Re: French And CERN Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator) Unknown Planetary Risk To Create Artificial BIG BANG

On May 16, 3:19 pm, Rumpelstiltskin
<PleaseDoNotReplyByEm...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2008 12:33:24 -0700 (PDT),alGuacamole<a...@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:



On May 15, 9:51 am, Rumpelstiltskin
<PleaseDoNotReplyByEm...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2008 09:39:54 -0700 (PDT),alGuacamole<a...@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:

IIRC a particle of light represented by a photon is absorbed by an
electron and hence is kicked out of the solid. The explanation of the
electron absorbing the energy from a continuous light wave just does
not work. On a macroscopic level, light is an electromagnetic "force".
On a quantum level it is a photon with momentum and energy.

Yes, but no-one suggests that a photon or an electron are
particles that "cause" the electromagnetic force. That would
be like saying that QM doesn't need "gravitons" because
matter itself is the "cause" of gravity.

I'm not saying that matter itself is necessarily not the cause
of gravity, just that it's tough to reconcile the contrary view of
"gravitons" with gravity. It would help gravitons were very,
very small, but they would have to be very very very very
small to have enough of them for us not to have seen so
far any statistical differences in weight of the same thing
measured at different times.)

photons have no mass (just energy) so a light source can emit
uncountable numbers of photons without violating the conservation of
mass of the emitter and satisfying the energy balance of the emitter.
We have observed individual photons being absorbed in the
photoelectric effect. Similar theories of gravitons can be stated just
as theories of the ether were suggested. But testing by an experiment
has been unsuccessful in discovering the graviton. But common sense
would tell you that since every fundamental force has a quantum
identity, it would be expected that so does gravity. Otherwise, the
distortion of space caused by mass is very very different from the
other fundamental forces of nature.

Photons do have momentum even if they have no mass,
so there would be conservation considerations.

I don't think anyone's suggested that gravitons, or any
particle other than the photon, is massless.

As I mentioned, I think the discrete quantum identity of
apparently continuous fundamental forces is an indication
we don't have the whole story yet.

You just mean gravity don't you. In the case of strong forces, there
is no continuous equivalent because they're of such short range (in
quantum dimensions) that the long range equivalent is unmeasurable.

But regarding photons, the "mass" in the momentum definition is the
energy equivalent. If photons had real mass, then they would achieve
infinite mass to travel at the velocity of light. Having zero mass and
traveling at the speed of light makes photons consistent with
relativity and quantum theory.

As I've mentioned, my suspicion is that gravitons, if they
are found, are just artifacts, as I would say is the
"collapsing" of a wave into a proton when a human observes
it. It's a powerful artifact, separating worlds, but I would say
that it separates worlds only from the viewpoint of each
future branch of that human and the world-experience he
carries with him, somewhat as a straw that is swept down
the left rather than the right branch in a delta carries its
experience with it. The delta, or the "multiverse", simply
"is". That's all tied up with my take on many-worlds, of
course. I don't know if many people, or even any people,
agree.

IIRC the weak interactions have been studied in linear electron
accelerators which are used to study particles that do not follow or
observe the rules of interactions of the heavier hadrons like protons
and neutrons. The decay which conserves energy and momentum can only
be balanced by a particle called the neutrino with no mass like the
photon and which conserves energy and momentum of the weak reaction.
Perhaps the graviton will be discovered in a similar fashion where a
decay takes place of a supposedly stable particle which cannot decay
according to the rules of the strong and weak interactions?

The weak force is famous for not behaving symmetrically
with matter versus antimatter. My suspicion is that the matter
in the universe is what was left over after mutual annihilation
following the Big Bang, because that asymmetry created
more matter than antimatter.

Ah, you speculate on the time before the big bang. It could just as
well have been that God created the matter of the Big Bang and the
universe for its existence. We have an intelligent designer?

I vaguely remember this stuff. IIRC antimatter comes from the symmetry
of time reversal on physical systems and is related by the Hisenberg
principle to the conservation of energy. Anyway antimatter has quantum
physical attributes such as nuclear spin property, color, etc that are
negative in value wrt regular matter. The total values of these
properties are preserved in a reaction. So when a particle stable
according to existing quantum numbers, disintegrates, a new symmetry
has been suspected and a new physical property invented with a new
quantum number to explain the symmetry. Don't recall whether
antimatter was experimentally discovered or verified a time reversal
prediction.
.