Several years ago, while I was thinking about dark matter and how we had misplaced 96% the matter in the universe, I realized that something was very wrong with how we perceived matter and that something was fundamentally wrong with physics. To think that 96% of the matter in the universe is invisible, right in front of our eyes and we can't see it except for its interaction with matter is a very unsettling thought. All we know about this dark matter is that it is responsible for holding our galaxies together. The conclusion that I reached was that their is something fundamentally wrong with the physics concerning matter and that their must have been a moment in our past where physics took the wrong path in its evolution. Since Albert Einstein marked the beginning of the age of modern physics with his Special Relativity theory I decided to begin there.
Einstein based his theory on the fact that light has the same speed for all observers. He didn't bother to determine why it is so, just that the Lorentz transformation must be a result of its fact. Since then, nobody has bothered to determine just why light travels at the speed that it does, and no other! Einstein did not bother to include the multidimensional state of matter, nor the possibility that time might be multidimensional even though he required the use of the square root of minus one in his equations. We should have known that their must be something wrong with Relativity when it disagreed with Quantum Mechanics, and when it predicted that it takes an infinite amount of energy to force a particle of mass to reach the speed of light! It is amazing that no one has determined why!
Ever since I was a graduate student I have been bothered that a particles mass must increase with its speed. That was the point when it became apparent to me that particles don't reach the speed of light, waves do; and, in particular, matter waves do. It then became a question of "when does a particle become a wave?"
A close examination of Quantum Mechanics shows that Schrodinger's equation, and, in particular, the operator for momentum, indicates that a particle's motion occurs as a wave; and as a wave it travels at the speed of light with an energy of h-bar omega. Thus a particle is stationary except when it is in motion as a wave! Relativity indicates that the wave travels in imaginary time and that the particle is stationary during real time.
An object travels at a speed v by converting a portion of its particles to waves, those waves displace a distance dx, and those waves then convert back to particles. This cycle continues until all the particles in the object are displace a distance dx. Then these cycles repeat causing the object to move at the speed indicated. The distance dx is on the order of 10exp(-30) cm. during an imaginary time interval on the order of 10exp(-40) sec. The motion appears to be continuous. Motion on an object is similar to that of a Slinky moving down a staircase. During a cycle the particle's time has the form
T=T*{SQRT(1-V^2/C^2) + iV/C}
where the real part is the time during which the particle is at rest, and the imaginary part is the time during which the wave travels the distance dx. The real time is the time during which the particle ages. Mass does not age during imaginary time. This complex number has a magnitude which is conserved and is independent of speed. Likewise, the matter in the object has the form
M=M*{SQRT(1-V^2/C^2) + iV/C).
The real term is the mass of the object and the imaginary term is the equivalent mass of the wave, which comes from E=M*CC. The velocity of the object is then
v = cSIN(phi)
where phi is the phase of the complex numbers.
In the absence of a potential field the object will continue its motion by continuously performing the mentioned state changing cycles. In the presence of a potential field the object will accelerate by increasing or decreasing the number of particles each moment that undergo the state changing cycles. This theory of motion is seen to be quite different than Newton's F = MA. A particle in a field will be coaxed by that field into using its own energy to change its states and displace the distance dx. Motion does not have to be forced! With the proper field, motion of an object can be enticed to happen naturally. An object can be enticed to reach relativistic speed by converting all of its mass into wave energy. The equations of Classical Mechanics can be derived from this model by making the approximation that v is much less than c.
We can now understand that all observers, no matter how fast they travel, will spend some time in the real dimension of time, during which they can measure the speed of light. Observers, being objects of mass, experience life in real time, and are completely unaware of imaginary time. During that real time all observers are stationary, at rest, and each will determine the same number for the speed of light! Also, the questions concerning Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle are resolved: a particle's position and momentum cannot be measured simultaneously simply because they don't occur at the same time. The relation for energy and time are equally resolved: A particle doesn't experience its kinetic energy except during imaginary time. It is amazing that Heisenberg had this insight concerning uncertainty without understanding why.
Their is one more thing about relativity that needs correcting: The requirement that all particles are stationary during their real time and travel at c, the velocity of light, during its imaginary time, means that matter "knows" what stationary is, or zero velocity, and that waves "know" the value of c. This requires that an absolute reference does exist! In which case Relativity really doesn't exist!! The principles of Relativity are now inherent in the principles and equations of Quantum Mechanics.
Formalization of this new Wave Theory of Matter will require the use of mathematics from Quantum Mechanics, fluid dynamics, Maxwell's equations and Maxwell-like equations concerning wave probabilities. We can see that a hole has a large curl and a relatively small divergence for its appetite for matter and its Hawking radiation, and that it exists entirely in its wave state and in imaginary time. A hole exists in a different place and time, appearing to us as a singularity. A star has a large kinetic energy requiring its mass to exist mostly in its wave state, and the star ages at a comparatively small rate. Dark matter is simply matter waves, or the dark side of matter. And microwave background radiation is really matter waves passing through "our" universe from outside. The subject of the Big Bang may have to be revisited now. Physics now takes on a modern flavor. And a unifying theory may be just around the corner.
So what does all of this mean? When we learn to produce the proper field artifically we will be able to entice an object into the desired motion without forcing it to do so. It will be a much more efficient way to produce motion. Transportation of people and goods will be done cheaply, efficiently, very quickly and silently without roads and the polution that is presently the case. We will be able to produce engines that don't use fossil fuel, and we won't have to fight wars to secure the remaining fuel on earth. Space travel to anywhere will be possible, and done in imaginary time without anyone aging in the process. A new source of energy will be available by using the field to convert any mass into kinetic energy and transforming this energy into a more useful form. This model holds answers to questions from every field of physics. Scotty, beam me up, the future is here!
I have always thought that our understanding of dark matter/energy is weak. I think of it as energy that is moving away from us. Alway has and always will. Just the oposite of a star which is alway coming towards us or we wouldn't see it. So dark energy can be the back side of a star. Outside our perception of 3 dimensions, a star must have a back side or black hole. In my opinion, a photon is a self contained wave that acts like a particle and has a front and back side. I do have a model of this photon which I will post here. It is a very simple graphic due to my limited computer animation skills.
Einstein based his theory on the concept of curved space. His theories also led to the idea of a space time continuum in which space and time are treated very similarly.
It only makes sense that we should also explore the possibility that time can be curved.
I have been formulating a theory based on directional time. If true, there is no need for dark energy. The expansion of the universe is an illusion.
Furthermore, by conserving space time distance, I derive a gravity formula that reduces to Newton’s formula for objects in close proximity (on a cosmic scale) and to the MOND formula for the motion of stars in a galaxy. The MOND formula very accurately predicts stellar motion without the assumption of dark matter.
The matter with Einstein is “Dark matter”.
The darkness is that of the dark ages because Einstein is not only a scientist but also a celebrity and an idol.
There are many manufacturers who make dolls, pencils, toys and many commodities that either have resemblance of Einstein or his face pictured on products. If anyone dares to question any validity or correctness related to fantasies that evolved from Einstein’s teachings, then that one is doomed to fail, be rejected and accused of ignorance or even idiocy. For science to recover from this sever strike it will take dramatic measures that involve global political changes and funded mass media for promoting a new idol and celebrity as a sacrifice, the blood of which will save the world of science from this insanity.
Dark matter or the "stuff" which cannot be seen directly? Sounds really interesting.
So what makes us think that it exists at all?
Its presence is inferred indirectly from the motions of astronomical objects, specifically stellar, galactic, and galaxy cluster/supercluster observations. It is also required in order to enable gravity to amplify the small fluctuations in the Cosmic Microwave Background enough to form the large-scale structures that we see in the universe today.
Strange it might sound but, at least 90% the energy of the Universe is dark! We should also note that although the universe may be flat, that does not mean that matter makes up the critical density. In addition to dark matter there is dark energy, e.g. a cosmological constant, that needs to be included in the accounting.
No wonder that in our quest for knowledge in such a vast universe we keep getting lost in dark alleys.
It is interesting that light can't come out of 90% of
the universe's mass.
Seems to me we would have ran into it here on earth
if it is really true.
Take black holes. They are not at all black. They are
ejecting matter and energy out at their poles. So they
are easy for us to identify at least the ones at the center
of every galaxy. They were supposed to be black. So I am
sceptical about dark matter.
I do believe dark matter can be thrown out if galaxies have a stronger force than gravity. And as for dark energy, I think it is the result of space's instability. _________________ If we do not learn from our mistakes, there is no point in having them.
What if: Dark mass and Dark energy were the same thing in two forms like an electron (dark mass) and its movement (dark energy). Electron is to a black hole as dark mass is to a sun.
What if: dark mass energy was pervasive through out the universe.
What if: dark mass energy drove electrons and protons in the world of mass.
What if: dark mass energy expanded in the presence of mass due to the removal of energy from dark mass energy.
What if: a gradient of reduced energy to the center of mass is what we call gravity.
What if: dark mass energy is what astronomers use for the lensing affect.
What if: all energy in our realm is caused by, the friction mass causes in dark mass energy.
What if: dark mass energy in different frames were related to time so the energy level in each of the frames view the speed of light as the same in each frame.
What if: dark mass energy rotates with the earth, the solar system, the galaxy and between galaxies.
If dark mass rotates with the solar systems Einstein's biggest blunder would no longer be a blunder.
If Dark Mass/Energy exists in the solar system we ought to have run into it by now on Earth. I believe the reason it has been introduced in the first place is due to gravitation problems. What if gravity's strength varies from what General Relativity says? That might explain the anomolies without the Dark Energy/Matter.
Einstein toyed with the idea of ether (he may have used a different term for it), a substance that permeates all of space, and then he rejected it. Perhaps dark energy and dark matter are the ether. It would explain much such as particles might not really travel at all as we might suppose, it might be more like one particle bumps into the next particle that bumps into the next creating a wave or ripple from bumping into all the successive particles. This in turn sounds much like quantum mechanics with the little packets representing the dark matter and the wave the dark energy. Maybe the vacuum of space is not a vacuum at all; we just do not know how to look at it correctly.
It is similar to thinking about how we see. We actually see using the brain with nerve bundles that go to the eye and then on the back of the eye we have the receptors that pick up the light that has gone through the entire eye and the lens of the eye. We never think about this but while we are looking out upon the world we do not see the lens, we do not see the fluid within the eye, we do not see the rods and cones, we do not see the optic nerve or the pathways to the brain yet we know that we are looking through all of this apparatus so that we can look beyond ourselves. Maybe space is similar, the vacuum of space is a real physical construct, yet we cannot see its complexity because we are a part of it. We understand the eye because we can look at our own eye and other peoples eyes, we can study the eye and know its parts. With space we are not able to look at any other examples.
This is not a whole lot different with particles of matter. Think about the Supercolliders that are used to ascertain what the building blocks of matter are made of, why do we smash things up to find the answers to matter and energy? If you take two identical cars and have them crash head-on going several thousand miles per hour what do you get? You get little pieces of nothing shooting out in all directions. If you were not aware that they were cars, as in particles that are collided together, would you ever know that it were originally a car? It just seems really bizarre to smash particles to find out what they consist of, and then we also assume that particles must somehow be identical, although nature abhors identical things. Two identical cars are not even identical, why would two particles be any less unique? Of course, with particles of matter it is at least easier to speculate what the constituent parts are by smashing them because we have something to work with, but maybe as long as we believe an empty vacuum in space is empty we will not really be able to grasp such things as why light appears to have a speed limit. Maybe light has no speed limit, it is just that our space is limited to being able to perceive light at 186,000 mps but as it increases we cannot perceive the increase in our space just as our eyes can only see parts of the light spectrum. We can not see for example infrared, microwaves, or gamma rays, yet they do exist.
How do we even know if light is what we perceive it to be? Think about an infinite road that extends in both directions from the observer. There are stop lights that you can observe along the way situated so that nothing obstructs our view. Each stop light has a red, yellow, and green light in both directions at a 180 degree angle. The first light you see is just down the block and looks just like any other stoplight that turns green, yellow, and red. Next you see a stoplight that is one light second in distance, and then you see beyond this a stoplight that is 14 billion light years distance (or the exact distance of the furthest observable object in our universe).
Consider now that you can examine the stoplights from a different angle. You turn sideways and see that another stoplight is sitting before you at eye level as are all the stoplights. You can see the familiar lights but as you look at the device sideways you notice an infinite line extending from both directions out each of the lights. In your sideways reality you perceive that the ghost of these lines remain even when the stoplights are not lighted. It is then that you realize these lines always exist. You can remove the stoplight but the potential ghost line is still there. You can remove all the lights but the line is still there.
You are able to step away from our limited view of reality and see that the perceived speed limit of light is just that, a speed limit for our limited view of the universe. You now can see the real speed of light as it travels along the line. It is infinite. There is light that travels at a snails pace and then there is light that increases speed ever second by the speed of light. After the first second it leaves our perception of the universe and before the first second it has not yet come into our universe. In other words, light in another reality that is slower that what we thought was zero motion and in that reality they can perceive the light even before the stoplight comes on.
The quandary is that these paths always have been and always will be and they extend the length of the universe; although the universe is infinite, they extend it nevertheless. Light then becomes the illumination of paths that already exist in all directions everywhere. Light then is a form of seeing these infinite lines in our own reality where in fact the light is infinite in speed and at all potential speeds because light really is an illusion, a brightening of these infinite lines along the path.
Perhaps the way to travel at tremendous speeds is not to speed up initially but to examine slowing down. At the outset it might sound absurd but we all know that we move upon the Earth in an arc, the Earth and Moon interweave amongst themselves while traveling around the sun, the sun belongs to a local group of stars rotating within an arm of our galaxy that in turn rotates at tremendous speed. The galaxy belongs to a local group of galaxies that in turn belong to a much larger group and they in turn belong to the known universe. All of these clumps of matter including ourselves are in constant motion. The inflation of the universe due to what is perceived to be an initial big bang also includes tremendous speed.
We may believe ourselves to be sitting at rest in a chair typing away on a laptop at the moment but in reality we are hurdling through space in a dizzying number of complex paths ultimately leading outward from some singular starting point eons ago. What would happen if we could find a way to just stop and get off of the merry-go-round? What might we see then? Would we see a universe speeding away from us at fantastic speed? Might we be able to see the man working feverishly behind the curtain as in the Wizard of Oz? In other words by stopping we might be able to perceive the hidden makeup of the universe. Often what is needed to solve a difficult problem is to step back and view it from a different angle. Instead of riding along with the train we device a way to jump off the train safely and look around to see the train and the tracks.
Maybe I am not saying anything new, a difficult thing to do anymore, but maybe it might be good to think about it. Perhaps we could start by making a Superslower. Instead of smashing particles apart to see what makes them tick we device a method to slow them down to nothing. I know they can super-cool down to almost absolute zero but I don’t thing this is enough. Maybe there is a way to go beyond this, and not necessarily using cold but maybe fields of force to keep particles of matter stationary perfectly so that we can examine them like dissecting a frog. I know they also have incredible telescopes but we need real time viewing of particles smaller than atoms, much smaller. To be able to totally stop matter, or to at least slow it down enough so we could make the difference up by matching its speed to look at what might be hidden before us, to see the real building blocks, perhaps to even view these things is as many ways as possible beyond human visual spectrum and to measure the force lines. This would have to include clumps of matter also to see how they behave.
How do we know that time is not attached to matter in someway. We know that it is because the faster one travels the slower one grows old in relationship to the ones left behind. I know this has been proven with atomic clocks put in orbit in relationship to identical clocks left on Earth. Perhaps slowing down space around a capsule would stop the capsule, stop, meaning to jump off the train of the universe, or our perception of it.
What if time = micro dark mass energy and micro dark mass energy is what caused all electrons to move? Now the faster macro mass moved the more energy it drained from micro dark mass. With less micro dark mass energy, time would appear to slow down for the inertial macro dark mass. So yes macro mass and energy could be interconnected.
Maybe the difficulty with fusion reactions in the laboratory is that the assumptions of atoms are far too simple. From my youth I have read textbooks that have inferred that atoms are almost micro-solar-systems but in reality it is not really believed by the scientists doing the studies. Of course it would not be nearly as difficult to have fission because you just want to create a reaction that destroys. Maybe combining involves much more than the proton-proton reaction that it appears the sun uses for fusion to occur. Maybe there are other things to consider. How might it be if we combined the systems of Sol and Alpha Centauri? Maybe the micro world of creation is just as complex in reality. It would seem the only thing to do to find out is to devise methods to at least take snapshots in time of the inner working of atoms as similar to exploring our own solar system. I know they have tunneling electron microscopes and devices such as these but it would seem we need a giant leap in the ability to see the inner working of atoms instead of smashing them to pieces to find out how they work. We need to be able to actually see them working. If the two solar systems were combined, and we were as giants looking down upon this combining, would we say Sol was a neutron and Jupiter was a proton? Might we not even notice Earth or the smaller bodies, yet alone the complexity of each of them? Years ago they said it would be impossible to ever see an atom, yet they have photographed them now. These look like a blur though. We need to be able to see clearly in minute detail just what they are. Is it impossible?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Predictions
Community
Links and Downloads
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.zapfuture.com/images/valid-rss.GIF "Validate my RSS feed")
![[Valid Atom 0.3]](http://www.zapfuture.com/images/valid-atom.GIF "Validate my Atom 0.3 feed")