Kinetic energy hypothesis......

[upriver]

The hypothesis is simple.

Kinetic energy is separate from mass.
Kinetic energy does the work and charge keeps thing organized.

Electricity is just a way to move kinetic energy around.
Nothing mysterious.

The field is just structure so that kinetic energy can be given to a moving particle.


Brant

[upriver]

One important application would be in the description of wave motion.

Look at these animations of particle in a wave motion.

Longitudinal and Transverse Wave Motion
Mechanical Waves are waves which propagate through a material medium (solid, liquid, or gas) at a wave speed which depends on the elastic and inertial properties of that medium. There are two basic types of wave motion for mechanical waves: longitudinal waves and transverse waves. The animations below demonstrate both types of wave and illustrate the difference between the motion of the wave and the motion of the particles in the medium through which the wave is travelling.
http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/w ... otion.html

The particles never seem to go anywhere. So just what is it that is being transferred and making the particles move?? Does the stuff that makes the particles move have mass? What would allow the stuff that makes the particles move go faster than light in a longitudinal wave situation??

Brant

[upriver]

So I am having a discussion at work whether gravity does work, or exchange energy.
And does it apply a force to an object that is still?
I wasn't thinking about it then but I will tell him, "An object in a gravitation field like the earths is coupled to the earth energetically through that field or gravitons, while in motion(potential energy input). It does not uncouple from that field the moment you set the object down. Gravity still acts on the object even though there is no acceleration all of a sudden."
If work is defined as the transfer of energy, gravity does work even though there is no acceleration, or gravity applies a force even though there is no motion. Should it be F = KEIn? And work should be W = KE*time.
Gravity is just kinetic energy acting in the direction of the earth.
Brant
From Wiki:
"These formulas demonstrate that work is the energy associated with the action of a force, so work subsequently possesses the physical dimensions, and units, of energy. The work/energy principles discussed here are identical to Electric work/energy principles."
From Wiki
In the physical sciences, an energy transfer or 'energy exchange' from one system to another is said to occur when an amount of energy crosses the boundary between them, thus increasing the energy content of one system while decreasing the energy content of the other system by the same amount. The transfer is characterized by the quantity of energy transferred, which can be specified in energy units such as the joule (J), in combination with the direction of the transfer, which can be specified as in (to) or out of (from) one system or the other. The transfer occurs in a process which changes the state of each system. Thermodynamics recognises three categories (mechanisms or modes) of such transfers:
Heat[ing], which can occur via conduction, thermal electromagnetic radiation, and other mechanisms
Work (thermodynamics), for example, electric power transmission is a (non-mechanical) thermodynamic work process that can transfer energy from a power generation station to your home, where a pump can use it to perform mechanical work on water to lift it out of your basement.
Mass transfer, processes in which material moves from one system to the other, carrying its energy with it
Note that these mechanisms or modes refer to the kind of transfer or process acting on the energy, not the kinds (or forms, types, etc.) of energy that's being transferred. The increase or decrease in energy of each system can be in any of several forms of energy."
Like · · Share
Rick Crabtree and Al Leon Sr. like this.

Dan Kennerson
You're misquoting. Not "exerts force " on a still object, "does work".
21 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
Does work = transfers energy..... Exerts a force which is part of work as its currently defined. I am saying that gravity does work(exerts a force without acceleration) on the object even if the object is still....
12 hrs · Edited · Like

Dan Kennerson
Traditional definition is that work is force times distance. You have to produce a counter example before I'm going to let that one pass
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra From Wiki:
"These formulas demonstrate that work is the energy associated with the action of a force, so work subsequently possesses the physical dimensions, and units, of energy. The work/energy principles discussed here are identical to Electric work/energy principles."
12 hrs · Like

Dan Kennerson
Show me a physical example where I can't calculate work done by force x distance. You're implying that the table is exerting energy on the spoon its holding up. Prove it!
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
Work is the transfer of energy no matter how you define it mathematically.
I am saying that even if you stop moving an object it still has energy transferred to if by gravity, no matter how many equations you write that doesnt change.
Thats why we need to refine the definition of work and energy transfer to more accurately reflect whats going on for better engineering.
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
Gravity doesnt energetically uncouple from the spoon the moment you put the spoon down does it?
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
So in order to do work against gravity the table must have an energetic input... At the lowest level an electron stays in orbit around the atom. This requires energy input somehow... From whatever aether, quantum foam or whatever... You have to have a complete path of energy to develop a unified field theory.....

[upriver]

So if we think about a Truck and then think about a Cat why doesnt our weight change?

Wouldnt there be more information in your consciousness for the Truck than for the Cat?

So if information was massless that would solve it but what form does it take in your mind? What form of energy is your mind? I would posit it is structured kinetic energy... If you look at how the brain works its the impulses that are the foundation of the interface to kinetic energy, the mind. The neurons form a web of ever evolving groups of electrical impulses.The speedier the neurons the smarter the person. The mind is part of the consciousness which exists in the brain as the electric/kinetic interface to the complete consciousness which exists in the "kinetic field" outside the body as well.

I would posit that matter motion is matter life and kinetic motion is consciousness.

Where your consciousness goes when you die. From all of the Near death Reports, after life reports, previous life reports and Out of body reports - if even 1 of them were true, I would say that there is a another universe that consists of just kinetic energy where "people" live. Why they go back and forth when people are born and die I have not speculated on so much.


Brant

[upriver]

Mind and Its Evolution: A Dual Coding Theoretical Approach
By Allan Paivio

"Result 1 of 1 in this book for neuron impulses groups evolve selectively to faces or other complex forms. Alternatively or additionally. different patterns could be represented by different temporal firing patterns across synapses.
Chapter 7 described a relevant study by Kreiman et al. (2000). who recorded impulses from single neurons using microelectrodes implanted in the brains of severe epileptics to find the focus of their seizures. The recordings were taken while the patients viewed pictures of faces. household objects. spatial layouts, ears. animals. food. famous people. and so on. Later, recordings were again obtained when the patients were asked to imagine previously viewed pictures.
Neurons were found in various areas of the brain (hippocampus, amygdala, parahippocampal gyrus ...) that responded selectively when the pictures were viewed or imaged. Some neurons responded similarly dining vision and imagery of the same pictures, whereas others were activated only during vision, and others only during imagery.
The authors were especially struck by the selective activation during imagery, presumably reflecting retrieval of picture information from memory (involving the medial temporal lobe) or maintenance of the visual image during imagination. The selective and varied coding of seen and imaged objects is a remarkable feat for individual neurons, although it is recognized that populations of such neurons (and other lets selective ones) are usually involved in cognition.
Barlow (1995) dis-cussed cooling by cardinal cells (presumably the neurons from which Kreiman et al., 2000. recorded would qualify as such) and ensemble neuronal coding in a type of cell-assembly described by Abeles (1982. cited in Barlow. 1995 pp. 423-421) as a synfire group—a synchronously firing group of cortical neurons that can fire the next group in a chain.. Barlow concluded that both types of encoding are used by the brain. but that a single neuron is capable of perceptual discrimination using evidence from other neurons.
But how exactly does a single neuron know how to combine all this input so that it represents sensible objects? What and where is the model that maps physical events onto a cognitive neuron? And so the general binding problem persists in the case of single neurons as it does in the case of neural ensembles. "

[upriver]

Conduction pathways in microtubules, biological quantum computation, and consciousness
Stuart Hameroff *, Alex Nip, Mitchell Porter, Jack Tuszynski
Department of Anesthesiology and Psychology, Center for Consciousness Studies, Uniersity of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA
Received 18 May 2001; accepted 20 September 2001
Abstract
Technological computation is entering the quantum realm, focusing attention on biomolecular information
processing systems such as proteins, as presaged by the work of Michael Conrad. Protein conformational dynamicsand pharmacological evidence suggest that protein conformational states—fundamental information units (‘bits’) in biological systems—are governed by quantum events, and are thus perhaps akin to quantum bits (‘qubits’) as utilized in quantum computation. ‘Real time’ dynamic activities within cells are regulated by the cell cytoskeleton, particularly microtubules (MTs) which are cylindrical lattice polymers of the protein tubulin. Recent evidence shows signaling, communication and conductivity in MTs, and theoretical models have predicted both classical and quantum information processing in MTs. In this paper we show conduction pathways for electron mobility and possible quantum tunneling and superconductivity among aromatic amino acids in tubulins. The pathways within tubulin match helical patterns in the microtubule lattice structure, which lend themselves to topological quantum effects resistant to decoherence. The Penrose–Hameroff ‘Orch OR’ model of consciousness is reviewed as an example of the possible utility of quantum computation in MTs. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jac ... 000000.pdf

[upriver]

The biggest thing I learned from Pierre-Marie's work, which set me off investigating this, is that emission spectra moves from lines to continuum to blackbody depending to the density of the matter.

Put another way- only solid matter has a blackbody spectrum.
Even liquid does not have a BB spectrum because there is macroscopic movement of molecules.. Its emission spectrum changes with nadir angle.

I have observed sonoluminesence spectrum going from line emission to blackbody depending on driving pressure in world record high pressure resonators.

Here is a review of our work.
Transient cavitation in high-quality-factor resonators at high static pressures.
Transient cavitation in high-quality-factor resonators at high static pressures.
1. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010 Jun;127(6):3456-65. doi: 10.1121/1.3377062. Transient cavitation in high-quality-factor resonators at high static pressures.
View on www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Preview by Yahoo


I have had several conversations on high pressure arc spectra in the range several hundred torr(mm) to atmosphere with Dr. Ott at NIST. His main focus was continuum spectra.


Thank you Pierre-Marie for starting me down this path..

Brant

[upriver]

How the brain kinetic interface seems to work.

"An important new facet of the theory is introduced. Microtubule quantum vibrations (e.g. in megahertz) appear to interfere and produce much slower EEG "beat frequencies." Despite a century of clinical use, the underlying origins of EEG rhythms have remained a mystery. Clinical trials of brief brain stimulation aimed at microtubule resonances with megahertz mechanical vibrations using transcranial ultrasound have shown reported improvements in mood, and may prove useful against Alzheimer's disease and brain injury in the future."
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-01-discovery- ... s.html#jCp

My hypothesis is that the Microtubule quantum vibrations actually modulate the neural net producing the conscious movements like picking up a glass of water from a thought..

Microtubles have electrons paired up by London forces.
So then the question becomes--- is the phase space between all the waves in the universe important? Is that information another universe?

I would surmise that you need (at least)2 electrons to be able to see that phase different between 2 waves. Every particle in the universe has its own frequency.
Conduction pathways in microtubules, biological quantum computation, and consciousness
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jac ... 000000.pdf


Ken Shoulders in his EVO work showed that sparks are groups of electrons with a leader.
Lightning is even larger groups of electrons and ball lightning my be even larger.

Larger collections of electrons means you can express more kinetic energy..... The bond is the electron...

[querious]

Brant Ra
Work is the transfer of energy no matter how you define it mathematically.
I am saying that even if you stop moving an object it still has energy transferred to if by gravity, no matter how many equations you write that doesnt change.
Thats why we need to refine the definition of work and energy transfer to more accurately reflect whats going on for better engineering.
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
Gravity doesnt energetically uncouple from the spoon the moment you put the spoon down does it?
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
So in order to do work against gravity the table must have an energetic input... At the lowest level an electron stays in orbit around the atom. This requires energy input somehow... From whatever aether, quantum foam or whatever... You have to have a complete path of energy to develop a unified field theory.....

Brant,
So basically you're asking what keeps the table's electrons from collapsing into the protons, turning into a heap of neutrons. Well, if you apply enough energy, that WILL happen. It's how a neutron star is created. So while setting a spoon on the table does deform it slightly, adding energy to it, the atoms of the table just reach new equilibrium positions. There is no new energy required once the table atoms are deformed.

So, we don't "need to refine the definition of work and energy transfer to more accurately reflect whats going on for better engineering."; just don't confuse force and energy.

Also, you might want to read this paper describing the what actually flows in static situations, like the spoon sitting on the table. Although no energy is flowing into the system, there is something flowing through the earth-table-spoon system. http://www.physikdidaktik.uni-karlsruhe ... cs_ejp.pdf

Hope that helps.

[upriver]

Brant Ra
Work is the transfer of energy no matter how you define it mathematically.
I am saying that even if you stop moving an object it still has energy transferred to if by gravity, no matter how many equations you write that doesnt change.
Thats why we need to refine the definition of work and energy transfer to more accurately reflect whats going on for better engineering.
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
Gravity doesnt energetically uncouple from the spoon the moment you put the spoon down does it?
12 hrs · Like

Brant Ra
So in order to do work against gravity the table must have an energetic input... At the lowest level an electron stays in orbit around the atom. This requires energy input somehow... From whatever aether, quantum foam or whatever... You have to have a complete path of energy to develop a unified field theory.....

Brant,
So basically you're asking what keeps the table's electrons from collapsing into the protons, turning into a heap of neutrons. Well, if you apply enough energy, that WILL happen. It's how a neutron star is created. So while setting a spoon on the table does deform it slightly, adding energy to it, the atoms of the table just reach new equilibrium positions. There is no new energy required once the table atoms are deformed.

So, we don't "need to refine the definition of work and energy transfer to more accurately reflect whats going on for better engineering."; just don't confuse force and energy.

Also, you might want to read this paper describing the what actually flows in static situations, like the spoon sitting on the table. Although no energy is flowing into the system, there is something flowing through the earth-table-spoon system. http://www.physikdidaktik.uni-karlsruhe ... cs_ejp.pdf

Hope that helps.

There is no confusion between force and energy. A force requires energy to maintain. Work is force * distance. Force is mass * acceleration. I am saying you can have a force without acceleration.
There by doing work without distance. The key to all of this is recognizing that in all cases energy is still being transferred leading to work is the transfer of energy with or without distance. This leads to many other things like the separation of kinetic energy from matter.

[upriver]

In listening to this TED talk I came to realize that there really is this huge amount of energy in the Aether lattice... It probably is up there around 10^100 Joules stronger than the value we observe today:-)....
The energy of the universe, dark energy or what ever you want to call it.

It makes up 1/2 of mass @ .87 light speed... If you remove the velocity component you are left with the original mass with no change...
However to get to light speed you are adding more than the mass equivalent of kinetic energy to accelerate an object to Lightspeed.
By the time you get to light speed you have an object that is 80% kinetic energy and 20% real mass....

There is more kinetic energy in the universe than there is mass.

Have We Reached the End of Physics? | Harry Cliff | TED Talks
https://youtu.be/gWPFJgLAzu4?t=386

[Webbman]

The hypothesis is simple.

Kinetic energy is separate from mass.
Kinetic energy does the work and charge keeps thing organized.

Electricity is just a way to move kinetic energy around.
Nothing mysterious.

The field is just structure so that kinetic energy can be given to a moving particle.


Brant

I completely agree with your hypothesis. All energy is or originates from simple kinetic energy. How we align or organize this energy is what gives it form, the highest form being electricity/magnetism (full alignment) and the lowest being heat (no alignment)

if you consider a stranded structure of the aether, where energy is translated (or stored) as pressure, transverse and torsional waves or ripples then it is easy to see that all energy is simply the motion of the aether, and all matter is composed of stranded structures.

The energy of the universe is the strands bumping off one another transferring their waves in the process. We can harness and control them by aligning them.

[Xantos]

Increasing mass is just plain wrong. Mass is constant, always.

Imagine a pond. And on this pond, you have an oscillator that is creating concentric waves. Now imagine this is a bubble that is vibrating (we are looking at a crossection on the surface of the pond). Now imagine this bubble (molecule in your body) being pushed by a rocket chair which is again a formation of vibrating bubbles. What happens is that the vibrations compress in the opposite direction of the movement. That is why you feel g acceleration pushing you back in to the chair. When the chair lets go (stops producing force) the built up compression relaxes spring-like towards the front. That is why you feel that you are being pulled forward (or a big belly flops forwards). It is as simple as that.

Or a more plastic approach...you push the surface of the pond by your hand. You see a buildup of water towards your hand, feeling the "mass" of the water that is at the higher potential than the water just infront of it (non-disturbed). When you stop, the wave travels forward until it is stopped by viscous forces of the water and returned into the rest state.

[upriver]

Increasing mass is just plain wrong. Mass is constant, always.

Imagine a pond. And on this pond, you have an oscillator that is creating concentric waves. Now imagine this is a bubble that is vibrating (we are looking at a crossection on the surface of the pond). Now imagine this bubble (molecule in your body) being pushed by a rocket chair which is again a formation of vibrating bubbles. What happens is that the vibrations compress in the opposite direction of the movement. That is why you feel g acceleration pushing you back in to the chair. When the chair lets go (stops producing force) the built up compression relaxes spring-like towards the front. That is why you feel that you are being pulled forward (or a big belly flops forwards). It is as simple as that.

Or a more plastic approach...you push the surface of the pond by your hand. You see a buildup of water towards your hand, feeling the "mass" of the water that is at the higher potential than the water just infront of it (non-disturbed). When you stop, the wave travels forward until it is stopped by viscous forces of the water and returned into the rest state.

Right. Mass doesnt actually increase. The amount of kinetic energy required to push that mass increases up to a limit.
If you measure mass in electron volts and you measure kinetic energy in eV, then you can have an equivalent.
That doesnt say anything about the actual mechanism of mass vs kinetic energy...

[upriver]

Gerald Pollack observes kinetic effects that are tied directly to how much sunlight there is. This is the same force that makes the solar wind....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-T7tCMUDXU