What is time?

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

What is time?

Unread post by junglelord » Fri Oct 17, 2008 5:29 pm

I have come back full circle, LOL, to the standing wave.
The distributed charge is not a particle. It is also never a probablility. It is always distributed.
The concept of dimensional analysis is clear, yet know one sees it.
Mass and Charge are dimensions.
Thats why they say matter has mass and charge.
Dave Thompson is right.
A 2-D perfect circle string of mass scanning an area (inerta) make perfect sense to me.
Quantum harmonic frequency is the only thing that resonates with me.
:lol:

Tensegrity is a funny thing. Sacred Geometry gets a bad rap from modern science.
However the geometry of Tensegity in atomic, molecular, viral, cellular, is all Sacred Geometry.
The geodesic framework of the cell is a icosahedron....cellular divison goes as tetrahedrons.
Carbon forms the hexagon.
Its all standing waves of platonic solids nestled within each other.
Its all rotors and stators.
At some level or domain the perspective of motion is hidden.
We are hurtling through space at many times any velocity that is apperant on earth.
The electron goes 3 million miles an hour around the proton in the hydrogen atom.
Yet the object in front of me seems very "still".
Standing waves of dynamic design created by a push/pull Gforce.
I see how the rotor and stator concept is the fractal.....its freaking wild the nestled vortices and nestled platonic solids I finally understood today. Its all come together. Look far enough down or up and there is constant motion. The still object in front of you needs a push, a pump, to create all kinds of functions. If you take our domain level and reintroduce the pump, you get electricity from copper wire and magnets or a battery. The more coherent the standing wave pattern the quantum level is reached. Its quite clear now. Standing waves are made of distributed charge...not particles or waves.

If you understand pi, phi and e, and platonic solids with APM and the EU, its all very clear.
Now that we know that indeed, to say the least, there is striking evidence that the atom structure is a standing wave, we need to describe in terms of this new concept, each observable conventional particle and picture how the real atom looks like.

We know that the atom has a high density core at the centre surrounded by a cloud of electrons. However, even in the case of atoms with a single electron, we still see a cloud, and never has anyone been able to track any electron orbiting around. We have also shown that no orbital electrons exist and therefore electrons can never collide to each other. In this theory there is no room either for a particulate nucleus or anything else described as particulate matter within the atom. The whole atom is a standing wave in three dimensions, and all known effects have to be described by electromagnetic standing wave geometry. So, where does this leave us with the picture of an atom? Surely we have got no neutrons, protons or electrons, but our model should still account for their effects in terms of 3D standing wave geometry.


It has been already stated that a sphere has got just five natural frequency modes of vibration, and each of these frequencies gives rise to the formation of a platonic standing wave structure. Each 2 dimensional face of these structures is a standing EM wave node. Here on the left, a tetrahedron is shown. You may notice this shape has got 4 Vertices, 4 Faces, and 6 Edges. Euler's characteristic, as with the other four platonics is equal to F-E+V= 4-6+4 =2. It is understood that everything that we apply for this shape will apply for the other four platonics. Each platonic, when rotated in all possible angular directions about its centre, will form two spheres, one inscribed within its faces and one circumsribed by its vertices, as shown in the diagram. The inscribed sphere, will in turn be the circumscribed sphere of a smaller nested platonic structure, and so on, until a point is reached where the actual sides of the platonic equates to the smallest possible vibrating length in space, relating to planck length.

The vertices of the internal nested platonic (the dual) will form at the centre of each face of the parent platonic. Curiously enough, this point is shown by dots on the 3,000 year old stones shown previously. This makes the inscribed sphere look very dense, in terms of standing wave structures. Unlike the conventional model, where the space between electron shells is described as a void and empty space, in our model it is the space in between the inscribed and circumscribed spheres, which contain the inward and outward going spherical waves forming up the 3D standing wave shape. Thus such a volume will be less opaque, and less dense than the standing wave shells. This volume, that is the volume trapped between the two spheres is what most call the 'electron cloud'. The internal inscribed sphere is as you might have guessed, what most call the nucleus. To reassure us of such an idea, we have to mention that one stable solution to Maxwell's equations is equivalent to a continuous standing electromagnetic wave arranged concentrically about a point. Standing waves of intermediate sizes explain the Rydberg constant and the fine and superfine structures of spectral lines, and may explain the valency shells of each atom. Since both nucleus and electrons in this model are made up of 3D standing waves, both of them will have common characteristics such as inertia (detected as mass), charge, and magnetic moments. Same characteristics, but not same values, as the energy density of the wave is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the centre.

If an electric field is sweeping over a sphere, it induces a magnetic field at right angles. Integrating the cross product of the two fields -- over the surface of a sphere -- is equivalent energy divided the speed of light squared -- which is equal to mass. (This is a variation of Gauss's law of gravity.) It follows that the smallest entity which can have all characteristics of a particle should be one the simplest of the basic platonics described above. If this entity is unique, then it must be one whose dual is itself, and which has got its analogue existing in all dimensions. There is just one platonic satisfying this criteria and this is the Tetrahedron (in 3D), called the Simplex in 4D. Of course the atom is not as simple as one tetrahedron and consists of many such elementary particles and so need not be simply composed of nested tetrahedrons, but the above description gives the basic idea of how our model could eventially explain both nuclear and electron shells. Chemists all know about the existence of so called nuclear magic numbers, and atomic magic numbers, and these strongly indicate a kind of geometric structure governing both the built up of the nucleus and that of the electron cloud.



Schrödinger assumed that the electron's behavior could be described by a three dimensional standing wave. He derived an equation which described the amplitude of this wave. The simplest solution for the Schrödinger Equation for the ground state (1s) energy of a hydrogen atom is:

Y= Ae-Br

where A & B are constants, e is the base of the natural logs, and r is the radial distance from the nucleus.

The cross product (ExB) of two similar waves gives (Y2) tells the probability of finding an electron at any given location, or the 'mass' distribution of the electron cloud.

One may note that the dimension of the nodes is always one less than the dimension of the system. Thus, in a three-dimensional oscillating system the nodes would be two-dimensional rotating surfaces. The square of an electron's wave equation gives the probability function for locating the 'point' electron in any particular region. The orbitals or shells used by chemists describe the shape of the region where there is a high probability of finding a particular electron. Electrons are confined to the space surrounding a nucleus in much the same manner that the standing waves in the platonic are constrained to its surfaces. The constraints of each platonic forces each side to vibrate with specific frequencies, in the case of the tetrahedron each parent platonic will have 3 times the side length of its nested shape. So, an electron, which is equivalent to one of these rotating platonics, can only vibrate with specific frequencies, called eigenfrequencies and the states associated with these frequencies are called eigenstates or eigenfunctions. The set of all eigenfunctions for an electron form a mathematical set called the spherical harmonics. There are an infinite number of these spherical harmonics, but they are specific and discrete. Thus an atomic electron can only absorb and emit energy in specific in small packets called quanta. It does this by making a quantum leap from one eigenstate to another.
http://blazelabs.com/f-p-swave.asp
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

Plasmatic
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: To Anyone Who Believes in Special Relativity's Time Travel

Unread post by Plasmatic » Fri Oct 17, 2008 5:40 pm

JL why dont you go start a thread fro your platonic world of holographic soccor balls. That post has nothing to do with anything in this thread.
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle

altonhare
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:54 am
Location: Baltimore
Contact:

Re: To Anyone Who Believes in Special Relativity's Time Travel

Unread post by altonhare » Sat Oct 18, 2008 8:51 am

Plasmatic wrote:JL why dont you go start a thread fro your platonic world of holographic soccor balls. That post has nothing to do with anything in this thread.
Yes, please. Your topic wasn't remotely related. Additionally you pasted in a huge amount of text that is cluttering this thread. START YOUR OWN TOPIC. You can proselytize your "sacred" geometry all you want there. This topic has proceeded as follows:

1) Special relativity and its implications on the measurement of time
2) Disucssion of time as a measure of existence between Plasm and I via the definition of object, time, and existence. This would have quickly become a first philosophy discussion had it continued so Plasm did not pursue it further, i.e he respects the thread's topic.
3) Junglelord and Grey Cloud made incomplete assertions about the understanding of time. I explained why they were incomplete and showed how they could be made complete.
4) Kevin asserts that the speed of light "is not the speed of light", by which he means that it does not travel rectilinear. He implies that a field mediates the action of what we observe as light.
5) I ask Kevin what HIS field IS.
6) Kevin admits that he cannot tell me. He calls it "stuff". He admits that it has a "dual nature" by which he means that it can be two things simultaneously. I reject his theory on the grounds that it is unscientific. Only one reason of which is that we do not define things in a dual fashion or we end up with cubic pyramids and particles that are discrete for one part of our theory but exist as a "distribution" for the other part of our theory, as it suits us.
7) Kevin admits that he is insane and tells us not to care of his ideas are supernatural or irrational.
8) JL and GC ask me what "field" and "light" are, I tell them what light is and refer them to the movie that illustrates it. I do not define "field" because I have never even pretended to know what a field is.
9) Solar has difficulty understanding why I have a problem with the word "field". I explain it. This is where I am now.

Nowhere do you see ANYONE asking about your "sacred geometry". Nobody said anything about transegrity or cellular division. Yet you dumped a load of text into the thread about these topics. You show no respect for the thread's topic. You hijack other people's threads with your own ideas, interjecting yourself wherever you can with no regard for anyone else. Your behavior is destructive to this forum. Go start a sacred geometry thread and talk till you're blue in the face. This thread is about special relativity and, by extension light. This is what we have been discussing. Discuss it or leave.
Physicist: This is a pen

Mathematician: It's pi*r2*h

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: To Anyone Who Believes in Special Relativity's Time Travel

Unread post by junglelord » Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:50 am

Excuse me plasmatic and altonhare.
I am allowed to post on any thread I choose.
Your both very rude.
Case in point, your inability to understand what I understand, leads to some attempt to belittle it.
If you take some time to look at your conduct, maybe you should start with cleaning up your act.
Instead of being rude to others.

You may not understand what I do, that in no way makes it false, or incomprehensible to others.

Your ability to rebutt with nothing but rudeness is clear that your in the dark....NOT ME.

Neither one of you is interested in a talk, rather you want people to listen only to you, and think only what you think.
Imaginary ropes is not doing it for anyone but you two. If people don't see what you see, you get all twisted.
:?

Thats two people on my ignore list, if you don't like me, then I suggest you do the same.
:D
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

Plasmatic
Posts: 800
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: To Anyone Who Believes in Special Relativity's Time Travel

Unread post by Plasmatic » Sat Oct 18, 2008 11:13 am

Excuse me plasmatic and altonhare.
I am allowed to post on any thread I choose.
Your both very rude.
Case in point, your inability to understand what I understand, leads to some attempt to belittle it.
If you take some time to look at your conduct, maybe you should start with cleaning up your act.
Instead of being rude to others.

You may not understand what I do, that in no way makes it false, or incomprehensible to others.

Your ability to rebutt with nothing but rudeness is clear that your in the dark....NOT ME.

Neither one of you is interested in a talk, rather you want people to listen only to you, and think only what you think.
Imaginary ropes is not doing it for anyone but you two. If people don't see what you see, you get all twisted.


Thats two people on my ignore list, if you don't like me, then I suggest you do the same.

Excuse me plasmatic and altonhare.
I am allowed to post on any thread I choose.
Your both very rude.
Case in point, your inability to understand what I understand, leads to some attempt to belittle it.
If you take some time to look at your conduct, maybe you should start with cleaning up your act.
Instead of being rude to others.

You may not understand what I do, that in no way makes it false, or incomprehensible to others.

Your ability to rebutt with nothing but rudeness is clear that your in the dark....NOT ME.

Neither one of you is interested in a talk, rather you want people to listen only to you, and think only what you think.
Imaginary ropes is not doing it for anyone but you two. If people don't see what you see, you get all twisted.
:?

Thats two people on my ignore list, if you don't like me, then I suggest you do the same.
:D
I have not "rebutted" anything in relationship to your fairy-dust in this thread.I have however commented on yor assertion about frequency. Nor have I mentioned threads in this topic. I am certainly not interested in talking about APM, sacred geometry ,numerology ,platonic solids ,or any of the other nonsense you want to call science. I am interested however in discussing the actual thread topic. It is you who are being rude by posting all of your mystical unrelated pontifications in every thread where there is someone discussing actively.

Ive been ignoring you for months. Your repeated disrespect and outright obliviousness to what is actually being discussed earned you this response. So please do be a man of your word.

Now if you want to talk about the actual thread topic please by all means its your privelige,but follow the rules and stick to the topic.
"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification"......" I am therefore Ill think"
Ayn Rand
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 73 guests