Vacuum and Light quanta.

All stars and planets move into the Outer space without
friction. Therefore Newton and Huygens were sure that
the Cosmic space, Aether /Vacuum was an empty space.
In that time Newton gave preference to corpuscular
light theory and Huygens to the waves theory.
But later A.J. Fresnel and Th.Young discovered that
light was transverse waves. And the transverse waves can
propagate only in the firm and spring space as the steel.
Can Aether/ Vacuum be empty and steel at the same time?
Many theories were written to explain this problem. All of
them are covered with dust and maybe only historians of
science remember them.
Now somebody wrote:
" Maybe the problem of transverse waves in Aether is
possible to solve in another way. Perhaps it is
necessary to explain not the Aether but how light works."
My answer on the question:" How does Light quantum work?"
1.
Light quantum can travel with constant speed c=1.
and then we call it Photon.
2.
Light quantum can work with speed c>1.
and then we call it Electron.
3.
Light quantum can stop its moving and take
a rest c=0 and then we call it Anti matter.
4.
Is my interpretation correct ?
Yes. It is correct. Why?
Because when Electron interacts
with Vacuum we also call it Anti matter
5.
If you doubt in my rightness, ask yourself :
What does " The Law of conservation and transformation
of energy" mean according to one single Light quanta ?
================..
Best wishes.

Vacuum and Gravity.

Now it is considered that Newton / Einstein's laws
of gravitation are basis of physics, the first laws of the Universe.
But the detected material mass of the matter in the Universe
is so small (the average density of all substances in the
Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that gravitation
field, as whole, is broken , it doesn't work, as whole, in the Universe.
So, the Newton / Einstein's laws of gravitation are correct only
in the small and local part of Universe and we cannot take them
as the first ones. What can the first law of the Universe be?
All galaxies , all gravitation fields exist in Vacuum (T=0K).
Therefore the Vacuum can be “The first law of the Universe.”
Question:
How can the hot process of star formation in cold Vacuum begin?
===========..
P.S.
Sorry, I forgot that it is possible also to take
a" Big bang" as the first law of Universe,
as the basis of physics. Everything is possible
in the mad Orwell's house.

Vacuum, infinity, particles... etc.
#
" The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex? "
/ Paul Dirac ./
#
"Now we know that the vacuum can have all sorts of wonderful effects
over an enormous range of scales, from the microscopic to the cosmic,"
said Peter Milonni
from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.
============..
1.
The Third Law of Thermodynamics says that we cannot
reach the Absolute temperature of Vacuum T=0K.
This temperature is a border for us.
Classic physics says that all particles in T=0K will stop their
movement. But Quantum theory doesn't agree with this statement.
Dirac and other his colleagues said that in the sea of
vacuum " virtual, negative, imaginary (i^2=-1) " particles live.
So, the Third Law says that the border between infinity universe
and the " finite world" is marked by Kelvin temperature T=0K.
In another words in the infinity universe T=0K another
objects with finite " inner borders " can exist. The question is:
How can the infinity universe interact with the " finite world" ?
======...
2.
What is a geometrical and physical parameters of particles
in Vacuum, in Nothing , in T=0K?
Can we know anything about this "soup of virtual particles" in vacuum?
The physicists think about the " virtual, negative, imaginary
(i^2=-1) " particles as about of a " point". They are mistaken.
Because, there are physical laws which forbid such opinion.
Because according to J. Charles law ( 1787), when the
temperature falls down on 1 degree the volume decreases
on 1/273. And when the temperature reaches -273 degrees
the volume disappears.
Because, as consequence from the Third Law
( W. Nernst-1906, M. Planck-1911, A.Einstein-1925)
when it is closer to zero T=0K the particles lose more
their volume, density, pressure. The volume of these
particles aspires to infinity. And when this “ infinity”
comes nobody knows what to do with the infinity.
But, according to the
" Law of conservation and transformation of energy"
the particles cannot disappear. So, they can only change
its geometrical form and its kinetic energy and become
“flat particles” with potential energy. These flat particles
must have geometrical form of a circle C/D=pi.
So, it is mistaken to think about elementary particle
as about a point.
3.
And from another side we know that photon is a real particle
and can fly with constant speed c=1.
In this movement its form is a compressing circle.
4.
etc.
========================================

"Etc."?

Did Socratus actually find his own post so tedious involved that he didn't have the energy to conclude it?

Perhaps he's just practicing conservation of energy.

On the question:
What inhale the Life in formulas and equations ?
What must be present in a body to make it alive ?
The answer is:
Soul. Quantum of Light.
Because, from all particles, only and only
the quantum of light is a privileged particle.

Light quanta and its life.
1.
The movement of light quanta does not depend of a source.
So, thinking about light quanta we can forget about a " source" .
It means that light quanta is an independent particle.
2.
When light quanta in the state of a rest its speed is c=0
and its impulse is h=0.
The time is frozen, and its own clock shows zero.
We call it "antiparticle".
2.
When light quanta moves with constant speed c=1
its impulse is h=1.
The time is also frozen, and its own clock still shows zero.
We call it "photon".
3.
When photon moves with speed c>1 and its impulse
(spin) is h=h/2pi the zero time changes and limited time appears.
In this situation we know light quanta as "electron".
Light quanta works as electron. SRT explains this process.
4.
When electron emits from an atom and interacts with Vacuum
all its parameters changes. Its limited time ended and its own
clock again shows zero. We again can call it as a " photon"
or "antiparticle". Now it lives in infinite/ eternal Vacuum
until new incarnation, until its new work maybe in an atom
(molecule), or in a cell, maybe in a blade of grass or in a tree,
maybe in an animal or in a person.
5.
If you doubt in my rightness, ask yourself :
What does " The Law of conservation and transformation
of energy" mean according to one single Light quanta/Electron?
====================...

Mr. B. wrote:
If you are looking for support, at most you will find paranoid
and/or confused individuals who want to take shelter in your
us-vs.-them state of mind.

Who is who?
=================....
1.
The speed of Light quantum is constant: c=1,
no matter how the source or the observer moves.
/ Michelson’s experiment. 1881. SRT. 1905. /
2.
But .. .. in every book and textbook is written that
there isn’t absolute speed. For example in the book
“ Relative theory- actual” by Prof. Ernst Schmutzer.
Part 3.2.2.page 122. and
Part 3.2.4. page 130.

Another book “Relativity for the layman”
By James A. Coleman.
Part 3 pages 47 -48

Another book “The materialistic essence of Einstein’s
Relative theory” by Mostepanenko M. B.
Page 37.

Another book “ Einstein and development of physical/
mathematical thought.” by Science Academy of
USSR. Article “ Physics and Relative theory”
by M. Born. On the pages 74 and 81.
And article “ Relative theory and some questions
about the optic of moving bodies” by Francfurt U. I.
and Frenk A.M. Page 224: “ Relative theory
doesn’t know absolute moving”.
etc….
3.
From the school days I cannot understand how
it is possible to say that the speed of photon is
absolute constant c=1 and in the same time to say :
“ All motion is relative (hence ,the theory of relativity).
We can never speak of absolute motion as such,…..”
…etc.
Maybe somebody can explain me this paradox.
==========..
It is very difficult to prove the correctness
in our Orwell's mad house.

====================...
Best wishes.
Israel.

What bothers me is the observation of those particles in a vacuum. I am wary about assuming that since there is no operation on those particles, they will not change. Maybe they behave differently in the dark, when no one can see them. In other words, we cannot know that what we are observing in the light is the only behavior those particles can manifest. Also, what is the material of the vacuum? In other words, in a vacuum of another material, they may behave differently.

Nothingness. ? !!!
============ ========= =..

Nothingness of Space Could Illuminate the Theory of Everything .
============ ========.
Could the vacuum contain dark energy, gravity particles,
and frictionless gears?
by Tim Folger
published online July 18, 2008

When the next revolution rocks physics,
chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum, that endless
infinite void.

http://discovermaga zine.com/ topics/space

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-...theory-of-everything

#
" The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex? "

/ Paul Dirac ./
#
"Now we know that the vacuum can have all sorts of wonderful effects
over an enormous range of scales, from the microscopic to the cosmic,"

/ Peter Milonni.
from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico./
============ ==.

What is the first law of Universe ?
=========.
The Physics is first of all Vacuum.
Vacuum is :T=0K.
It is the empty space between milliards of billions Galaxies.
* * *
Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, all matter
(all elementary particles and all quarks and
their girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks,
all kinds of waves: electromagnetic, gravitational,
muons gluons field .. etc.) was assembled in a single point.

It is interesting to think about what had surrounded the single
point. The answer is : EMPTINESS- NOTHING.!!!
Ok!
But why does everyone speak about EMPTINESS- NOTHING in
common phrases rather than in specific, concrete terms?
I wonder why nobody has written down this EMPTINESS- NOTHING in
the form of a physical formula ? You see, every schoolboy knows that
is possible to express the EMPTINESS- NOTHING condition
by the formula T=0K.
* * *
Once there was a Big Bang.
But in what space had the Big Bang taken place
and in what space was the matter of the Big Bang distributed?
Not in T=0K?
It is clear, that there is only EMPTINESS, NOTHING, in T=0K.
Now consider that the Universe, as an absolute frame of reference is
in a condition of T = 2,7K (rests relic radiation of the Big
Bang ). But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will
change and decrease. What temperature can this radiation reach?
Not T=0K?
Hence, if we go into the past or into the present or into the future,
we can not escape from EMPTINESS- NOTHING T=0K.
Therefore it is necessary to begin to think from T=0K.
============ =======.
About the theory of the Big Bang is written
the thick (very thick) books.
But anywhere do not write about the reason of the Big Bang.
Anybody does not know it.
I know.
Action, when the God opens his palm,
have named the "Big Bang".
And action, when the God compresses his palm,
have named " a single point".
============ ========= ======.

Now it is consider that Newton / Einstein’s laws
of gravitation are the first laws of Universe.
============
1.
Newton was a clever man therefore when he discovered his
" law of gravitation" he quickly understood that
soon or later the all matter in the Universe had to gather
in the " singular point".
And because this effect does not happen in the Nature,
Newton , being very religious man , thought that only God’s
power did not give the matter to gather in a " singular point".
2.
And then atheistic time came. They decided :
As God does not exist, so the all matter in Universe
must gather in a " singular point".
============ ====
I don’t agree that Newton / Einstein’s laws
of gravitation are the first laws of Universe.
Why?
1.
Take simple atom: proton and electron,( small distances).
Nobody interests in gravitation interaction between
proton and electron . There is not any theory about
gravitation interaction between proton and electron .
Everybody interests only in electrical ( nuclear)
interaction between them.
It means that Newton / Einstein’s laws of gravitation
are local and limited.
This law in the small ( nuclear) distance does not work.
2.
Take Universe ( cosmic distances).
There is not theory about gravitation interaction between
galaxy A. and galaxy Z. We don’t need it.
Why? For example.
Let’s imagine of all apple- trees on our Earth
as a galaxy, and apples as stars.
Nobody will interest in the interaction between
an apple- tree in New York ( galaxy A.) and
an apple- tree (cherry-tree) in Varanasi (galaxy Z.).
It means that Newton / Einstein’s laws of gravitation
are local and limited.
This law in the big cosmic distance does not work.
3.
Detected material mass of the matter in the Universe is so small
(the average density of all substance in the Universe is
approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that it is not able to isolate all
cosmic space in sphere. It mean that Universe (Vacuum) is infinite.
=========
Conclusion: Newton / Einstein’s laws of gravitation cannot be
" The first law of Universe."
============ ====
What is the second law of Universe ?
To answer of this question we must ask:
" What geometrical and physical parameters
have the particles in Vacuum T=0K? "
1.
Thermodynamics point.
Let us take some area of Vacuum and mark it with letter R.
The number of particles in this area of Vacuum
we will to mark with letter N.
When every particle of this area has gravity/ mass of rest: R/N= k.
============ =======
2.
Quantum (SRT) point.
Classic physics asserts, that in a Vacuum Ò=0Ê cease any motion
of particles, and the energy of Vacuum is equal zero.
The quantum physics asserts, that in a Vacuum Ò=0Ê there are
motion of particles, and the energy of Vacuum is not zero.
Let us take some energy area of Vacuum and mark it with letter E.
The mass of this energy area of Vacuum we will to mark with letter M.
When every particle of this area has energy/mass of rest: E/M= c^2,
( E=Mc^2, M=Ec^2.)
============ ========= ==
3.
Geometry and Physics.
The Modern Physics was started from two points:
thermodynamics and light.
1.
By studying the effect of thermodynamics, physicists came to the
opinion that the physical parameters like volume, temperature and
density (of particles mass) are enough to discover the laws of
thermodynamics, and they didn’t need to know something
concrete about single particle. But then, soon or later, all mass of
this
particles will stop it’s moving and the thermal/ radiation death
will come. Is it possible? No, it isn’t , some particles will radiate
and then QT evolved from this idea. Now the situation radically
change.
From studying mass of particles in thermodynamics Planck and
Einstein
began to study one individual particle (quantum of energy). It
seams that
it was logical to think about geometrical form of this particle,
but this
did not happen. And still now physicists do not think about concrete
particles, they are concerned about the " mathematical point".
2.
When physicists studied the behavior of light, they came to the
conclusion that light ( light quanta) can sometime be a particle as a
" mathematical point" and sometime a wave as a " mathematical
wave". From behavior of light the SRT was born and here the particle
is also " mathematical point". It is hard to understand, why nobody
think about geometrical form of light quanta if it is real particle.
3.
For many years, physicists used Euclidian (static and firm )
geometry for solving physical problems, and they thought there was
only one geometry.
But Lobachevsky and Bolyai had another opinion.
They thought that to use only Euclidian geometry was not enough to
explain all the effects in the Universe. Why, because our Universe
is not static and firm. The physical processes in Universe change
all the time so the Euclidian geometry also has to change. This lead
Lobachevsky and Bolyai to discover Non-Euclidian geometry which is
not static but elastic.
4.
Between the XIX and XX century, many physicists such Abraham,
Poincare, Lorentz and Einstein came to the conclusion that the
particle (electron) does not have constant mass, energy and length.
This means that an electron is not a firm particle. The electron is
an elastic particle and therefore his geometrical form can change.
All physicists know about this fact and took this fact in their
calculations. But which conclusion can be done from this fact? They
have no answer. Nobody interested about the borders of this changes.
5.
In 1915 Einstein said the mass and speed (moving mass) can change the
geometry of space. (GRT). It means the physics without geometry is a
limited part of science. It means the physics without geometry is
not complete (whole) part of science.
6.
The situation we see today is similar to the years between 1900 and
1928 when QT was created. Nothing changes.
Mathematicians use Non- Euclidian geometry and they do not know
the power of these changes from Euclidian to Non-Euclidian geometry.
They do not interested how these changes came.
And physicists use forces (energy, impulse, ...etc) without know
anything about geometrical changes of particles. They do not think
about this. For them the particle is only represented by
a " mathematical point".
After all, they say the situation in QT is crazy, the Nature is
paradoxical. I know why they say this, because one hand "physical
doesn,t know that the other hand "geometrical" does.
7.
Can we understand our " paradoxical" world?
The answer is clear. In the Natural world, physics and geometry
are one unit part in the evolutionary process, and this fact must be
reflected in any future theory of the evolution of matter (as a mass
and as an individual particle).
------------ --------- --.
The Natural world is not a " mathematical point".
Even the smallest object must have a geometrical form.
And on my opinion, only when we begin to think about light quanta as
a particle with a geometrical form we come from image to reality.
------------ -------.
P.S.
Italy. Railway station.
It was more then two hours till the departure of the train.
I went to the café and ordered a cup of coffee. Soon two men
and a very beautiful, slim woman took place opposite me.
They ordered something to drink and one of the man opened a
case of violin and took out a bow. He began to explain something
about a bow , carefully and gently touching it. Then another man
took this bow and also enthusiastically continued this conversation.
For half an hour the bow was passed from one hands to another
following with enthusiastic discussion.
And the beautiful woman looked at bow, at both these men without
saying a word. For half an hour I watched this group with admiration
and excitement. What a class! What a cultural level! What a beauty!
=======================..
And now let's imagine the bow pressed into a "mathematical point"
and the musicians speak seriously about a " mathematical point "
which must produce a sound from a violin. Everybody will say I
describe an idiotic situation. Well, I agree.
But why don’t anybody say it to physicists when they observe the
elementary particle as a " mathematical point " , without paying
attention to its geometrical form.
==========..
P.S.
When Feynman said " I think I can safely say that nobody understands
quantum mechanics. " it was only because nobody took into consideration
the geometrical form of particle.
================.

In 1787, French physicist Jack Charles found out that at
a decrease of gas temperature to 1 degree, its volume decreases
on 1/273 : " Charles' law ". And when the temperature reaches
-273 degrees the volume disappears.
This law was confirmed by others of physicists:
Gay-Lussac ( 1802), W. Nernst ( 1910), A. Einstein ( 1925)
All these laws (as consequence from the Third Law of
Thermodynamics ) tell, when the temperature goes closer to
zero T=0K, then the particles lose more their volume.
The volume of these particles aspires to infinity.
Unless can it be? No.
It prohibits with the "Law of conservation and transformation
energy". Its mean, when volume of the particles disappear they
become indefinitely flat circles - phantoms.
So, they can only change its geometrical form and its kinetic
energy and become “flat particles” with potential energy.
These flat particles must have geometrical form of a circle
C/D= pi = 3,14…..So, it is mistaken to think about elementary
Particle as about a "mathematical point".
What does "indefinitely flat circles means?
It means, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we cannot reach density of the particle in the rest .
============ ========= .
4.
Mathematical point.
In mathematics, such condition of the particle in Vacuum
is characterized with the imaginary quantity : i^2=-1.
============ ========= ========= .
The quantum physics approves, that `virtual particles`
exist in Vacuum
Astrophysics approves, that "latent mass", "invisible particles",
'missing mass', 'dark matter' exist in Vacuum.
Everything was created from them.
But nobody knows that it is.
They say, that 90% or more of the matter in the Universe is unseen.
They are right.
============ ========= .
We have now whole bouquet of formulas to begin
to paint the picture of creating the Existence.

C/D=pi , E=Mc^2, R/N=k , h = 0 , i^2 = -1 .
============ ========= ========= =====.
Does not anybody see how beautiful
this bouquet of formulas?
============ .
Israel Ssdovnik./ Socratus.

socratus: What I distrust about all reasoning even all logical arguments is what is excluded and even unknowingly omitted despite supposed caution and integrity. Having stated that, here is what you failed to include in your philosophical discussion: mass gap.

My opinion about “ black hole”
=================================..


A black hole is a region of space in which the gravitational field is so powerful that nothing,
not even light, can escape its pull after having fallen past its event horizon.

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

=========================.
But to give only such explanation of “ black hole” is not complete.
There is another alternative.
There is another interpretation of “ black hole”.

A “ black hole” is not a “region of space in which the
gravitational field is so powerful that nothing, not even light,
can escape its pull “ but…..
but region with very small density (critical density : p = 10^-29g/sm^3).

And the detected material mass of the matter in the Universe
is so small (the average density of all substance in the
Universe is approximately less than p=10^-30 g/sm^3)
that the “ black hole” is only a model of our Universe / Vacuum
as a whole .
===========.
Best wishes
Israel

John ( n...@hotmail.com) ask:
For a non-specialist, what's the conclusion?
=========.
1.
In 1900 Planck found what “ black body” / a model of Vacuum /
can radiate . The radiation goes only by “ quanta” particles (h).
This kind of radiation is electromagnetic radiation.
2.
In 1974 S. Hawking found what “ black hole” / other model of vacuum/
can radiate . This is another kind of radiation.
This radiation explain the thermal spectrum radiation of the beginning
of star formation ( gravitation).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
3.
So, we have two different kinds of radiation:
electromagnetic radiation and thermal radiation.
4.
Hawking radiation has never been observed because it begins
from very small “ micro black holes “ in the vacuum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_black_hole

And nobody know that the “ mini black hole” keeps in itself.
What is “ mini black hole “?
3.
If you are interesting you can read my opinion on the site:
1.
http://www.wbabin.net/physics/sadovnik.pdf
Gravity, particles and star formation.
2.
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
Entropy - My opinion.

========================..
Best wishes.
Israel.