dispersion). The same mechanism of composite particle formation can be applied onto every other heavier particles or even objects in social systems. All elementary particles are propagating through space like solitons, composed of smaller bosons, which can be illustrated for example by relation of spin projection into axis of motion to speed of particle. The escape of particles through polar jets of black holes can be considered as an exagerrated case of soliton mechanism.

Concerning LS violation, we aren't disputing a lone photons, the exact path of which is unavailable for us - but cluster of photons as a whole, which is indeed quite different situation: at the scope of such cluster individual photons may move randomly along different paths - while they're still keeping the shape of cluster as a whole. Therefore LS remains maintained at the cluster level with respect to dispersion, thus leaving postulates of string or LQG theory intacted - but whole cluster is still moving in subluminal speed with respect to lone microwave photons, so that even lightweight neutrinos can move faster in certain cases. Atemporal logics of formal math, used in these theories cannot handle such situation easily, because of collective motion of many objects at the same moment - although it's still quite trivial to understand. For example, while theories like DSR/DSR2 proposed by Smolin and Maguejio consider violation of LS less or more successfully in 3D, they still cannot explain "violation of LS violation" at both large distance and large energy density scales, which is indeed the case of gamma ray propagation across whole Universe.

String theory could easily model violation of Lorentz symmetry in inhomogeneous 4D space-time simply by declaring it a higher-dimensional flat space in the same way, like LQG - the only problem is, scientists on both sides of ST/LQG duality still didn't realize it, while they're still seeking for signs of both extradimensions, both Lorentz symmetry violation - although they have them before eyes all the time. In addition, here exists an interesting deadlock mechanism: string theorists (ST) could introduce Lorentz symmetry (LS) violation by considering of extradimensions, but they hesitate to propose it, because LS belongs between ST postulates in 4D space-time, while LQG proponents could introduce extradimensions by considering Lorentz symmetry violation, but they grudge against it, because they proposed LQG a just "4D theory" originally.

At the moment, when both sides are earning half of grant support, no one wants to start the reconciliation of both theories by considering of ideas of the dual theory. In such a way both sides are effectively locked inside of ivory towers of their own prejudices. I presume, this example situation explains a lot, how symmetry breaking is occurring at phenomenological level and it illustrates clearly, why theoretical physicists should be payed for reconciliation of existing theories be decreasing of number of postulates, instead of for development of new ones by increasing of number of existing postulates, because divergent character of their formal thinking prohibits them in reconciliation of existing theories.

AWT and peer review

2009-08-22T08:54:00.000-07:00

This post is motivated by recent discussion (1, 2) concerning the relevance of anonymous peer-review in specialized areas of physics. From general perspective (which I always recommend to consider at the first place) anonymous collectivistic approach leads to the lost of personal motivation (which lead to the fall of communism, BTW) and it slows down generation of new ideas. While too individualistic approach fragments science and it slows down acceptation of new ideas.

In addition, there is always bias given by fact, if we choose reviewer, whose scope of interests overlaps with scope of interest of author, it becomes biased due the possible conflict of interest or existence of personal coalition.

If we separate the scope of interests, we increase risk of incompetence of reviewer. This risk is the more pronounced, the more science becomes specialized - which effectively means, above some critical density of information peer-review process isn't effective anymore.

Now we are dealing with two dimensional matrix handling distance of scope of interest and anonymity of peer-review process. The possible solution is to add time dimension into matrix and to make whole process as transparent, as possible ex post. In my opinion the most effective approach would be to keep peer-review as blind, as possible. BUT after publishing of article, it's peer-review should become available together with names of reviewers.

Of course, here's an apparent limit in density of information again and from long term perspective, every source of information should be published with minimal delay despite the result of peer review.

Higgs boson and Uroboros model of Universe

2009-08-02T09:40:00.000-07:00

Uroboros is an ancient archetypal model of Universe related to implicit surfaces of topology, the Mobius strip and Klein bottle topology of holographic model of Universe in particular, which manifests at many levels of observable reality. In AWT it follows from geometry of causal energy spreading in transversal waves through nested Aether foam, where the same energy mediates both bulk volume properties, both surface properties of the same object. For example, if we get close to black hole, during passing its event horizon we would see, how previous universe generation has collapsed into many black hole horizon behind our spin and interior of black hole now appears like observable generation of universe with many black holes inside, the direct observation of black holes can therefore serve as an observational evidence of Uroboros geometry at cosmological scale.

The same geometry we can met with many dualities in human society, for example in mutual convergence of extreme leftwind and rigtwind ideas, as practiced by NDSAP party in Nazi Germany or bolshevist party in former Soviet Union, where employees got the same social status like their employers, at least proclamativelly. At Planck level scale the Uroboros model manifests in various supersymmetry phenomena, which follows from AdS/CFT correspondence (Mobius strip structure of electron and other spin 1/2 particles in particular) and in E8xE8 heterosis of Platonic solids, which can serve as 3D geometric models of causal dynamic triangulation of Aether foam (Lorentz/Wick rotation leads to isomorphism of root vector system of E8 Lie group in 3D, as Lisi Garret demonstrated).

Interesting consequence of T-duality in Uroboros model is isomorphism of most heavy/lightweight fermions and their supersymmetric bosons, the top quarks and Higgs boson in particular. From Standard model follows, the product of Higgs boson Yukawa coupling to the left- and right-handed top quarks have same rest mass (173.1±1.3 GeV/c²) and dilepton channel of decay and they're virtually indistinguishable each other. While top quark was observed in 1995 by the CDF and DØ experiments at Fermilab, it has no meaning to search for Higgs anymore at the moment, when bare top quark decay was identified (if something looks like a Higgs, walks like a Higgs, and quacks like a Higgs, it's just a product of top quark dilepton decay). In this point last bet of prof. Hawking that LHC won't find Higgs boson is dual to my conclusion, Higgs was observed already.

The more detailed interpretation of Higgs boson in AWT is difficult, because Higgs mechanism isn't primarily responsible for rest mass of particles in AWT. Higgs mechanism for giving mass to particles was actually first proposed in the context of solid state physics to explain how particle-like structures in metals can act as if they had an effective mass and it explains temperature dependence of conductivity in transition metals and semiconductors.

In particle physics, though, Higgs argument is designed to introduce the masses of the gauge bosons by a spontaneous breaking of the gauge symmetry of an additional field, the Higgs field. Of course this mechanism is a conceptually different from the way, in which condensate droplets of every particle environment are obtaining mass. And it has nothing to do with superconductivity also, as it takes place at room temperature, too. If Anderson–Higgs mechanism is related to background field in superconductivity such effect shouldn't be called a Higgs mechanism anymore - or we simply get two different kinds of Higgs bosons. Even worse, the technical derivation of the Higgs mechanism, consists in a mere reshuffling of degrees of freedom by transforming the Higgs Lagrangian in a gauge-invariant manner. This already raises serious doubts about the adequacy of the entire manoeuvre, since gauge transformations possess no real instantiations and no straightforward interpretation of the Higgs mechanism is tenable. IMO physicists are just mixing various concepts and mechanisms mutually at each level of physical model from phenomenological to formal one. Furthemore, a well known "hiearchy problem" implies, that quantum corrections can make the mass of the Higgs particle arbitrarily large, since virtual particles with arbitrarily large energies are allowed in quantum mechanics.

The case, when scientists are looking for phenomena, which is known for years already - just from opposite side - isn't new at all in context of AWT. For example the search for gravitational waves (CMB radiation), supersymmetry (observation of tetraneutron, pentaquark, dimuon event and other phenomena) Lorentz symmetry violation (gravitational lensing, GZK limit and other phenomena) or evidence of hidden dimensions (Casimir force and related phenomena) is the situation of the same category. For scientists is quite normal to search for violation of relativity by quantum mechanics and vice versa, while they're know already, these theories are inconsistent mutually up to level, their predictions differs in two hundred orders of magnitude.

Such situation just reflects the level of conceptual confusion, which penetrates whole contemporary physics. But we should realize, scientists as such have no strong motivation to solve contemporary situation, on the contrary - confusion enables them to keep their information monopoly, to broaden their RE-search and to ask money for another grants from taxes - only layman society is who is paying here. I suppose, such situation would appear unbelievable for our descendants - but this is exactly the situation, we are experiencing by now. Scientists are shamans of modern era and they're eating their own tails by such ignorant approach.

AWT and principle of uncertainty principle

2009-07-22T14:50:00.000-07:00

This post was motivated by recent confrontation between Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and Cambridge cops, who were condemned last night by President Barack Obama for acting "stupidly" in arresting the African-American scholar. I personally found the stance of all people involved as somewhat unlucky, because it illustrates emergent character of many serious situations, resultig from high number of small, if not predictable mistakes. By AWT every object of reality is composed of nested density fluctuations and it has a fuzzy character, so we can always observe and interpret things from at least two perspectives: the inner (insintric) and outer (exsintric) one. This is why we are saying, there are two sides to every story and the truth often lies somewhere in between...

For example, we can observe gravitational lensing from outside from place, where space-time is flat, so you will see the path of light curved and Lorentz symmetry violated (quantum mechanics perspective). Or when we stay inside of gravity lens or in Lagrange point, we will become bended by gravity field together with space-time, so you will see the path of light straight and the space-time curved, instead - this is general relativity perspective. It's evident, these perspectives are mutually exclusive, so we can never reconcile relativity with quantum mechanics by using of formal approach, which combines postulates of both theories (like string theory or quantum gravity) and to save money of tax payers for its development.

The main source of uncertainty here is, with compare to above picture every gravity field / lens has a fuzzy boundary, so we can never see the gravitational lensing from single perspective only and your observation remains fuzzy as well. Only pin-point observer can see all things from exsintric (outer) perspective only. Because every real observer is of finite size and it suffers by quantum delocalization, he can observe the same effect or artifact both from inside, both from outside perspective. The mixture of both these perspectives results into insintric uncertainty of every reality observation.

We can use surface wave analogy here, which is more convenient with Aether concept of particle environment. At the water surface every information always comes in two parallel ways: in form of longitudinal (underwater) waves and surface waves, which are of transversal nature. The pure transversal waves are called capillary waves, these pure longitudinal waves are called gravity waves (do not confuse it with gravitational waves, which are of longitudinal character too, but they're spreading through vacuum).

In real case, the surface waves are always of mixed character, which we are calling Rayleigh or Love waves, depending on whether longitudinal or transversal character of the wave prevails. Despite the weakness of underwater waves, this results in quantum uncertainty of every information, which comes to observer at water surface in two independent ways: via surface and underwater waves.

Despite of their insintric character, we cannot exclude surface wave from observation so easily, because energy is spreading in slowest speed at the inflexion point of (water) density gradient, which is forming water surface, thus defining the largest space-time possible ("a cosmic space") for observer, so he can exists in it. As we can see, uncertainty principle is direct manifestation of Lorentz symmetry violation, hidden dimensions and multiple time arrows. Here's no need to spend another money in expensive, but silly (re)search of these artifacts, until we are convenient with existence of quantum uncertainty and AWT approach. AWT can save a lotta money for tax payers here again - but from the very same reason scientists involved aren't very happy about it, because from their insintric perspective such search still has a good meaning.

We can met with uncertainty principle in many places of everyday reality at the moment, when insintric perspective remains mixed with insintric one, as expressed in many proverbs and fables (Mark Twain: "There are two sides of every coin"). When someone describes an accident in real life, he always describes it from perspective of person, which was involved in it, or from perspective of independent remote observer. At the moment, when some persons was both reason, both victim of this accident, their stance becomes fuzzy undeniably.

For example, Germans or Soviet Union nations were both reasons, both victims of WWW II, so their stance to this even remains fuzzy and controversial. As the result, both Russia, both Germany are claiming, the weakest country involved in conflict, i.e. Poland was the true reason of WWW II, which is simply ridiculous - but it illustrates the way, in which uncertainty principle manifest itself in human society.

Here exists an insintric duality between most general and most exact views of reality. Currently it seems, AWT is most general one - but definitely not the best, when it goes to exact numbers. From the same reason, we don't use quantum mechanics for computation of boiling point of water under reduced pressure, but we are using a more specific extrapolations based on thermodynamics. Not because the quantum mechanics couldn't handle it in ab-initio calculations, but because such calculation would be more tedious and sensitive to introductory parameters. Due the uncertainty principle we cannot expect true "theory of everything" and every theory has it's own applicability scope, corresponding to observable part of Universe.

Principle of uncertainty manifests by duality between quantitative and qualitative understanding of reality. Exact theories (like string theory or LQG theory) are poorly conditioned, so they lead into fuzzy landscapes of althernative solutions, whereas these qualitative ones (like AWT) doesn't suffer internal inconsistencies, but they can predict phenomena with limited exactness at the price.

Aesop: "Every truth has two sides; it is as well to look at both, before we commit ourselves to either".

AWT and metamaterial character of vacuum

2009-07-21T07:42:00.000-07:00

The modeling of vacuum by light spreading through material environment isn't completely new here. For example the recent experimental work demonstrated by sending of ultrashort pulses into foamy structure of optical fibers the blue-shifting of light at a white-hole horizon. Recently whole area of physics named transformation optics was established on analogy of physics of vacuum in gravity field to spreading of waves in media of variable refraction index (which was one of Einstein's "refractive approaches" to gravitational light bending and general relativity, by the way).

Metamaterial character of vacuum was proposed before two years and recent publication described the way, how to model structures like gravitational lensing, strange attractors, streaks of dark matter, photon sphere or event horizons of black holes by infrared waves spreading through porous GaInAsP metamaterial sponge. In context of existing theories these analogies are rather ad-hoced, but they've deep meaning in context of AWT, which describes vacuum as a dense system of particles, composed of nested fluctuations, which are having structure of fractal sponge or foam. Therefore the metamaterial nature of vacuum belongs between significant predictions of AWT.

The understanding the role of foamy structure of vacuum fluctuations (as manifested by CMB radiation, soliton character of gamma bursts or ZP energy) in metamaterial character of vacuum is quite easy, if we consider Aether concept. In inhomogeneous environment so called Rayleigh dispersion occurs, whenever the positive surface curvature of density fluctuations prevails. In such system the waves are dispersed (absorbed and refracted) the more, the shorter is their wavelength, because short waves cannot avoid obstacles so easily. From this reason both the absorption coefficient, both the refracting index of environment increases with increasing frequency of radiation - this is so called normal dispersion.

The materials with negative curvature fluctuations of Emental cheese structure are less common, but in such environment the relation of absorption and refraction curve is exactly as opposite, because in such environment the refraction index decreases with increasing frequency with compare to absorption, so we are talking about "anomalous dispersion" here.

The absorption and dispersion curves are mutually related by Kramers-Kronig relations, by which absorption curve (bulk effect) is the first derivation of dispersion curve (i.e. the surface refraction effect), because in environment modeled by spherical particle fluctuations the surface of sphere is first derivation of sphere volume with respect to radius. In vacuum environment the absorption and dispersion curve of electric and magnetic waves corresponds the real and imaginary portion of complex quantities called permitivity and permeability of vacuum, accordingly.

With respect to space-time definition the negative portion of dispersion curve close to inflection point is most significant (compare the red point on the dispersion curve above), because for such frequency the energy spreads in slowest speed possible, so that the space-time appears most huge from insintric perspective here. Such environment has a structure of foam, where positive curvature of density fluctuations remains balanced by negative curvature of holes, but not quite - from this the symmetry violation of vacuum foam follows and the environment behaves like metamaterial of negative refraction index, whenever the imaginary portion of both permeability, both permitivity remains negative. We can say, vacuum behaves like metamaterial just because it's so huge due the presence of large amount of density fluctuations, so we can model phenomena like dark matter streaks, photons and event horizon of black holes by light spreading through metamaterials of foamy structure (compare the simulation bellow).

With compare to solid state metamaterials vacuum is composed of fractal foam of density fluctuations similar to Perlin octal noise, because Aether is behaving like elastic fluid filled/formed by its vortices and the diameter of vortices is indirectly proportional to frequency of wave perturbations. This leads to metamaterial character of vacuum in broad range of wavelengths, until we use transversal waves of minimal exsintric speed for observation. Because metamaterial focuses wave into solitary wave packets (i.e. bosons), we can see the distant stars like pin-point objects without dispersion in broad range of spectrum from infrared to X-ray range of EM wave spectrum.

From general perspective, the normal and anomalous dispersion should be symmetric phenomena. The usage of word "normal" in this context is anthropocentric, because it's based on the fact, human creatures are formed by density fluctuations of arbitrarily positive curvature (i.e. by particles in common sense), so we can interact with particle fields more often and easily, then with fluctuations of negative curvature. Inside of atom structures the positive and negative curvature of electron orbitals remains balanced, so we can observe both absorbance peaks, both transmittance peaks with the same probability there.

Preprint servers and string theory evolution

2009-07-18T20:55:00.000-07:00

Server arXiv.org is a vast online repository of physics papers, most of which are uploaded before they have passed muster by refereeing. Recently, increasing amount of scientists, testified that none of their papers are accepted and others are forcibly recategorized by the administrators of the arXiv either due to the controversial nature of their work, or it not being canonical to string theory, in what amounts to intellectual censorship. We should realize, the main (if not the only reason) of preprint servers is to maintain priority of scientific work - without it all ideas could be presented in private blogs for the sake of recency without problems. From these and possibly another reasons (1, 2) a viXra.org portal has been launched recently by "independent physicist" Phil Gibbs as a functional alternative to arXiv.org.

What happened here? The following lines are illustrating my private understanding of the whole story at general level from exsintric perspective of outer observer:

Because string theory was never accepted by mainstream in its entirety due the "lack of falsifiability", string theorists have started to use arXiv portal as their alternative publishing platform like squatters, thus by-passing standard process of peer-review of mainstream physics. They claimed on public, the dynamic character of string theory development requires faster public exchange of ideas, then the standard peer-review process can provide. Now string theory is forty years old theory (like "..old woman wearing way too much lipstick.." by Robert B. Laughlin) and arXiv server was always considered as an alternative publishing platform, especially by mainstream peer-reviewed journals (Science or Nature journals in particular), which were often hostile to preliminary publishing of scientific articles from apparent "conflict of interests" reasons (1, 2, 3).

As the result, former squatters have begun to consider arXiv server as their native or even private publishing platform and they started to displace proponents of another alternative theories by general paradigm "young anarchists - old conservatives". It's significant, well known proponent of string theory Lubos Motl is both opponent of squatters, both opponent of viXra.org due the "lack of credibility" by now - i.e. from the very same reason, from which string theorists were forced to publish their work on arXiv server before some time - although squatting chaos corresponds well the conceptual chaos of string theories and Mr. Motl himself was in strong opposition to mainstream (Google translation) represented by Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic in his young age.

Now we can observe formation of new opposition and we can expect, whenever such alternative becomes significant, a new independent publishing group will be established on its base - and so on.. Such evolution is quite common in social groups and it fits the AWT model of nested condensation of Aether particles well - so we can consider it as easily predictable in AWT context. While we should appreciate the responsibility, rigorousness and acuracy of formal approach represented by string theory, we shouldn't overlook the conceptual vagueness of this approach based on internal inconsistency of postulates and the lack of understanding of subject at general level. Instead of it, Aether concept is based on deep insintric plurality of concepts and mainstream scientists, some string theorists in particular should learn plurality in thinking by now. From this perspective, formation of vi@Xra server is the first step in this direction.

Aether based explanation of dark matter

2009-07-12T07:38:00.000-07:00

Before month I listed four explanations of dark matter, which are plural from AWT perspective:

consequence of limited light speed spreading through expanding space-time
surface tension effect of bell curve shaped gravity field
application of mass-energy equivalence to Einstein field equation
result of variable surface/volume ratio to energy spreading by principle of least action

But we can use even more illustrative explanation, linked to dispersion of energy by background field of CMB photons formed by gravitational waves (GWs), which manifests like weak deceleration equivalent to product of Hubble constant and speed of light. This dispersion is direct manifestation of hidden dimensions on both large scales, both small scales, because it manifests as a shielding effect of these photons at Casimir force distance scale. We can say, Casimir force is a shielding effect of GWs, whereas the Pioneer anomaly is subtle deceleration effect caused by dispersion by GWs. Both these forces results in violation of Newton law at small scales, which manifests itself by anomalous deceleration at large scales and as such it violates the equivalence principle of general relativity - it's as easy, as it is.

We can even find a direct analogy of this deceleration in our "pocket model" of observable Universe at water surface. From local perspective of every observer, whose size is evolutionary adjusted to wavelength of capillary waves (human distance scale) such surface is covered mostly by transversal waves, where the energy spreads in maximal speed from his insintric perspective, so he can interact with largest space-time possible (the speed of transversal waves is minimal from exsintric perspective, instead).

But the particle character of water environment manifests by dispersion of surface waves by tiny density fluctuations of underwater, which results into gradual change of transversal character of capillary waves into longitudinal one (i.e. into gravity waves). This dispersion decreases the speed of waves from exsintric perspective, which manifests like omni directional Universe expansion from insintric perspective or like subtle deceleration, which effectively freezes the spreading of surface waves, which can be interpreted like spreading of these waves in environment of gradually increasing density. We can observe this effect easily by splash ripples, formed by capillary waves. On the example bellow such waves are formed by bursting of bubbles at water surface, which can be interpreted like radiative decay of unstable particle in vacuum into gamma photons. By this interpretation dark matter effects, like Pioneer anomaly are related closely to the Universe expansion: for example the anomalous deceleration of Pioneer spacecraft (0.87 ± 0.13 nm/s2) is equal to product of Hubble constant and speed of light (a = Hc), which agrees well (±10% error) with value observed.

From this perspective every object is surrounded by virtual massive field which originates from massive field of virtual photons, i.e. the field of density fluctuations, which are manifesting in GWs formed by gravitons expanded by inflation and which is forming vacuum foam - and in this context it's quite natural and easily predictable effect following from AWT directly. Just the immense density of vacuum and common disbelief in Aether concept has caused, the effect of background field dispersion wasn't linked to dark matter observations and Pioneer anomaly before many years. Here's still plenty of room "at the bottom" of basic human understanding. Note that in this context the further search for GWs has no meaning, because we have observed them already like background noise of GWs detectors and their scope is limited by Casimir force scope in the same way, like scope of extradimensions and Lorentz symmetry violation at low scale.

As J.C. Cranwell (archive) pointed out, prof. Stephen Hawking has blundered by his own image... This picture comes from his book "A briefer history of time" at page 29 and it illustrates the energy wave spreading in particle environment. It's easy to see the waves getting further apart from each other as time increase, while Hawking is still claiming, the Lorentz invariance is "difficult to reconcile" with Newton theory. Of course it is, because it leads not only into Lorentz invariance, but into dark matter and expanding universe observations. This example just illustrates, how everyone sees, what he wants to see and Hawking the physmatic sees waves of constant wavelength in picture, which illustrates exactly the opposite.

Albert Einstein "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother."

List of censors

2009-07-10T17:00:00.000-07:00

Bellow you can find a list of sites, from where I was banned at least five times in sequence. This list is of informative purposes only and it will be updated gradually.

Blogs:

Sean Carroll: Cosmic variance
Lubos Motl : The reference frame
Peter Woit : Not Even Wrong
ZapperZ : Physics and Physicists

Forums:

Journals:

NewScientist
OSEL (Objective Source E-learning, in Czech)
ScienceWorld (in Czech)

"...They can't help it. Some people are just born with a lack of oxygen..."

Science and philosophy

2009-07-10T02:05:00.000-07:00

This post is motivated by recent essay "What Is Science" of Mrs. Helen Quinn (former president of the APS), which was published in the July 2009 issue of Physics Today (via ZapperZ) and discussed here and which pregnantly distinguishes subject of science from philosophy by single sentence:

"Religion and philosophy are interested in reasons and purposes, but science cares only about mechanisms."

Such definition has a deep meaning in AWT, because contemporary science is based on consecutive logics of formal math, which is strictly atemporal, which effectively means, that this logics can be reproduced any time without change. This gives math the power of general language for logical and exact communication. We cannot define and share our ideas exactly, until we are express them in predicate logics and symbolic language of formal math (Feynman: "Shut up and calculate!"). But from Gödel theorems follows, even the most strict / limited axiomatic system can lead to uncertain conclusions about reality and this finding has a good meaning in implicate geometry of AWT.

From more general perspective formal view remains quite limited, because it operates in space dimension only, not time dimension and consecutive logics is strictly single time arrow based. So we can call the science "a philosophy of locality" or "atemporal philosophy", which leads to sort of conceptual opportunism or even hypocrisy, because due its strictly local character their proponents often didn't realize, their stance changes in time and/or it doesn't fit exactly their well minded, but more general ideas due the lack of personal feedback, which always requires wider, nonlocal perspective. Just because our mind can operate in wider concept, we can ask for mechanism in time dimension, so we can even ask "philosophical" questions about reasons and consequences and these questions even remains fully motivated from fractally nested perspective of implicate order. The question "WHY?" about causality isn't less important here, then the descriptive question "HOW?"

In AWT the interactions along time dimensions leads to quantum fuzziness and chaos on both small scale of details, both on large scale (the fuzziness of vague answers about very general questions) and this character can be modeled by spreading of waves at water surface. Therefore the fuzzy character of philosophy is quite predictable and it goes as the price for its universality - it's not a manifestation of intellectual laziness or incompetence of philosophers or something similar.

Therefore from AWT follows, the excessive usage of strictly formal approach leads to fuzziness at small scale (extensive landscapes of string theory and quantum gravity solutions as an example) and to separation from reality in similar way, like overly philosophical approach. A formally thinking theorist cannot explain things in intuitive way even if such explanation becomes quite simple (for example explanation of Lorentz invariance or string concept by density fluctuations of particle environment). In Weinberg's essay it is explained, why the main doctrine of positivism is wrong - if taken strictly - and why it has slowed down science in the past. And vice-versa: a philosophical mind cannot postulate formal description of phenomena even at the case, such description becomes quite simple (the derivation of parabolic equation of free fall as an example).

Both approaches have their predictability power, therefore the strategy of highest fitness from evolutionary perspective is usually based on balanced equilibrium of both intuitive, both formal approach, while the intuitive approach usually goes first and the formal one finalizes intuitive ideas in reproducible manner, which can be exchanged freely without lost of information.

Burning water and water memory

2009-07-09T17:26:00.001-07:00

This post is motivated by recent ideas about dissociation of water by radiowaves, presented on Matti Pitkanen's blog, where he explains it by his theory involving "dark phase conjugate photons"(?). In 2007 radio-engineer John Kanzius developed an apparatus for cancer treatment by polarized radiowaves in 13 MHz frequency range. During desalination tests of his device with tube filled by marine watter (~ 3% solution of NaCl) he observed an evolution of hydrogen, which can be ignited by lighter (video 1, 2). Experiments were confirmed and replicated (1, 2) by Rustum Roy, a materials scientist at Pennsylvania State University.

In my opinion the origin of this phenomena is more trivial and it's closely related to memory properties of water, which manifests by number of anomalies, like water autothixotropy(1), Mpemba effect, homeopathic activity of various drugs and chemicals in minute concentration etc. which are based on oligomerisation of water into form of rigid water clusters of icosahedral symmetry. The water cluster formation is based on the finding of X-ray spectroscopy, there exists only two hydrogen bridges available per molecule, so that the formation of chained flat structures simmilar to sponge or foam is preffered. Some observations indicate, the salt ions dissolved may increase surface energy during water clusters and foam formation.

Note the close connection of icosahedral water clusters to sacred geometry of five elements, where the icosahedron shape is assigned just to water element, which could mean, vedic authors have general information about five-fold structure of fluids, the structure of glass and water clusters in particular.

Interesting aspect of quantum behavior of water clusters is their shape memory, which originates from quantum mirage phenomena. The conformal change of shape in particular place of cluster surface is followed by redistribution of charge density, so that the molecules of water are attached/removed to cluster from opposite side in such a way, the original cluster shape is retained like of piece plasticine, although it undergoes rapid Brownian motion as a whole. In AWT analogous mechanism keeps the shape of particles during their travel through vacuum foam.

From the above reasons, each water cluster propagates through density fluctuations of water like solid body of much large effective mass, then the single water molecule - so it can absorb energy in radiowave frequency energy density range (13 MHz, i.e. 5.10E-8 eV). During mutual collisions of such larger clusters the cavitation and splitting of water molecules may occur as a result of anti-Stokes scattering and various resonance phenomena. As a macroscopic demonstration of anti-Stokes scattering can serve famous Astroblaster toy and/or jet formation during water splash, explosion of cumulative warheads (bazooka) and/or collapse of black holes and supernovae (compare the recent simulations of "super rebound" effect during cluster collisions). The main trick here is, the energy of cluster surface waves affects the total bilance of translation energy during collision. Such resonance can have it's analogy in explanation of cold fusion for clusters of deuterons dissolved in palladium lattice.

The electrolysis of salty water by radiowaves is interesting from practical purposes, because it leads to thermodynamically metastable mixture of hydrogen peroxide and hydrogen gas and it doesn't require cooling, diaphragms and metal electrodes affected by corrosion and surface reactions, which decrease yield during classical electrolysis. In polar organic solvents we can expect analogous reaction mechanism, interesting from preparative perspective. Furthermore we can expect a strong isotope effect here, which may become significant for heavy water production. Therefore the electrodeless electrolysis by radiowaves can have a great future and it's definitely worth of further research - despite it doesn't enable to produce fuel from watter in cheaper way, then classical thermodynamics allows.

Aether and graphene behavior

2009-07-08T16:50:00.000-07:00

Aether concept streamlines the intuitive understanding of many aspects of solid phase physics, for example the unusual quantum mechanic and transport properties of isolated sheets of graphite, so called graphene. Recently we discussed, how electrons orbitals can be modeled by adhering droplets of high surface tension fluid, so we can even build an unique mechanical analogy of PN junction in semiconductors. The mechanism of ballistic transport in single sheet graphene is analogous to metallic state of high temperature semiconductors: it's a result of high compression of electrons from delocalized p-orbitals of carbon atoms by their own surface tension, so we can model both phenomena by single theory.

We can illustrate the graphite lattice by model of stacked sieves composed of wire mesh, which are vetted by water surface, analogous to Fermi surface of electrons inside of graphite. In such way, stacked pile of meshes can hold a significant amount of water between its wires. But when we remove one layer of mesh, the amount of watter attached on it would decrease significantly because of higher surface/volume ratio. In AWT such ratio is driving force for virtually all phenomena from elementary particles to black holes.

Due the higher pressure inside of graphene orbitals the electrons behave like chaotic superfluid inside of hole stripes in HT superconductors in over-doped state. With compare to superconductors, the pressure of free orbital surface on graphene layer isn't still sufficient for formation of fully chaotic system of electrons, but low energy excitations would propagate here in much higher speed, then electrons inside of common metals, because electrons are forced to move as a single body through delocalized orbitals and their charge is propagated in waves of collective surface plasmon excitations, i.e. like bosons.

We can understand this behavior by motion of wagons in train with compare to motion of string of cars. Free cars on the street are forced to accelerate and brake to avoid obstacles and mutual collisions under significant lost of energy. Wagons in train doesn't suffer such problem, because they're compacted, so that whole train is moving like single body and the lost of energy due the acceleration/deceleration of individual wagons is limited here significantly. While loose electrons in metals are forced to avoid mutually, they radiate energy during their mutual collisions via electromagnetic waves. Inside of graphene orbitals such mechanism is limited the more, the more electrons are collapsed. Inside of hole stripes of HT superconductors electrons are compressed in such a way, the radiative lost of energy is decreased to nearly zero here.

This week's hype of string theory - or just another evidence of Aether model?

2009-07-08T15:12:00.000-07:00

String theory (ST) is believed to provide description of particles by model of 1D stringy loops. While this model has worked only for bosons inside of atom nuclei (for which it was proposed originally at the beginning of 70's), it was extended later for N-dimensional strings, so called branes and the number of string theories increased significantly, but without larger success, measured in number of testable predictions. Recently Leiden University presented article "Physical Reality of String Theory Demonstrated", in which scientists modeled some aspects of phase transition in hight temperature superconductors by concept of AdS/CFT duality, developed for ST originally. Such result is no surprise for AWT, because it allows to model HT superconductivity by ballistic charge transfer through field of electrons, highly compressed by presence of hole stripes. While individual concepts of string theory (concept of branes, hidden dimensions, AdS/CFT correspondence or even holographic principle) may become relevant for particle physics, as a whole ST remains void and fringe theory, because concept of hidden dimensions violates Lorentz symmetry, which the formal model of ST is based on.

Aether Wave theory therefore explains strings as a foamy density fluctuations of hypothetical dense gas, which is forming vacuum. While electrons in superconductors are heavily compressed near holes by Coulomb forces, they behave in similar way, like particles on event horizon of black holes and they forms "stringy" fluctuations of density - so we can use some of ST concepts for description of this system.

If such model is still relevant for string theorists, it would simply mean, particle strings are formed by highly compressed fermion field as well - which is essentially AWT model. Such result excludes model of particles formed by isolated strings and branes, as presented in naive drawings from Brian Greene's popular books and TV shows. Instead of this, every particle is formed by compact cluster of foamy density fluctuations, formed by another particles.

But string theory wasn't designed for such purpose - it was supposed to describe fermion itself, not the compact systems of fermions. While ST failed this target apparently from obvious reasons, the endeavor to model superconductivity by AdS/CFT correspondence is just an attempt to make the best of a bad job. We should realize, how string theorists are frustrated after forty years of ST development, while still having no real physical system to describe. Now they're modeling dense system of fermions instead of individual particles - and they're still happy.... Even worse - it seems, they even didn't spot the difference!

The true is, HT superconductivity is conceptually quite simple phenomenon and no working knowledge of string theory is required for its intuitive understanding at all. String theorists shouldn't forget it, when pretending boldly, they can provide the very first / only description of this phenomena, explanation the less. From AWT follows, every dense cloud of compressed electrons should exhibit a superconductivity and we can model it by computer simulations of repulsing particle field, or by numerical solution of Schrödinger equation on field of charged particles, i.e. via standard means of quantum mechanics without introduction of concepts borrowed from ad hoced theories.

AWT and multiple time dimensions

2009-06-27T17:51:00.001-07:00

Concept of multiple time dimensions is dual to atemporal universe concept and AWT supports them both. In mathematical physics, a framework of equations is often put forward to model the physical universe. In some sense, a dimension simply means that a mathematical variable exists in some equation, allowing the use of certain mathematical tools. The physical implications of multiple dimensions are theoretical, at best; as it is not always clear what real meaning these extra dimensions actually have. Ascribing real, physical existence to multi-dimensional universes is largely a fringe idea and is not widely accepted amongst the scientific community because of lack of experimental support. Note that the concept of multiple time arrows excludes the concept of single God and creation, both predicate logics of formal math rigor, which are based on single causual time arrow and as such is thereofore refused both by deists, both by proponents of mathematical universe.

While multiple time concept gains popularity in recent time in the similar way, like atemporal universe (1, 2, 3, 4), deeper insight of AWT is greatly welcomed here. One of the first physicists to suggest the idea of inverse time variable was P.A.Dirac for his antimatter formalism in the 1930s and Andrei Sakharov in the 1970s. S. Hawking later proposed the concept of imaginary time on background of imaginary complex numbers, used in quantum mechanics. A second temporal dimension is also seen in Penrose's twistor theory.

F-theory is a branch of string theory introduced by Cumrun Vafa, who develops mathematical descriptions, which involved a second time variable, reportedly. While it's said, many branches of F-theory involve multiple temporal (time) dimensions, Ed Witten has argued, that the second time dimension of F-theory is only a mathematical fiction used to simplify calculations. Put simply, Witten accepts additional spatial dimensions, but acceptance of at least one additional temporal dimension is less popular amongst researchers. It was established after recent discussion on Wikipedia, that F-theory is not a "two-time" theory of physics, because it has metric signature (11,1). This controversy documented illustrates the depth of confusion in contemporary physics, where clear interpretation of piles of formal equations, mechanically derived by various theorists from mutually inconsistent postulate sets remains completely unclear.

Nevertheless, from AWT perspective the situation is still quite synoptic, here. Until F-theory is claimed to be part of string theory, it's expected to follow Lorentz invariance as one of fundamental postulates of string theory. And the Lorentz invariance violates the concept of multiple radiative time arrows, so no place for additional time arrow exists in context of whatever version of string theory. Indeed, such constrain violates the concept of hidden dimensions too, because these compacted dimensions should manifests itself just by violation of Lorentz invariance, which renders string theory a fringe theory as a whole. The situation is even more complicated by fact, contemporary physics distinguishes many definitions of time, the definitions of time arrow in particular - which aren't guaranteed to be compatible mutually under various conditions. This case just illustrates the depth of general level of confusion in contemporary physics and the urgent need of robust conceptual basis based on predicate logics, i.e. in similar way, like formal math remains based so far.

AWT just illustrates, it's a refusal of Aether concept, which prohibits us to see the hidden dimensions all around us - in this sense, it belongs between bests supporters of string theory concepts. Despite of this, the perspective of multiple time dimensions is just a special observational perspective based on exsintric (quantum theory oriented) view of reality and it has no place in strictly local and causual insintric perspective, as being used in relativity, in special relativity theory in particular. The mixing of exsintric and insintric perspective isn't recommended here, as it leads to mathematical singularities and conceptual confusion, above presented.

The general understanding of radiative and thermodynamics time arrow in context of omnidirectional Universe expansion is, the forward time arrow leads to expansion of matter into smaller particles, including particles of radiation, i.e. bosons. This is the reason, why we cannot travel in time in larger extent, or we would evaporate or collapse. Evaporation is generally considered as a spontaneous process during which the entropy increases. But such view isn't quite general, because it's generally followed by spontaneous symmetry breaking, i.e. condensation of matter into larger groups as a result of gravitational collapse. Because physicists aren't sure, which process is "more spontaneous" here, the omnidirectional expansion of space-time from insintric perspective can be considered dual to gravitational collapse of matter, forming such space-time. In AWT the general boundary separating both these perspectives is completely observer dependent, i.e. the CMB or human scale, which is adopted to CMB scale.

Briefly speaking, all objects larger then CMB photons tends to condense by shielding effect of these photons, while the smaller ones are separated. The CMB scale corresponds the scale of solitons inside of human brains, as it brings the maximal degree of complexity, which we can interact with in common life. From human perspective every birth alternates death, the smaller organisms then CMB photons are serving like parasites or source of food for these larger ones, the droplets of rain smaller then CMB photons would evaporate in rain on behalf of larger ones due the surface dependency of vapor tension, and so on. From our observational perspective one half of universe matter would evaporate into CMB photons due the proton decay, while the rest of it will condense into black holes of the same size in the similar way, like false vacuum has separated into matter and antimatter during inflation. As we can see, we can met with dual time arrows all around us, because with respect of time dimensions our world is quite symmetrical and reversible and no prevailing arrow of entropy exists here, in fact.

From general perspective of AWT both history, both future of observable part of our Universe remains fragmentized into infinitelly many time arrows like foam membrane, which manifests by quantum uncertainty on both macroscopic scale (the past), both microscopic scale (the future). It means, time has a character of fractal foam or tree (1) in the same way, like the space foam - just dual to the later one. While such perspective is dual to atemporal Universe, we can say safely, both groups of scientists have their side of truth, here.

Art and curvature of space-time

2009-06-27T03:35:00.000-07:00

Being general theory, AWT explains many aspects of symmetry and periodicity in art and beauty theory. For example in Aether theory a fuzzy boundary exists between insintric and exsintric observational perspective, which affects the perceiving of space-time curvature bellow and above human distance scale. Insintric perspective corresponds the deterministic, curvature geometry based view of relativity, where space-time is considered deformed, while path of light remains straight due Lorentz invariance. Exsintric perspective corresponds the perspective of quantum mechanics, which considers undeformed Hilbert space, while path of light is deformed heavily, thus forming fuzzy reality composed of overlapped particles, where Lorentz invariance remains violated heavily. Bellow human distance scale the meaning of both these perspectives becomes reversed.

In this context an interesting question may arise, whether some objective, curvature based boundary between impressionism and expressionism in visual art exist? In general, impressionism is earlier movement, related to rather optimistic illustrations of real exteriors oriented to future - whereas the expressionism is more recent movement, connected more to internal, abstract and tragical feeling of the past. Abstract or psychical impressionism is based on intuitive preference of overlapping spots (tachism), where positive curvatures and altitude prevails, while expressionism is more rational art, based on curves and lines with zero or negative curvature and pessimistic connotations (informel). Note that expressionistic art is often generated mechanically or by algoritmic digital techniques. The distance scale between positive curvature of blobs and negative curvature of areas and lines still remains around 1.7 cm, i.e. at range of CMB wavelength scale.

Psychic impressionism of Jeff Lewis, 2001:

Jackson Pollock, Autumn rhythm, 1950:

Karin Kuhlmann: Inflammable matter, 2005:

Such perspective would explain the subliminal value (and objective price) of J. Pollock's abstract oil drip "paintings", which are of fractal nature (albeit their fractal dimension is rather low) and where the spot and lines feature of 2D curvature remains rather balanced in it - so they appear most transformable/transformative from our subconscious view, because they illustrate dual character of Aether foam in its critical Lifshitz point most exactly.

AWT and atemporal universe

2009-06-23T15:05:00.000-07:00

In recent time the popularity of atemporal (timeless) Universe concept gained in similar way, like the popularity of emergence concept. This is not so surprising, because human understanding converges to Aether model rather quickly and both emergence, both atemporality belongs between important aspects of behavior of dense particle field. Such dense particle system is highly chaotic and atemporal and because no energy can propagate through it at distance, it can be considered "aspatial" as well. It simply has no meaning from causal perspective, as it behaves like empty void singularity with respect to energy and information spreading at distance. Unfortunately, just because various proponents of atemporal concept (J.A. Wheeler, D. Bohm, P. Yourgrau, Dennis A. Wright, J. Barbour's, P. Lynds, Ron Larther, Amrit S. Sorli and many others) didn't connected it with Aether concept explicitly, the concept of atemporality was left ignored by mainstream because of apparent lack of easy to follow (if any..) testable predictions (like the absence of global enthropy changes). Pure tautological idea without arrow of implicate logic isn't apparently enough even for positivistic approach of contemporary science from utilitarian reasons - no energy gradient has occured here.

In AWT the concept of time remains perfectly dual to concept of space. We can even imagine a hypothetical civilization, which would navigate through its dual Universe via time intervals mediated by longitudinal waves like bats - i.e. in dual way to human creatures, who are using space interval and transversal waves for such purpose (you can get the sample of bat clicking sound here). Therefore the concept of atemporal Universe is symmetric to concept of aspatial Universe and we can replace both of them by Aether concept easily without apparent lost of information.

This is because Aether concept still appears slightly more general, then the time or space concept and we can understand the relevance of particle nature of underwater for character of surface wave spreading even at the moment, when no surface wave can spread through it at all. This is because causal energy spreading in transversal waves isn't the only possible way of energy spreading and the longitudinal energy spreading is possible here, too. In addition, the concepts of both time, both space are rather abstract and derived from concept of particle environment like sand of water, which human mind has experienced first during its evolution. Therefore the water surface can serve as a good model for understanding of atemporal Universe concept. For example, we can imagine our space-time like 3D analogy of water surface, which we can observe via transversal surface waves only. What would we see on this surface?

At medium distance our view of 2D reality at water surface wouldn't differ very much from view of causal reality in 3D space. The so called capillary waves exhibit most pronounce transversal character of surface waves at 1.7 cm wavelength/distance scope and we can use them for explanation of relativity and Lorentz invariance concept in AWT. But at different dimensional scale our perspective would change radically.

At smaller distances the spreading of surface waves becomes dispersed into longitudinal waves by Brownian motion of water particles. These particles cannot be never seen by surface waves, because no object can serve both like subject, both like mean of observation at the same moment. But they still would lead to blurring of observable reality analogous to our observation of quantum phenomena at microscopic scale.

At the distant scale our view of reality would become analogous. As we know, only longitudinal waves can propagate at distance as so called gravity waves. It means, our vision of distant reality would become chaotic and blurry in the same way, like our observation of closest reality mediated by cosmic microwave background radiation. Gravity waves are related to vortices and tornados formation in fluids in analogous way, like gravitational waves in vacuum are related to black hole formation. Note that from exsintric perspective gravity waves remain tranversal ones in the same way, like capillary waves remains transversal from insintric perspective. We can met with 2D/3D version of T-duality and AdS/CFT correspondence in wave spreading here and because we can observe all artifacts in dual way, we can use water surface model for easy to understand prediction/explanation of quantum uncertainty principle. Note that the symmetry of longitudinal wave scale is violated toward longer wavelength even in logaritmic scale (compare the celerity curve for water above) - and we can use it for prediction/explanation of accelerated Universe expansion and CPT symmetry violation from particle simulation of space-time brane gradients as well.

Believe it or not, such view would change radically our understanding of cosmology at large scales. It would mean, our Universe is basically infinite and atemporal both at large, both at small scales and no real evolution or enthropy arrow occurs here. It would mean, what we can see in Hubble ultra deep field is not the formation of first galaxies in dark ages - it's just a foggy boundary of our part of Universe. It would mean, remote galaxies are widespread into infinity - we just cannot see them clearly. We can compare such view to the observation of landscape under haze. From distance every distant place appears blurry and foggy, although we can still believe, it would appear rather clear and transparent from local perspective. Every distant observer at the boundary of visible Universe would see our part of Universe from distant past in the similar manner, which we can experience in ultra deep Hubble field by now.

I do believe, the true motivation of atemporal Universe concept exist in a deep relativeness of observational perspective - but from AWT perspective this perspective isn't quite general, because it's dual to local perspective, which is indeed temporal and it has no meaning to generalize it for human observer, because we could not survive and/or exchange information in atemporal Universe anyway. Just the replacement of naked eye by devices enables us to interact with it vicariously. So we can always ask, which perspective may be more relevant for us - the remote abstract perspective dedicated to human intuition, which enables us understand and generalize - or the deeply local perspective represented by causal logics and formal math, which enables us to concretize and describe exactly the neighboring reality? From this perspective the atemporal Aether concept remains dual to fractal nested geometrodynamic concept - while the former one is still way way more palatable for human mind. We can still think, why is it so...

For me the most surprising aspect of AWT isn't the Aether concept itself - but a fact, nobody did ever attempted to think in such straightforward way. The common disbelief in Aether concept made people completely blind for dual vision of reality for long years. This should serve as a sufficient warning for human civilization: no matter how advanced it becomes, it may still remain quite primitive and short-seeing at certain level of thinking.

Did Aether concept hit the mainstream at last?

2009-06-15T08:48:00.000-07:00

By Arthur Schopenhauer all truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed and ignored. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted in quiet as being self-evident. It seems, dense Aether concept has reached its third stage by now. This post is a reaction to recent article Remarks on the world-sheet saga of Prof. Bert Schroer. As Jacques Distler has independently figured out on Clifford Johnson's blog, Schroer's general "reasoning" goes as follows:

Only zero-dimensional particles are acceptable building blocks in physics. ..Wtf...?!?
So string theory must be a theory of point-like particle fields with infinitely many components, too.
(The only question is, why scientists have realized just after forty years of string theory existence..)
This localization is inconsistent with the idea of world-sheets and the string theoretical interpretation of T-duality.

The expected denouncement of Lubos Motl had to follow. Every introduction of Aether model into physics fulfills predictable scenario, in which particle model will be used for politics and disposal of private animosities, rather then for reconciliation of existing theories. The pluralistic character of AWT model would be ignored during such confrontation completely. The problem isn't indeed in string theory, but in its postulate set. String theory is just formal layer built upon postulates, which could be reformulated anytime later. But because it's popularity serves as source of grant money for theoretical physicists, it's leads to easily predictable situation, when various people would add new and new postulates into theory, while ignoring former ones in order to call the result string theory anyway.

T-duality is the stand of (T)orroidal duality. We can imagine formation of such duality by torsion field inside of repulsing particle system or elastic fluid, which we would jump on like onto heavy urethane mattress. During which toroidal torsion deformations will be formed. At the moment, when the energy density/frequency of undulations exceed certain level, the inertia of environment must be taken into account and new daughter generation of smaller vortices perpendicular to original direction will be formed, and so on... In fluid mechanics this mechanism of vortex propagation is called Widnall's instability. From this follows, its a toroidal symmetry, which connect small and large distances by R-1/R relation. It's a continuous version of one to many duality, as expressed in following scheme:

Which conclusion follows from the above insights for string theory? Well, none specific. String theory is a theory of 1-dimensional quantum objects, which were later extended to N-dimensional quantum objects in M-theory. It's NOT theory of particle field or quantum loops or whatever else - and as such it's fully defined by its postulate set (or at least it should be..). It has no meaning to speculate, if description of T-duality or wordsheet in existing string theory is consistent or not, until it follows from string theory postulates in rigorous way. The introduction of quantum loops or particle field into string theory is indeed possible and string field theory or string net liquid concept takes account into it. But such theories aren't string theory anymore and they can lead to completely different predictions, then the AWT or string theory in its classical form and we cannot expect consistency in anything.

Until we believe, only zero-dimensional particles are acceptable building blocks of physics, no additional constrains or postulates of string theory are required to make such concept testable and predictable - or such theory becomes overloaded by its postulates, thus leading into new generation of fuzzy landscape of many possible solutions.

Can dimensionful quantities change?

2009-06-14T13:58:00.000-07:00

This post is a reaction to recent deduction of Lubos Motl "Changes of dimensionful quantities are unphysical", presented on his blog. As Lubos belongs between conservative proponents of formal approach to theoretical physics, string theory in particular, his stance can be understood easily in this context. String theories are rather large group of quantum field theories, which are based on combination of quantum mechanics and special relativity postulates - between many others, which are specified less or more vaguely by math formalism used. Because Lorentz invariance belongs special relativity postulates, it's evident, string theory cannot derive violation its own assumptions, i.e. Lorentz invariance violation in rigorous way with compare to quantum gravity theory, which is general relativity based, so it uses a different postulate set. Therefore we can understand negativistic stance to all theories dual to Lorentz invariance, which are considering the changes in fundamental quantities, the "varying light speed" theories in particular.

In AWT Lorentz invariance is completely matter of observational perspective. The gravitational lensing can be interpreted both like manifestation of variable light speed in vacuum near massive object (an exsintric perspective of quantum mechanics), both like manifestation of constant light speed in curved space-time (an insintric general relativity perspective). The observer, which is deformed together with space-time inside of gravitational lens would have an tendency to consider light speed invariant and space-time deformed, unfortunately its rather abstract and local stance, as real observer usually cannot stay at the center of gravity lens (for example at the center of Sun or large galaxy).

The crucial point is the definition of fundamental SI units here, the meter and seconds units in particular. Until 1975 light speed was defined by using of iridium meter prototype since the second can be defined more precisely than the metre, in 1983 the metre was re-defined to be the distance light travels in a vacuum in ¹⁄_299,792,458 of a second, making the speed of light in vacuum a defined constant, c = 299,792,458 m/s. By AWT the omnidirectional space-time expansion can be interpreted as a fall of observable matter into black hole, the surface gradient of which is forming space-time. During this process vacuum becomes more dense gradually, so that transversal waves of light spreads more slowly through it, which the observer inside of it can interpret as an expansion of space-time. Whereas the observer which is using exsintric perspective would see the collapse of vacuum foam instead - from this reasons the cosmological constants differs so much in relativity and quantum mechanics. In SI system of units meter unit cannot change with density of vacuum and the second unit can change only if mass of cesium atoms will change with respect to kilogram unit, which may occur only, if cesium atoms will change their mass in dense vacuum in different way, then the iridium alloy. After then even gravity constant and fine structure constant may change (compare the Expanding Earth theory). The decrease of gravity constant would increase the frequency of supernovae used as a standard candles for measurement of distance and change our understanding of acceleration of Universe expansion observed. Recent measurements of a possible variation of the gravitational constant showed an upper limit for a relative change of 5•10^-12, while Expanding Earth theory needs a variation ten times higher than that measured. Changes in dimensionless fine structure constant observed in distant quasars and Oclo reactor are still unconfirmed.

From insintric perspective the massive bodies would expand together with space-time, but because space-time is preexpanded already, massive objects smaller then human/CMB distance scale (1,7 cm) would collapse slowly then the vacuum and they would shrink effectively, whereas larger object would expand faster in the form of radiation (i.e. they would evaporate in vacuum into bosons), until they fill the volume of the whole universe like gummi bears inserted into hot watter. It's evident, if we would measure the distance by wavelength of light, this distance wouldn't change, but the large massive objects would expand gradually and they would evaporate losing their mass. This prediction of AWT was confirmed recently, because iridium meter prototypes are still used for fitting of interferometers results.

The changes in kilogram prototype seem to be consistent with this finding, although the "Shrinking Kilogram Mystery" can be the consequence of abrasion due the primitive and somewhat drastic "cleaning methods", especially the usage of hot vapor, followed by mechanical wiping (note that the poor etalon is even manipulated without gloves). Iridium-platinum alloy is soften, then the chrome plated steel - so I'm a bit surprised personally, the changes in kilogram prototype mass aren't just a much bigger.

When rigid body meter prototype is used, the light speed could slow down gradually, because of increasing vacuum density with compare to matter density. From historical observations follows, such possibility cannot still be excluded with certainty.

From implicate topology follows, every system of physical quantities will remain always inconsistent by definition - if it would be fully consistent, we could replace all quantities by single one. It means, the change in one constant will affect the others in unpredictable way from less or more distant perspective. Analogous situation exists in theories based on at least two mutually inconsistent postulates: if these postulates will be consistent, we could replace them by single one, thus obtaining a tautology. This means, no theory can remain universally valid, or it couldn't be falsified (compare the AWT approach to Goedel's theorems). Therefore the finding of universally invariant quantity corresponds the finding of generally valid TOE. By AWT such quantity in gradient driven reality could serve the quantity of change as defined by polyomino algebra.

AWT and gravity

2009-06-13T12:13:00.000-07:00

This post is motivated by recent NewScientist article Seven things that don't make sense about gravity. By AWT gravity is manifestation of shielding effect (supergravity), similar to Casimir force in 3D space. Massive objects are standing wave packets of energy, which spreads to their neighborhood in evanescent waves, which are making vacuum more dense. Because energy spreads more slowly in more dense environment, omnidirectional energy waves are retarded and shielded by this environment.

This model is consistent with Fatio-LeSage theory of gravitation, which remains after four hundred years the only theory capable to explain/predict the inverse square law, on which Bullialdus-Hooke-Newton's gravitational law and Einstein's field equations of general relativity are based (the potential energy field term and its gravitational constant are borrowed from gravitational law). Sailing boats at the undulating water surface are attracted together by the same mechanism.

Note that LeSage theory implies the existence of tachyons in form of "ultramundane universe particle flux" propagating in hidden dimensions, which is consistent with holographic principle.

The connection of gravity and omnidirectional universe expansion can be understood on background of general relativity and quantum mechanics theories duality, which is expressed in formal form by Maldacena's AdS/CFT correspondence and it manifests itself in most pronounced way of "vacuum catastrophe" in prediction of cosmological constant and density of vacuum, describing omnidirectional Universe expansion. Briefly speaking, quantum field theory observes particles and their gravitational lenses from exsintric (outer) perspective of flat space-time, so it considers the omnidirectional expansion of space-time as a collapse. By Schrodinger equation of quantum mechanics all wave packets of free particles would expand in speed of light, which is apparently unphysical solution. Such expansion is compensated by omnidirectional space-time collapse or by gravity field, which cannot be predicted/derived by using of quantum theory.

General relativity describes quantum wave packets and gravitational lenses from insintric perspective (where observer remains affected by gravity field) and it suffers the similar, just dual problem: it predicts the existence of black holes composed of gravitons and gravitational geons, composed of gravitational waves - but it cannot explain, why such object cannot collapse into singularity due their gravity. The concept of omnidirectional space-time expansion prohibits such collapse again. As we can see, the concept of omnidirectional expansion/collapse is closely linked into gravitational force in such a way, we can say, the gravitation is the acceleration force of omnidirectional universe expansion inside of gradient of vacuum density. By AWT omnidirectional universe expansion is an emergent dispersion phenomena, which we can experience inside of field of density fluctuations like during observation inside of fog or foam.

By using of particle model we can therefore predict/explain:

Why strength of gravity is indirectly proportional to 2nd power of distance in 3D space-time and why gravity law becomes violated at the proximity toward higher dimensions (Casimir force operates in six dimensions and its indirectly proportional to fifth power of distance between spherical points, fourth power of distance between planparallel plates).
Why speed of gravitational waves is inherently superluminal by the same way, like speed of underwater waves exceeds the speed of surface waves and why we cannot observe/detect gravitational waves by using of light directly, but by changes of cosmic microwave background noise intensity.
Why the gravitational waves and force are so weak with comparison to electromagnetic waves/force by using of underwater/surface analogy again (the ratio of force constants of electromagnetic and gravitation (~10E+40) would correspond the ratio of speed of electromagnetic and gravitational waves propagation and the ratio of space-time expansion/compactification during inflation period)
Why gravity is attractive force only in the world, where observable particles are of positive curvature only. In AWT the repulsing gravity is equivalent to pressure of radiation, energy field is an area of negative curvature (a "hole") of space. Inside of Lagrangian points the gravity field would become of repulsive character at least locally. Antimatter particles of negative surface curvature would exhibit an "antigravity" force at least partially.
Why we cannot have a rigorous theory of quantum gravity. While general relativity and quantum theory are based on mutually reciprocal geometries and T-dual perspectives and formally inconsistent postulate set, we cannot expect an rigorously explicit and self-consistent theory based on quantum uncertainty. The string theory suffers the same conceptual problem, like quantum gravity and other quantum field theories.
Why existence of life is related to presence of gravity. By AWT the last step of life evolution were tightly connected to gravitational force - not just to the electromagnetic forces and surface tension phenomena, which cannot enable the required degree of complexity and energy density of space-time events (i.e. mutations). It means, without gravity force (for example at the case of tiny planets in absence of tidal effects) the life could not evolve to the required degree of complexity so fast, if ever at all and organic life is not just adapted to gravity, but it even requires it for its formation and evolution.
How we can reflect gravitational waves or shield gravitational force. In analogy to water surface, the longitudinal waves are reflected by density gradients composed of chaotically moving massive particles. By AWT such particles exists in superconductors due the compensation of repulsive forces of electrons under mutual pressure, which leads to delocalization of their quantum waves to macroscopic size, enabling shielding effect. When a gravitational wave at microwave frequencies impinges superconducting layer, the delocalization of the charge carriers causes them to undergo non-geodesic motion relative to the geodesic motion of the decohered holes in the superconductor lattice due the equivalence principle and charge separation. This excitation effect enhances the interaction of a gravitational wave with a superconductor relative to that of normal matter, so that the wave will be reflected from rotating superconducting film in gravitomagnetic analogy of Barnett Effect (1, 2).

The gravitational shielding was observed first in Podkletnov's experiments above rotating superconductor disk and it was examined further by measuring of angular momentum by gravitometers and by fiber optic gyroscope signal (1, 2, 3) above rotating superconductors. From AWT follows, such shielding could hinder the formation of entangled states and "spooky action at distance" as well, thus increasing the stability and safety of quantum cryptography, for example.

AWT and particle model of quantum mechanics

2009-05-26T13:41:00.000-07:00

By AWT Schrödinger equation describes elastic string (red line on the animation bellow), the mass density of which (blue line on the animation bellow) is proportional to energy density of string in each space/time interval (i.e. the Hamiltonian distribution) by mass-energy equivalence principle. Therefore many quantum phenomena can be illustrated by nonlinear elastic liquids, the supercritical fluid at multiple Lifshitz point or soap foam in particular. The inertia and elastic properties of water are subtle, but we can still observe macroscopic analogy of double slit experiment and quantum mechanic behavior at the case of tiny droplets, bouncing on undulating water surface. The direct connection of Newtonian mechanics to quantum mechanics (i.e. a correspondence principle) can be illustrated with computer simulations of elastic fluid composed of repulsing particles. Computing power of contemporary GPU's and parallel processors is sufficient to run such simulations of 300.000+ particles in real time.

On the simulation example bellow the density scale of resulting density fluctuations is exaggerated - so we can see clearly, how underwater density wave follows surface waves like so called probability function solution of time dependent Schrödinger equation. The underwater sound wave corresponds the gravitational wave in vacuum analogy, whereas the transversal surface wave corresponds the photon wave. We can see, the underwater wave spreads in much higher speed, then the surface waves, because of higher number of dimensions involved and they're behaving like dispersive tachyons of negative rest mass. The longitudinal character of underwater wave results in fast dispersion, though, so that such waves can mediate only short distance range interactions (Casimir force and weak nuclear force in particular).

The density fluctuations of underwater waves correspond wave packets at the water surface, where energy spreads in lower speed, so that the probability of surface waves occurrence increases here. In this way, underwater density fluctuations can model the probability function of quantum wave and as such they can serve as a model of photons. We can see, density of water layers increases with thickness, i.e. with potential energy content and it depends on kinetic energy of surface wave (i.e. the frequency) as well, i.e. by the same way, like Hamiltonian term of Schrödinger equation.

At the real situation, the density fluctuations of water are subtle, so that only surface wave can be observed here. Under relativistic situation, when we are forced to observe the water by its own waves exclusively (which is situation, analogous to observation in vacuum), then the surface waves would be unobservable for us via surface waves due the Bose-Einstein distribution of waves, which are penetrating mutually like ghosts (compare the picture above). So that everything, what we would be allowed to see are just the nondispersive wave packets, i.e. solitons, refracting and bouncing from inner walls of underwater density fluctuations like tiny gravitational lenses (wave particle duality). The actual state of surface waves would remain unachievable for us, from this the indeterministic and probabilistic character of quantum mechanics follows.

These connections are all quite simple and trivial - so that only deep misunderstanding of Michelson-Morley experiment and strong disbelief in Aether model has prohibited the mainstream science in recognition of emergent character of quantum mechanics before many years already.

AWT and the fall of matter into black hole

2009-05-23T10:18:00.000-07:00

By classical physics matter during fall into black hole doesn't radiate, until the density of matter flux becomes so large, the mutual collision and friction of matter particles doesn't lead into lost of matter into accretion radiation even before the matter can reach event horizon. From AWT follows, part of matter will be always converted into accretion radiation, because matter is composed of nested density fluctuations of Aether and forces, which are keeping these density fluctuations together depends solely on the density gradients / space-time curvature at different levels of particle nesting. We can compare the dissolving of matter into accretion radiation to the dispersion of wet lumps of sand after immersion into watter. On air, the capillary forces are able to keep grains of sand together, whereas bellow water surface not.

By AWT the gravity field of black hole behaves like density gradient of Aether, which results into fast disintegration of matter even at the case, when matter falls very slowly. Because during accretion most of matter will evaporate into energy, the pressure of radiation keeps the residual particles away from gravity field or it can even blow them away at the polar axis of black hole, where the ratio of gravity field and electromagnetic field becomes highest (polar jet of black holes may be considered as an exaggerated case of gravitational brightening observable at the case of giant spinning stars). This effectively prohibits the formation of giant black hole by accretion mechanism, and we are forced to consider primordial origin of giant black holes at the heart of most galaxies. Only black hole merging ("brane collision") can increase the mass of black hole at the moment, when it was created already. The excessive matter will be emanated in the form of less or more widespread polar jet of naked singularity or quasar, after then. Occasionally part of accretion radiation may condense at the equatorial plane of black hole, thus forming an accretion disk, which becomes the source of galactic matter and flat shape of most mature galaxies. After then, a similar process repeats inside of galaxies at stellar and planetary scales (Saturn rings), just in correspondingly faster way .

From the above mechanism follows, we can expect nested structure levels of event horizons inside of black hole, during which the character of radiated energy changes from weak to electromagnetic force. Only the most compact portion of hadron matter will survive the fall into black hole (axions and neutrinos) and these particles can pass event horizons rather freely like tachyons. The rest of matter in the form of photons, gluons and vector bosons will dissolve into graviton foam forming the interior of black hole. This foam can be perceived as CMB / Hawking radiation from outside.

We can consider, the matter of particle dissolved may condense inside of whole volume of black hole, thus restoring original entropy/information contained within particle. Ocassionally it could even reapear in the finelly divided form of CMB inside of our portion of observable Universe. But we could never follow such process in its entirety, because we would evaporate into accretion radiation a well before we could ever approach an event horizon. Which makes this description a somewhat abstract thing, testable only by dispersion of gravitational waves and/or neutrinos at distance.

AWT and one-to-many duality

2009-05-18T14:29:00.000-07:00

In AWT the existence of dualities is inherent an it follows from concept of gradient driven reality, which the AWT is based on. As the most general example of duality we can consider one-to-many duality (1:N relation). It's a permutation group, which surjectivelly maps every local object (i.e. number of particular configurations of many conformal states possible inside of object) to its probability distribution at the rest of space (probability of the occurance of these states outside of object). Because Universe is composed of nested density fluctuations from human perspective, people are naturally one of these fluctuations and the scope of their interactions (so called "human scale") is placed near the center of dimensional/energy density scale of observable Universe. We can say, the people are living at the middle of space-time brane, i.e. near inflexion point of density gradient, forming observable Universe, because it's the place of maximal complexity (i.e. space-time events enabling mutations during mankind evolution).

One of observable consequences of this insight is, habitable zone is placed in the middle of Milky Way galaxy boundary and the habitable zone is placed in the middle of solar system. From the very same reason we can expect, life has evolved at the gas-fluid-solid phase interface as well.

One to many duality manifests by many other ways. One observation may be, the most distant objects at the Planck boundary of observable Universe scale (i.e. the future boundary with respect to omnidirectional space-time expansion) are one-to-many dual to objects, living at the opposite boundary, i.e. the cosmological one (i.e. the past boundary). The semicontinuos counterpart of one-to-many duality is the famous AdS/CFT duality. It means, common black holes are dual to elementary particles - especially if we consider quantum gravity models of black holes, not just these relativistic ones.

By AWT elementary particles are formed by clusters of many smaller particles (virtual quarks) as well. The overlapping interactions (distance forces) of individual particles collapsed is what makes the composite interactions in many dimensions for us. If we imagine black holes as a dense stars full of particles, the conceptual similarity becomes quite apparent here.

If we consider common black holes as a gravitons or gravitational waves stars (gravastars or gravitational geons), then the counterpart of leptons are neutrino stars and the counterpart of mesons are unstable quark stars, which are composed of many quarks. The counterparts of baryons, neutrons in particular are the stable neutron stars. The common atom nuclei are 1:N related to collapsed stars, so-called white dwars and the common stars are dual to common atoms. Planets are dual to molecules, being formed by them. Well, and humans are 1:N dual to human civilization, living at the middle of their own scale.

We can deduce many fundamental aspects of reality (like the symmetry breaking) from the 1:N duality, i.e. from the fact, we are forming part of observable Universe - but not vice-versa. One consequence is, the curvature of all observable objects "inside" of our Universe is inherently positive and we can perceive them as a particles of matter, whereas the negative curvature objects are forming invisible holes, "voids" or particles of energy for us. Such conclusion may appear trivial for someone - but without AWT concept we probably never could explain it in logical way.

Please note that the implicate logic and formal math theorems are 1:N dual as well, because every formal theorem is based on many implications used in its derivation. Which can explain, why AWT appears so different with respect to mainstream physics, based on formal math.

Aether model of semiconductors

2009-05-16T13:59:00.000-07:00

Being particle fluid based, Aether model can simplify even the intuitive understanding of processes, which are notoriously described in common textbooks, for example the behavior of semiconductor junctions. Because movable electrons doesn't penetrate atom interior very much, by AWT metals can be considered as a dense sponge soaked by movable electrons like fluid, the shape of which roughly corresponds to Fermi surface.

Note that such foam exhibits surface of both positive, both negative curvature. Electrons are repulsing mutually, so they're covering both surfaces of this sponge. The wet surface of sponge is responsible for good electrical and thermal conduction of common metals. At presence of hole conductivity the conductive electrons are collected inside of foam cavities preferably. The flat areas of zero curvature cannot keep the conductive electrons due the balance of electrostatic forces, and they correspond the band gap, occurring in common semiconductors. Under situation, when the motion of free electrons remains restricted to sponge cavities in continuous stripes arranged in hyperlattice, which are serving like pipes full of highly compressed electron gas, we can expect high temperature superconductivity in such system.

Another interesting situation may occur, when two pieces of sponge of different surface curvature are connected together. We can model such situation by connecting of two pieces of porous material, the hydrophilic and hydrophobic one, soaked by moderate amount of water. Because hydrophobic surface repels polar molecules of water, the water will collect inside of pores, thus emulating hole conductivity of P-type semiconductors. The hydrophilic material is attracted by water surface, so that water is forming bridges connecting convex surfaces and it represents a N-type of conductor here.

At the moment, when two pieces of such materials are connected together, the portion of fluid from hydrophobic material is soaked into the hydrophilic half of junction, thus removing water from cavities of neighboring part of hydrophobic material. This is a direct analogy of formation of space charge zone / depletion layer of semiconductor junction. Note that suction of liquid from hydrophilic part of junction doesn't improve the water transfer, it just leads to removal of additional amount of water from hydrophobic part, thus leaving it even less conductive for water molecules.

A quite different situation may appear, when we push additional amount of water in hydrophilic part. After soaking the dry portion of hydrophilic junction, the excessive water will fill up the cavities, so it can pass freely through capillary junction. Apparently, a surface tension based "diode" is formed, but we can imagine even much more complex structures analogous to transistor, thyristor and others, based on capillary forces inside of porous materials of different polarity. Nature supposedly uses these principles for controlled osmosis inside of living cells already, because surface of cell membranes is porous and it contains both hydrophilic, both hydrophobic part, formed by phospholipides.

Note that pushing of fluid into our "capillary diode" requires to overcome pressure exerted by capillary repulsion during filling of emptied cavities inside of hydrophobic part of junction. This corresponds the voltage drop in forward bias direction of semiconductor junctions. We can even met with analogy of recombination at the flat portion of porous surface, when water droplets are forced to overcame negative surface tension, so their surfaces are moving in accelerated way. At the case of liquids of extreme surface tension (like the mercury inside of porous glass), such area can even become the source of audible noise, thus mimicking the formation of photons at the recombination centers of PN junction nearly completelly. Such centers can be observed by Lorentz microscopy directly in thin layer of low temperature superconductors (compare the embedded animation bellow).

Isn't it a bit strange, nobody has ever come with such trivial and intuitive models of superconductivity, not saying about semiconductors and semiconductor junction? Well, this is not so strange in contemporary physics, because particle based models cannot be handled easily by consecutive logics of formal math models, so that formal theorists avoids them. The more easily they can become subject of intuitive thinking and computer simulations, though.

AWT and collective guilt

2009-05-10T15:29:00.000-07:00

Recently I've read about case of w eb executive working for TF1, Europe's largest TV network, who sent an email to his Member of Parliament opposing the government's law proposal of Internet disconnections for those who repeatedly infringe online copyrights. His MP forwarded the email to the minister, who forwarded it to TF1. The author of the email soon received a letter saying he is fired for "strong differences with the company's strategy" in a private email sent from a private address (French corporations and government are entangled in ways that people in other countries might find unfamiliar). The point was, MP people were passing the e-mail along for informational purposes reportedly - though if that were true, one wonders, why the identifying information wasn't stripped out of the message. No one "meant" for this to happen - but happened it has, anyway - just because of careless approach of responsible people chaining the sensitive information, which was supported by their own biased stance.

The above case reopens the question of collective guilt. This is subconsciouses emotional reaction, that results among a group of individuals, when it is perceived that the group illegitimately harmed another people. It just illustrates, how sensitive indicator of morality our conscience is - especially in western society, which is "guilt-based" rather then "shame-based". By AWT such morality becomes a manifestation of emergent phenomena in system, when only slightly biased stance of individual components may lead to the fatal results and phase transforms. We can illustrate this situation by large group of people, waiting for opening of discount shop. Even though every member of crowd exerts only weak force to its neighbors, some of people at the head of crowd will get trampled by this crowd.

AWT explains emergence of such action inside of multiparticle field by the assumption, every system of finite sized consists of large number of particles, circumscribed by their surface density gradient, which is manifestation of internal spin in hidden dimensions. In space with even number of spatial dimensions the particle spin is compensated by the same way, like the mutual motion of particles, because of lack of chirality of such system.

But in 3D the situation becomes different. The translation momentum of particles remains compensated at the sufficient distance, whereas the momentum of their internal motion (i.e. the spin) not. Such system behaves like spin field of cellular domains, analogous to Weiss domains of ferromagnetic material. Due the nonzero surface curvature of individual particles the resulting spin of whole system will remain always unbalanced and it undergoes so called spontaneous symmetry breaking. This is because of hairy ball theorem, which states, that there is no nonvanishing continuous tangent vector field on the sphere ("you can't comb a hairy ball flat without creating a cowlick"). From this reason a field formed by system of 3D spherical particles would always exhibit a nonzero vorticity, which would cumulate with distance and it manifest itself in lattice of vorticity cells at the distance. Which basically means, we cannot have a 3D space without black holes separated at distance in less or more regular domains. This is the reason, why our space-time appears filled by black holes even at the most distant view of Hubble ultradepth field without apparent limit. Just the existence of space-time in limited numbers of dimensions is the reason, why its symmetry becomes violated in presence of many higher dimensions undeniably.

The principle of collective guilt has its practical application at the case of particle physics, when mainstream physics insists on safety of LHC experiments , although official safety analysis ignores many apparent risky factors because of biased stance of mainstream physics toward LHC. The subtle bias of physical community can lead to the same result, like carefully planned conspirative activity of mad terrorist just because of cumulative effect of individual ignorance. As another case can serve the politically motivated refusal of Aether theory at the beginning of 20th century, the rise of Nazi party and Nazism in Germany before WW II or the blind adherence to peer review principles, which has lead to ignorance of cold fusion or antigravity experiments. The memo is, we should never underestimate collective ignorance, when more individuals are involved without public feedback by Czech proverb: "A hundred times nothing killed the donkey".

AWT and quintessence concept

2009-05-10T06:29:00.000-07:00

In physics, quintessence is a hypothetical form of dark energy postulated as an explanation of observations of an accelerating of universe expansion. Quintessence causes the effect we experience as gravity. Since quintessence exists only in empty space, it does not exist where sub-atomic particles exist. A planet such as the Earth consists of many sub-atomic particles, and between those particles, quintessence exists.

Since Earth's moon consists of fewer sub-atomic particles than those that make up the Earth, there is a smaller volume where quintessence is absent when compared to the Earth. Therefore, the push from quintessence is less restricted by the moon. Hence, the difference in the quintessence push from the volume of space encompassed by the moon versus the volume of space encompassed by the Earth results in what we experience as the pull of gravity.

The quintessence concept follows from diffusion of particles in dense Aether model of AWT and it corresponds the "ultramundane flux" (i.e. flux of tachyons or gravitational waves), which was conjectured by Fatio/Le Sage theory of gravitation (1690) before more than three hundred years.

The usage of new denomination for classical well known concepts of former authors without quotation violates the principles of Occam's razor and scientific priority and it's called a plagiarism. In this case it's rather an another attempt of mainstream proponents to cover the apparent fact, they fighted against Aether concept for many years, while adopting Aether ideas quietly on background - thus fooling the publicity and itself (the usage of Lorentz invariance or Lagrangian and Hamilton mechanics borrowed from Aether theory is the problem of the same category).

In dual way, we can consider introduction of quintessence concept like attempt, how to avoid the censorship of peer-review during presenting of extrapolations of Aether theory. Every sectarian community doesn't allow and tolerate mistakes in the eyes of publicity, which leads to reintroduction of formerly misunderstood ideas under new names. Such behavior is even more stupid and amoral, then the stance of Holy Church, which simply refused scientific ideas - but it didn't stole them for the sake of its theology.

In AWT the dark energy is the mechanism dual to dark matter, i.e. the surface tension of density blobs of vacuum, which are source of gravity field and gravitational lensing phenomena. On the outer sides of every blob the gravity field is of negative curvature, which leads to repulsive force at the distance. The same effect is responsible for weak nuclear force at short distances or for repulsion of mercury droplets at human scale. It means, when massive objects during inflation achieve certain critical distance, they're repelled by repulsive force instead of attraction.

Neither AWT, neither relativity theory are forced to consider quintessence at all, because

omnidirectional expansion of space-time is one of implicit consequences of general relativity (a positive or negative cosmological constant)
the omnidirectional expansion of space-time in connection of curvature of space-time concept of gravity field in general relativity leads to the very same effect, like the quintessence.

Which basically means, quintessence concept is redundant both for aetherists, both for relativists - as both the dark energy, both dark matter phenomena can be explained by existing theories without (re)introduction of ad-hoced concepts and postulates.

AWT and multiverse concept

2009-05-08T13:34:00.000-07:00

This post is a reaction to recent NewScientist article, promoting the string theory motivated view of multiverse concept by Brian Greene. The crucial problem here is, the multiverse concept is poorly defined even with respect to other concepts of mainstream physics, the AWT the less. How the scope of multiverse is defined? How is it related to "many worlds" or "parallel universe" concepts?

"Many worlds" concept was promoted by Hugh Everett originally (1957) and it usually means, different observers would see the same space-time event differently.
Parallel universe concept usually considers the existence of another, less or more similar - just causally separated - universe at the different place of space-time.
Multiverse in string theory interpretation usually means, at some (if not all) places of our space-time another space-time events may occur in hidden dimensions set alternatively.

If we define our universe like place, where known laws of existing physics remains valid, we can say, our Universe is defined as a place, where some sufficiently general theory of everything remains valid. If string theory is such a theory, for example, we can postulate our Universe as a place, where string theory remains valid and the parallel universe will be place, where string theory isn't valid. Such definition would mean, string theory isn't TOE anymore, or it even contradicts itself, as it predict something, which violates the string theory. Which is probably not, what the string theorists (prof. Brian Greene or Michio Kaku in particular) expects/promote.

OK, we can define a parallel universe as a place, where all existing physical laws remains valid, it just exhibits another configuration or different physical constants. For example, it's the place, where existing particles are creating different structures, then those, which we know from our Universe. For example, in tropic areas electrons and protons are forming rain forests, whereas in Arctic areas they're forming ice only - is that what the multiverse means? Supposedly not. So, we can consider, in multiverse only gravitons (axions or neutrino or black holes..) can exists, all remaining particles or structures are of different nature, stability, etc. As such multiverse could serve the interior of neutron star, after then. Which is still not, what we are looking for.

Another definition of multiverse may be based on relativity phenomena. Each of observer would see a bit different reality, while these realities are still tied together by common radiative time arrow. For example, observer in relative motion would see the same muon less stable or even decomposed, then observer at rest. It seems, such situation still doesn't fulfill the definition of multiverse, as it falls belong realm of predictions of classical relativity.

The uniqueness of radiative time arrow would be violated at the case, when light signals propagates through density gradient of vacuum, so that the gravitational lensing takes place. It means, a single space-time events has a multiple consequences at different places. Is this, what the multiverse means, already? We should realize, the violation of radiative time arrow would mean the violation of Lorentz symmetry as well, which is prohibited in strictly rigorous string theory, because this theory is using special relativity in its derivations and as such it uses Lorentz symmetry as one of its fundamental postulates.

At the case of rotating black hole, the location of event horizon would depend on polarization of light - vacuum exhibits a birefringence and related phenomena, vacuum analogies of Faraday and Kerr effects. It's the another, even deeper manifestation of quantum uncertainty at macroscopic scale. Everett's interpretation of quantum entanglement uses the many worlds concept - is such manifestation of quantum uncertainty what, the multiverse means in string theory? It seems not, as string theory itself is quantum mechanics based already - the prediction of quantum uncertainty in quantum mechanic way would become a trivial conclusion here.

In AWT the existence of multiverse depends solely on observational perspective and the scope of observations. From AWT perspective, which is most general possible one, no real place for multiverse concept can exists, because everything fulfills the very same theory here. If it doesn't, then the AWT cannot predict it in causal way. From the above follows, observational perspective is always defined by observer. Because people are the only known creatures, who can observe the things like electrons, photons and black holes, the observational scope is defined by abilities of people to observe these artifacts. It has no meaning to ask, whether the multiverse can appear differently, because we couldn't see them at all. Which effectively means, no multiverse can exist here, or it would become a part of our Universe.

Because the causal perspective of people is defined by transversal energy wave spreading inside of random system of Aether particles, we would see whole Universe exactly the same. If some newly revealed physical laws would enable us to see a larger portion from our Universe, then the newly revealed portion of Universe would share the same laws with the portion of Universe observed by now. For example, we can consider, if the observable portion of Universe appears like interior of black hole, then the outer Hyper-Universe would appear exactly the same, like the observable generation of Universe - or we could never interact with it, to predict or to see it the less.

Such conclusion fits the Copernican principle in particular, by which every observable portion of Universe doesn't differ significantly from another portions of Universe and our location in Universe is not significant in any way. This theorem corresponds the anthropic principle, in which every product of long term evolution would see its environment as a best place for its life - just because it's a product of long term adaptation to this environment. From this perspective anthropic principle becomes a sort of self-referencing tautology. Which means, you cannot predict nothing very much usefull with using it, but you cannot disprove it so easily as well.

Some positivistic people aren't convenient with antropic view of reality, though - as they believe, the random model of Universe isn't sufficient for explanation of "unique character" of observable reality. They didn't realize, inside of dense random particle environment only transversal energy can propagate at distance, because longitudinal waves compensate mutually even at short distance. To be able to see our Universe sufficiently large, we should become adopted perfectly to observation of Universe in causal way, i.e. with transversal waves, which puts rather strict limit to the possible appearance of universal randomness. And the deeper in space-time perspective we are supposed to see, the stronger such limit should follow.

Four approaches to dark matter

2009-05-08T09:53:00.000-07:00

As J. Duffield once pointed out, people often say, gravitational anomalies are evidence for dark matter, but they aren’t. Dark matter is a hypothesis that attempts to explain the evidence. The evidence is the gravitational anomaly, instead. The dark matter phenomena can be explained in context of existing theories at least four ways, which appear nearly equivalent phenomenologically. The another approach, based on dispersion in particle field based is illustrated here:

The simplest explanation of dark matter (DM) is based on AWT, by which every gravity field is a result of density gradient of Aether. At the case of massive bodies the highest density gradient exists just at the surface of massive object. This density gradient is a source of additional weak gravity field of negative curvature, which attracts and collects the particles of negative surface too, the particles of antimatter in particular - which is one of the ways, in which such interpretation of DM may be tested.

From AWT follows, the idea of gravitational singularity of general is conceptually wrong, as every high curvature of Aether density would manifests like another source of matter density, which would balance the singularity at the center. This is a direct consequence of gradient driven reality (i.e. the fact, nature doesn't like jumps and steps).
Another explanation may be based on general relativity in connection to mass-energy equivalence. We can consider again, maximal curvature of space-time of every massive object exists at the surface of this object. This curvature is equivalent to energy density of space-time, which is equivalent to mass density by E=mc^2 formula (this approach was formalized by J. Bekenstein and Rudi V. Nieuwenhove recently.) This additional mass density balances the curvature of the space-time, which has caused gravity field originally.

Note that large space-time curvature at the surface of massive object will lead to violation of buoyancy condition, because mass/energy density may become higher here, then at the center of massive object - which would lead to undulations of space-time and indeterministic quantum mechanics behavior - so it suggests a route, how to implement quantum gravity solution, at least locally.
Another model of dark matter may be based on general relativity and concept of omnidirectional Universe expansion. The Lense-Thirring effect is based on constant speed of energy spreading in curved space-time, which leads to reference frame dragging. If we introduce an omnidirectional space-time expansion, it will be pronounced the more, the more the space-time is curved already. This will gradually lead to freezing of energy spreading in expanding space-time, which will therefore move like single body from distant observer perspective. For example, Pioneer anomaly is based on acceleration, which is proportional to product of Hubble constant and speed of light. It can serve as an indicia, the limited speed of light and omnidirectional expansion of space-time itself is sufficient for explanation of dark matter behavior.

The surface-tension model of AWT is still more intuitive here, though: we can imagine, the gravity field of galaxy behaves like single giant water droplet, the surface of which is behaving like water surface. And energy spreads always slower at the water surface, then through underwater or above the surface. It means, at surface layer of every gradient of gravity field the light or gravity spread in slower speed, then at the bulk. The space-time moves here like more dense and rigid body, which we can observe by rotational curves of individual stars at the galactic boundaries.
The most abstract explanation of dark matter phenomena may be based on pure geometry of omnidirectional space-time expansion, where the volume of every area of space-time increases faster, then its surface. Because geometry of energy spreading is given by Lagrangian (which follows from diffusional Aether model on background), the energy spreading through bulk (via longitudinal waves) switches itself into surface spreading (via transversal waves) in less or more distant perspective - thus creating a new reference frame, because human creatures can consider only surface transversal waves in causal energy spreading at distance.

The problem of math models is, they become poorly conditioned, when large number of parameters or postulates is involved. As we can see, even qualitative models may lead to similar results here - so it may be difficult to distinguish between then. The increasing number of various theories becomes a brake of the intersubjective understanding of reality, after then - which isn't quite accidental here, because dark matter is a quantum gravity phenomena and a manifestation of hidden dimensions of space-time. We cannot have a formal model of gravity based on quantum mechanics, while retaining full determinism of general relativity. Mainstream physics was trapped in determinism of consecutive logics, on which formal math is based.

AWT and room temperature supersolidity

2009-05-03T04:24:00.000-07:00

How AWT, tin cry, snow avalanche, liquid crystals and helium supersolid may be related mutually? Well, by emergence of many instances of surface quantum phenomena into macroscopic bulk effect. The fact, helium doesn't freeze at room pressure even at the absolute zero temperature is a direct evidence of Aether character of vacuum, which exhibit a Brownian motion, which keeps the nuclei of helium atoms in "aethernal" motion (so called the "zero-point energy" or ZPE), by the same way, like pollen particles in water. Only religious refusal of Aether concept during last one hundred years prohibited the mainstream physicists to realize this apparent connection. The remarkable fact here is, zero point energy of vacuum originated at the Planck scale level (1.6 x 10E-35 meters) manifests in the way, which is observable by naked eye at the human scale (3 x 10E-3 meters) - i.e. over thirty orders of scale magnitude - which is truly amazing!

By AWT the supersolidity is a quantum analogy of liquid crystals or ice regelation. Did you notice, how fresh cold snow crackles and crunches under your feet? A supersolidity takes place here - just in quite limited extent, indeed. The trick is, the surface of helium-4 crystals isn't dry in certain range of low temperatures, as it's being covered by thin layer of molten superfluid helium, which lubricates them by the same way, like surface of snowflakes. In thin a few nanometers thick layers so called ballistic transport mechanism takes place. It can be called a "low distance superconductivity" of "low distance superfluidity". We can observe this in thin layers of graphene or semiconductors even at room temperature: the electrons aren't moving' continuously here, but in small jumps, during which they're behaving like boson condensate. This is a result of geometric degeneration of quantum wave, which is constrained in thin layer like particle in 1D box - so called quantum tunneling can take place here. A real sample of solid helium is presented bellow - it requires the temperatures bellow -272.2 ºC and over 40 atmosphere pressure to exists:

The same mechanism occurs in thin surface layers of snow or ice, where it is magnified by large number of crystalline particles involved. The fluid moves in thin quantum vortices along surface of crystals by mechanism, which is similar to domino effect. The same effect is responsible for anomalous slipperiness of ice and ice regelation. And of course, it occurs in solid helium in much more pronounced way, because of low temperature. It means, the fluid / solid mixture of helium crystals is not completely superfluous, but it responds to small deformations freely. But we can observe it even in another systems in smaller extent, for example the so called "tin cry" (sound sample) is the bulk phenomena of the same category.

The helium-4 differs from helium-3 in scope of supersolidity. Atoms of helium-3 are non-symmetric due the odd numbers of nucleons, which effectively means, ballistic transport remains constrained to surface of crystals and dislocations inside of frozen helium. The symmetrical atoms of helium-4 are adsorbed to these surfaces preferably, as they condense more easily - so they're killing the effect here like every impurity, which prohibits a free motion along surface of crystalline domains. The surface character of supersolidity in helium-3 manifests by limited temperature range, in which this remarkable effect can take place - at temperature bellow 1K the surface layer of molten helium freezes and supersolidity disappear. The water molecules are highly polarized in charge, so that the surface phenomena can take place in -52 ºC to 0 ºC temperature range, whereas some larger rod-like molecules are asymmetric up to level, they're forming a "liquid crystal" in the bulk phase even at highly elevated temperatures.

With compare to above systems, supersolidity of helium-4 is much more subtle phenomena, which occurs at lowest temperature range only, because of high symmetry of 4He atom nuclei. It manifests only at the moment, when number of crystalline domains becomes very high - it means inside of glass phase of helium, prepared by fast cooling. Such glass can be considered as amorphous phase with large amount of tiny dislocations, where the surface quantum phenomena become more pronounced due the large number of surfaces involved. Glass can flow rather quickly at nanoscale, which can be illustrated in experiments with fast healing of thin holes formed by ion bombardment. The flowing of glass is well known from limited lifetime of glass knives, used for ultramicrotomy or from healing of tiny glass cracks, which can be determined by fracture mechanics techniques. Because dislocations inside of glass phase are very small in size, the scope of ballistic transport is quite limited here, which results in "quantum jelly" or "superglass" behavior, rather then "quantum crunching".

These subtle phenomena can become quite significant even at large scales, as they can promote for example the formation of avalanches in mountain areas. It means, a subtle quantum surface effect, which applies to nanometer distances can kill people here due its cumulative effect over large number of particles involved. And this is basically, what the whole AWT is about.

AWT and definition of space

2009-05-02T03:58:00.001-07:00

In AWT theory the definition of space depends on definition of space-time, so that the definition of space cannot be separated from definition of time due the mutual symmetry of transversal and longitudinal wave spreading through Aether. This relation is one of most important finding of relativity theory, albeit rather unconscious / ad-hoced at Einstein's times - so that Aether theory extends the understanding of this relation to duality of space and time.

In AWT analogy the space-time is the density gradient, forming water surface. The space dimensions are the directions (space-time dimensions) planparallel to water surface, while the remaining direction (a time dimension) is normal ("perpendicular") to water surface. This model explains naturally the symmetry of space dimension and the asymmetry of time dimension (so called the time arrow), the various number of space and time dimensions and much more.

Surprisingly, nobody has pointed to this trivial analogy in physics after one hundred years or relativity theory development - isn't it somewhat strange? Anyway - it's apparent, both time, both space has a robust meaning in physics. If we admit, here's no space, we should admit, here's no time as well - and how we could explain the tangible difference in time and space symmetry (space has no arrow, so we can move along it rather freely), the various number of spatial and time dimensions of space-time and so on..? If something makes a difference, it must exists, because difference is, what makes things real in AWT.

The causal space-time is the place, where density of Aether exhibits some density gradient, so it can behave like water surface, which can serve for transversal wave spreading, i.e. for causal energy propagating at distance. Therefore the scope of space always correspond the scope of causal time arrow, which is virtually unlimited because of infinite mass/energy density of Aether by definition. Infinite (or zero) things usually doesn't need any further explanation from human perspective. Every fixed number is suspect from strictly causal perspective and as such it needs an even deeper explanation. Until the time is infinite by definition, the space remains infinite, too.

Space is always "empty" by definition, because motion in it doesn't requires, neither excerts an energy. If space could be visible, it would become a observer object in space. No pin-point object can serve both like subject of observation, both like mean of observation at the same moment, from this the deep misunderstanding of Aether concept follows. Aether cannot be observed, until it serves as a luminiferous medium of space-time by definition - therefore the speed of energy spreading is always invariant by definition and it has no reference frame in space. If we are moving under exchange of energy with environment via dispersion or during climbing to hill, we can be sure, we are moving in space-time - not just space. If we could observe space, it would mean, space isn't space anymore. Due the nonlocality of every observer and observation process in space-time (real observer isn't never pinpoint object by the same way, like every observation at distance takes some nonzero time), the emptiness of space is always violated by the same way, like the Lorentz invariance at all space-time scales.

Because scope of space is delimited by scope of transversal energy spreading from local perspective of any observer, the limitation of space (and time) scope is the speed of causal energy spreading from observer, the light speed in particular. Therefore we can say, radius of observable Universe corresponds the speed of light spreading multiplied by age of observable Universe.

Another limitation of space concept is the scope of causal energy spreading along single time dimension. Whenever observer starts to move in another time dimension(s), we are saying, it undergoes a dispersion or compactification. Due the presence of cohesion forces inside of object, dispersion usually begins at surface - so we are saying, it collapses or evaporates. The evaporation of water or meteors during their fall through Earth atmosphere, the evaporation of matter in contact of magnetosphere of magnetars or during fall into black holes are all dispersions of energy wave packet forming observable object from AWT perspective. Therefore inside of observable Universe the space is limited by stability of observer - it cannot cross the boundaries of observable space, or (s)he would follow another dimensions of space, i.e. (s)he would collapse and/or evaporate into smaller particles of matter, or even into pure energy, i.e into radiation.

From symmetry of time arrow follows, every dispersion of matter into smaller particles bellow observer scale is followed by some compactification of smaller particles into large objects above the observer scale. We aren't considering the dispersion or collapse as a traveling in time usually, but this is exactly, what these things means in AWT. Note that the dispersion corresponds the traveling into past, whereas the collapse denotes the traveling into future with respect to omni-directional space-time expansion. The observer space-time scale usually defines the local boundary between both time arrows. Due the breaking of symmetry between insintric and exsintric perspectives (every local object appears like part of global object, inside of which it resides), the symmetry of space-time arrows is violated toward a dispersion from local observer perspective, so we tend to believe, entropy of Universe increases as a whole.

Of course the boundary between time arrows isn't always completely sharp due the particle nature of space-time gradient by the same way, like symmetry between insintric and exsintric perspective (i.e. the boundary between space and observable objects inside it). When symmetry of dispersion is broken, we are talking about refraction, the gravitational lensing in particular. For example dark matter can serve both like space, both like observed object. With compare to various field theories, AWT doesn't require some tangible particles for dark matter to exist. In AWT interpretation the streaks of dark matter can be simply formed by more dense areas of Aether foam. Such dense areas exhibits a refraction, when observed from distance - but from proximity they appear like normal transparent space-time.

The dispersion means, the transversal character of energy spreading and uniqueness of time arrow is violated, at least for some most lightweight particles, like the photons. Because causual energy spreading is mediated by transversal waves, the dispersion is usually followed by birefringence, which means, some portion of photons from some space-time events spreads in different directions in space depending on polarization of wave - which is impossible from strictly causal perspective. The collapse of object into black hole singularity can be understood as a violation of causality as well. Therefore the presence of some observable objects in space is always connected to some violation of causality and increase of number of time arrows - despite of we usually don't realize it. And every evaporation is manifestation of hidden dimensions of space by the same way, like every dispersion of light energy is a direct manifestation of Lorentz symmetry violation. In this way, AWT unifies our fundamental understanding of space and time and various other concepts by concept of particle environment symmetry.

AWT and mechanical models of entanglement

2009-04-27T15:09:00.001-07:00

By AWT explanation of quantum entanglement is closely related to wave function collapse. Try to imagine, you're a sailor, who is staying at night on the end of floating wharf, to which some boat is attached. Because night sea is stormy, everything (both sailor, wharf and boat) are wobbling up and down, but in different phases. From the perspective of sailor this boat sways randomly.

The observation of quantum particle is analogous to situation, when sailor touches the boat for a moment, thus exchanging some kinetic energy with it. What will happen, after then? The wharf and boat will begin to oscillate at phase. It means, the sailor will keep his relative position with respect to boat, so he cannot detect any boat wobbling anymore, because he moves by the same way. We can say, the wave motion/function of boat has collapsed from local perspective of that sailor. It still remains undulating from perspective of another observer, though - this is the moment, when relativity takes place in quantum mechanics.

In AWT both particles of observer, both particles of observed object are formed by dense nested clusters of another undulating particles, recursively. At the moment, when observed object exchanges some energy with particles of observer during process of observation, the undulations of both systems aren't independent anymore: their internal fluctuations will undulate at phase, too. Briefly speaking, the observer will get entangled with the particle observed. As the particle doesn't undulate independently from this moment, the corresponding part of their mutual undulations will disappear from observation, because the internal motion of both systems has been synchronized.

This is what we are calling a collapse of wave function during process of observation. The observer and object are now undulating like single body - the common center of mass of both objects is forming a private reference frame, a sort of independent island of reality inside of wave ocean - from this idea the concept of many worlds follows. This state isn't permanent, indeed - due the omnipresent random undulations of environment a process called quantum decoherence will take place, thus breaking the entanglement state and synchronization of observer and observed object.

A more close and natural mechanical analogy of entanglement can be demonstrated for undulating droplets levitating in low gravity conditions (i.e. oil droplets inside of lava lamp or water droplets under diamagnetic levitation, for example). When we split such undulating droplet into two halves by thin wire, the resulting parts will remain undulate at phase with respect to the center of their common mass. The smaller droplets will therefore "remember" the state of original droplet in certain extent, so they can serve as a quabit memory. Such pair will create their own "inertial reference frame" and/or "local universe" by many worlds interpretation. But as we can see - nothing "spooky" is on such entanglement, in fact.

Note that even though we can combine the different droplet pairs with the same surface amplitude or even frequency, such reconnection will not restore the surface wave of original droplet, until the phase of the surface waves of both droplets will not remain exactly the same - from this the quantum cryptography follows. We can see, while this model is very trivial and natural, only common disbelief in Aether models prohibited scientists to consider it a long time ago in explanation of various quantum mechanics phenomena.

AWT and ultra-energetic cosmic rays

2009-04-19T12:17:00.000-07:00

This post is an reaction to New Scientist article named "13 things that do not make sense", which was updated recently. Ultra-energetic cosmic rays (UHECR) are exceptional from two reasons:

They're most energetic spouts of energy known so far, i.e. of energy densities which becomes close to upper limit of GUT scale.
They're propagating over whole universe, i.e. at space-time distance scales close to lower limit of GUT scale.

These two properties enable us to observe 2nd order phenomena, which are not just violating the classical theories - but they're even violating some of their corrections. For example, while special relativity considers, light spreads in constant speed, the cosmic rays exhibits a dispersion on CMB field, which results into violation of Lorentz symmetry, because gamma ray photons spreads in lower speed, then the CMB ones. As the result, gamma rays are absorbed in CMB field at 40 MPsc distance scale, which manifests as so called the GZK limit, which protects terresterial life from gamma rays from nearby supernovae explosions. This dispersion can be even detected directly, because gamma ray flash separates from those formed by visible light during explosions of supernovas - compare the MAGIC observation, for example.

The above is valid just from moderate gamma ray flashes, generated in stellar implosion or collisions. UECRS, which are coming from very distant areas of Universe (fortunately) are formed mostly by collisions of galactic black holes (AGN) and as such they're propagating like bullets or solitons through cosmic space - which effectively means, both visible, both gamma ray portion of remote flash arrives to Earth at the single moment again. The photon pulse of UHECR is distorted and breaks up by its own gravity, condensing into one or more gravitationally localised objects, which are propagating through distant space as a single body without dispersion.

This behavior is essentially welcomed by some string theory proponents, because string theory is basically a particle theory, not a field theory, so it can describe nonlinear effects connected to particles by hidden dimensions concept - but it gets into troubles when explaining of nonlinear field phenomena, like Lorentz symmetry violation in vacuum (being Lorentz symmetry based theory). Various quantum gravity theories - the LQG theory in particular - are dual to string theories from certain perspective, so they become a more successful in description of nonlinear properties of vacuum. This is particularly because the quantum gravity theories are based on combination or general relativity and quantum mechanics, not just a special relativity and quantum mechanics, like string theories - so they can become a bit more general in this point. The soliton behavior of UHECR is explained by various mechanisms, like the axion–photon conversion or by gravitino-neutrino coupling.

By AWT the observation of UHECR can be explained by considering of three facts, which follows from AWT rather directly. The first two points explains, why existing mechanism of gamma ray formation may lead to more energetic flashes, then current theory predicts. The third point explains, why such energetic flashes doesn't suffer gradual dispersion, so we can observe them even over whole universe.

The collapse of neutron stars into black holes enables a substantial portion of matter to escape in form of energy
The black hole merging exhibits an hysteresis due the surface tension effects of space-time curvature, similar to merging of mercury droplets.
The short intensive flashes can propagate at long distance in non dispersive way, i.e. like solitons.

From AWT follows, every gradient manifest itself by mass/energy density, even the gradients of gravity field, which is source of spacetime curvature, which surrounds all massive bodies. This behavior leads to supersymmetric phenomena, which manifest itself as a dark matter clouds surrounding massive galaxies. At the case of black holes or large clusters of elementary particles (strangelets) the gradient of gravity field is especially pronounced and it has a character of surface tension of mercury droplets. It means, the merging of black holes isn't so smooth, as follows from unmodified equations of general relativity - black holes tends to form a relatively stable dense clusters, similar to strawberries. We can observe these structures from inside like foamy streaks of dark matter. The same surface tension effects of gravity field curvature are responsible for creation of tetraneutrons, or perhaps pentaquark or more large particle clusters, so called the strangelets during collider experiments.

Merging of black holes considers the formation of thin neck with negative curvature of space, which manifest itself by repulsing antigravity force. By classical theory the antigravity action results into increasing of rotational momentum, which slows down the coalescing of massive bodies into account of gravitational waves (the energy of transversal waves converts into longitudinal ones in process of symmetry breaking). At the moment, when surface tension is overcomed, the black hole coalesce under release of activation energy, which is released in form of longitudinal gravitational waves and transversal waves of gamma radiation.

Even the tiny mercury droplets (which are full of free electrons) exhibits a repulsive force at the distance, which prohibits them in merging due their surface tension. Thus is because their merging requires the formation of thin neck with strong negative curvature, which is always source of repulsive force in nature. At the moment, such droplet will become very close, a suddenly merging occurs, because the negative gradient will change into positive and the repulsive force will change into attractive one. It means, the process of ultra-dense massive bodies proceeds in much more vigorous way (i.e. atemporarily from outer perspective) under radiation of much more energy in both transversal (gamma ray), both longitudinal (i.e. gravity) waves, then relativity theory predicts.

This behavior is in fact the consequence of Aether theory driven by classical mechanics, by which the most pronounced gradient of gravity field remains at the surface, not at the center and it manifests by its own energy density (surface energy). Albeit the mercury droplet behavior of free electrons isn’t very pronounced in metals, it dictates the behavior of chemical bonds between atoms during chemical reactions and charge transfer in semiconductors, which can be interpreted by mercury droplet model in many cases.

Does gravity change with time?

2009-04-17T19:33:00.000-07:00

AWT is fully consistent with ekpyrotic cosmology, while branes are generally considered a density gradients of Aether. Which basically means, observable Universe passes through density gradient of Aether, which results in omnidirectional space-time expansion. Because of fractal foam nature of branes and time dimension, it's probable, this expansion would change it's direction in less or more distant perspective, but it will never repeat in the same way. It means, AWT is somewhere between aperiodic (i.e. Friedman's cosmology, for example) and cyclic cosmology.

Brane cosmology is directly testable both in space, both in time dimension, because it manifests both in foamy structure of dark matter, both in gradient of space-time expansion, i.e. by the Doppler anisotropy of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB). From time perspective we should observe a change of gravity constant with time, because observable portion of Universe passes through more and more dense Aether gradually (we can interpret it like fall into giant black hole). This behavior leads to new interpretation of classical theory of expanding Earth, but it can be tested in even more straightforward ways.

Because observable matter has a greater density, then the vacuum, we can consider it as a pieces of pre-collapsed Aether foam. During space-time deforms, these peaces would behave like more stiff and the density difference between Aether foam forming matter and vacuum will cease to zero. Because the gravity force and gravity constant depends on this density difference, it will decrease too with time. We can even observe it in real time for example by gradual decrease of mass of kilogram prototype - as it virtually dissolves in collapsing vacuum (compare the proton decay, as predicted by Standard model).

We should realize, we cannot detect the change in light speed in expanding space-time, until we use measure based on standing waves of light (i.e. laser resonator in contemporary SI system of units) for meter definition. But when we use a solid rod as a reference measure, we could detect change of light speed related to this measure - after then the gravity constant would remain constant, just the light speed will change - so we shouldn't detect any change in fine structure constant anyway. By some theorists change in speed of light is interpreted as a disappearance of time from our Universe, but such interpretation is apparently dual to variable light speed concept and/or accelerated space-rip, as interpreted by other cosmologists.

The more dense vacuum is, the less stable are all material objects in it, the smaller amount matter is sufficient for phase transition of stellar mass. Therefore the decrease of gravity constant is followed by gradual decrease of luminosity of periodic flashes of type Ia supernovae cefeids (so called the standard candles), which would appear more remote and frequent, then those in constant gravity field. From this perspective the speed of Universe expansion would remain constant (i.e. no dark energy should be required) - just the gravity constant or speed of light will change. These insights render our Universe a much more dynamic, then we ever expected before - but we should realize, they're plural and as such they shouldn't be mixed mutually.

The annual motion of Earth in Aether density gradients should manifest by subtle annual changes of gravity constant or light speed, too. This possibility was opened recently and it can be tested easily by correlation of annual changes in gravity constant to spatial orientation toward Virgo cluster and Rubin-Ford anisotropy.

More dense vacuum in direction to Virgo cluster should increase the speed of heavy element decay, because it weakens all attractive forces, not just the gravity. This annual change in decay rate of heavy elements was observed recently at the case of Si-32 and Ra-226 elements, which was correlated to Earth-Sun distance and possibly the catalysis of decay by solar neutrino flux. Again, the correlation of these observations with CMB anisotropy can help us decide, which explanation is more relevant here. As we can see, even quite rough logical approach brings a number of testable predictions and connections here.

Does string theory link the ultracold with the superhot?

2009-04-16T14:39:00.000-07:00

This post is a reaction to popular ScienceNews article about approach of string theory to duality observed inside of quark-gluon condensate, which author Tom Siegfried interprets as a "first testable prediction" of string theory. At first, it's not first testable prediction of string theory at all. String theory has made a number of testable predictions already (cosmic strings, primordial black holes, etc..) - they were just kept in quiet, simply because they weren't confirmed by experiments (1, 2), in which Casimir force was ignored as a gravity force in hidden dimensions.

Under normal situation such theory would be considered disproved already by common criterions of Popper's methodology - but this is indeed not a case of string theory, where too many important people and their money are involved. Nevertheless, even if we admit, Mr. Siegfried is right, string theory approach to description of quark-gluon condensate is just an ex-post interpretation, because the formation of quark-gluon condensate was observed before six years already at RHIC. By another words, it's a fabrication of predictability, which didn't exist before six years. With such approach we can say as well, constant speed of light or wave nature of light belongs the predictions of Aether theory, because Aether concept has existed a well before, it was ever used for interpretation of light spreading, predictions the more. But such manipulation of history isn't apparently enough for some string theory proponents.

By blog post of Lubos Motl, when experimenters studied the quark-gluon plasma formed by collisions of colliding golden nuclei, they "thought it would have to behave as a gas or plasma". The truth is, they didn't, of course - it's not so trivial to prove the formation of quark-gluon condensate (which is an original prediction of Quantum chromodynamics, in fact) in collider experiments and the experimental proof must be carefully planned and prepared in advance - so we should know, what to measure first. It was observed, that the material behaved as a superfluid, despite a trillion of degrees Celsius - which is what, these experiments were planned for. By Lubos, string theorists "already knew, why this thing would be observed" - the only problem is, they were pretty quiet about it before six years (or even ten years, when these experiments were planned actually). Just now some of them have realized suddenly, RHIC results may be interpreted by string theory - which is apparently not, what Mr. Motl wanted to say about it.

Well, the most crucial problem is, it's virtually impossible to explain this behavior by assumption, particles are formed by 1D strings. If you don't trust me, just try to reproduce the string theory based explanation for yourself in reproducible sequence of logical steps. If we cannot do it in logical way, it's apparent, we cannot derive it in formal math way either, because formal math is based on predicate logic - not vice-versa. After then we can say: sorry, but our stance is based on pure religion - no less, no more. While some connection between dualities of string theory and dual behavior of quark-gluon condensate may definitely exist here, the awareness of such connection isn't still a evidence of it, simply because we can expect, inside of our universe everything is connected with everything due the correspondence principle and general causal time arrow.

Fortunately, it's quite trivial to expect the superfluous behavior of quark-gluon condensate in simple and straightforward way without string theory - or even without Standard model - which is why these experiments were made, after all. When these particles are compressed, their repulsive forces will compensate mutually, which effectively leads into free chaotic motion of particles inside of droplet, i.e. into superfluous boson condensate state. And this is a quite common behavior, which is used for example for high pressure shaping of metals or in cumulative warheads, like bazooka, and nothing very surprising is about it - it's an explanation based on classical Newtonian mechanics. If nothing else, every more complex explanation is irrelevant here due the Occam's razor criterion ("pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate"). In fact, the formation of superfluid inside of dense particle clusters is one of many trivial predictions of Aether theory - as every little child can understand immediately.

We are facing a too many lies and misinterpretations in this particular case, don't you think? The whole story follows from predictable situation, when after some forty years of development, string theory needs some testable results desperately. Therefore the ScienceNews article is a typical example of fabrication of success of troublesome theory, which doesn't exist in fact. Even more serious problem is, such approach is amoral, as it introduces a religious stance for whole rest of society, which is manipulated in this way. All these article readers are forced to believe in interpretation, which doesn't understand at all - while the most trivial explanation is covered just for easier life of some limited group of people. Which is basically, what every theology was designed for.

And that's the memo.

Would Boltzmann brain see its universe chaotic?

2009-04-09T19:24:00.000-07:00

This post is an reaction to another blog article of Lubos Motl, where he presents a Richard Feynman's lecture about arrow of time. At the beginning of the third part, Feynman explains, why Boltzmann brain is a "ridiculous theory", because it "incorrectly predicts", that the rest of the world should be completely disordered. We can see this as a another demonstration of Popper's methodology symmetry, where every negation of theory becomes new testable theory as well. So that not only validity of theory - but the validity of all arguments against theory must be allways checked carefully. If we consider every logical theory wrong from its very beginning, the objective stance becomes biased quite often.

As I explained previously here and specially to Lubos, Boltzmann brain hypothesis has nothing to do with situation, when 10^{23} particles will get organized suddenly into something like human brain. It describes the situation, when unspecified amount of particles is involved into Boltzmann brain creation. When we consider 10^{23*23} particles, the probability of formation of some particular configuration of just 10^{23} particles will be unitary - so we can say safely, the existence of human brain in every 10^{23*23} particles of matter will become undeniable. This number roughly corresponds the number of particles inside of observable part of Universe and the number of string theory possible solutions, which could serve for falsification of this concept. So we can interpret both Universe, both human brains entities as a product of random fluctuations of hypothetical particle gas - which is basically what the whole AWT is about.

Among other things, this approach explains, why every large group of people tends to check all meaningful answers and theories, before the most relevant one is considered at the very end. This is because the intelligent stance of individuals in every large group of people is compensating mutually, so that such group is behaving like chaotic Boltzmann gas as a whole. This can explain, why Aether theory was recognized so early in human society - but understood and accepted so late.

Every brain can see (i.e. to interact via transversal waves with) just the causal portion of Universe, which corresponds the causality of Boltzmann brain hypothesis - so we can expect, if we find an even more general approach later, it could predict even larger number of states, then the random walk model considers - our causual Universe would expand with time. Because of nested character of density fluctuations of Boltzmann gas - which undergoes a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution - our Boltzmann brains could never see the rest of our environment empty, "completely random" the less - particularly because both Feynman, both Motl didn't realize, their intepretation considers no environment at all. I do believe, virtually every human brain (including this one of average string theorist) could understand the difference between Boltzmann and Feynman approach to random Universe and stop to misinterpret this simple, yet powerful theory.

AWT and the quest for hidden dimensions

2009-04-05T15:20:00.000-07:00

When Neil Armstrong made his first descent to the Moon's surface during Apollo 11 mission in 1969, he spoke his famous line "That's one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind..". Aether Wave Theory can become such a dual step in mankind awareness, too: in many areas of physics, which are covered by formal theories already its contribution may remain infinitesimal, whereas in more fundamental areas it suggests a virtually a deep revolution in thinking. Such revolution may become the understanding of role/scope of hidden dimensions and Lorentz symmetry concepts.

As we have demonstrated already by model of water surface, the problem of hidden dimensions is tightly connected to violation of Lorentz symmetry up to level, every violation of Lorentz symmetry can be considered as a direct manifestation of hidden dimensions. Because Lorentz symmetry for light spreading in vacuum is violated at presence of every dispersion or refraction phenomena, it would mean, the hidden dimensions are very common in Nature. For example, the hydrogen bonds or repulsive forces between atoms are manifestation of short distance forces operating in very high number of dimensions.

How the heck is all this possible? A quite easily - due the symmetry, in AWT energy spreads through every environment under conservation of integral number of dimensions in two dual ways only: via transversal and longitudinal waves. The forces mediated by these waves follows an inverse power law due the shielding LeSage/Casimir/Feynman mechanism represented by supergravity, where the power is always lower by one from the number of environment dimensions. In this way, for 3D space the only force fulfilling the inverse 2nd power law (ISL) should be a Coulomb force mediated by photons and gravity force mediated by gravitons or gravity waves at infinite scope, i.e. of zero rest mass. Every other force is simply manifestation of interaction in hidden dimensions and Lorentz symmetry violation. Note that Casimir force mechanism mediated by gravity waves corresponds Fatio-LeSage mechanism for gravitons and transaction absorber theory for virtual photons promoted by Feynman and Wheeler for QED in 50's of the last century. Easy and trivial, isn't it?

But mainstream physics still persists a deep inconsistency in thinking. While the world is full of short distance interactions - from weak nuclear force and dual Casimir force spreading if five dimensions, strong nuclear force mediated by gluons and so called gravitomagnetism ("fifth force") mediated by gravitophotons in four dimensions and many refraction and dispersive phenomena inside of atom orbital - mainstream physicists still considers these nonlinear forces as a "special forces", "nonlinearities" and/or "2nd order effects" rather then manifestation of hidden dimensions and ISL violation - despite the fact, under inconsistent thinking they can never get consistent conclusion.

As the result, these scientists are spending a lotta money from our taxes in various less or more sagacious searches of "hidden dimensions". Because they know, violation of Lorentz symmetry would manifest by inverse square law and non zero rest mass of photons, one way of experimental evidence is based on thourough tests of ISL for gravity and Coulomb forces (which are unsuccessful so far, especially because theorists are ignoring Casimir force in this extent). The deep inconsistency in mainstream science thinking manifests by the fact, some of these tests are even interpreted like tests of string theory as well - albeit string theory is based on Lorentz symmetry from its very beginning. Next time we will discuss some techniques, by which we can interpret and/or visualize interactions in hidden dimensions by AWT.