Re: Quantum physics question.

On Jun 23, 2:01 am, rick_so...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jun 23, 1:36 am, rick_so...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:



But that is typical of physics and mostly quantum physics, which is
about trying to muddy the waters of truth, because they thought, they
could keep, nuclear secrets, from the world, by telling lies about
physics.

Sadly people never let it go, after it was declassified in the 50's,
and physics has not advanced for 50 years as a result.

So physicists like to complain about that.
Because they seek the truth, and find lies ingrained solidly and
promoted in their field every day.

I can give you a few prime examples...

Do you remember the Cold Fusion fiasco?

Well quantum theory was used, (statistical mechanics) to debunk Cold
Fusion, and to make it out as impossible.

Surely you remember how Pons and Fleischman were burnt at the stake.
But were Pons and Fleischman mere useful idiots?
Were they too part of the conspiracy to cover up the recent advances
that had been made? Were they then the rodeo clowns, easily toppled by
the establishment, and made to look like boobs, but were of course,
insider boobs henchmen of the DOD?

Well it wasn't until people, using scanning tunneling microscopes,
actually embedded hydrogen atoms, into the surface of a cadmium plate,
and then took photographs, of the heat rising off the surface, would
they admit ok, there appears to be some excess heat.

But you know, until they actually rigged it up, to a two slit
experiment, and showed electrons hitting a screen, a cathode ray tube
had to be used, before it became accepted as truth.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SzpakIRcameraviews.jpg

Only if the establishment, were to deny, their one ace card, the only
thing that they built their entire world view upon, the cherished two
slit experiment, only if they denied that, could they deny Cold Fusion
was a reality.

That is the extent people have to go to, to merely get the
establishment, to accept reality.

There is a problem there without question. The notion that particles
exist, as little discreet entities, is the complete effort, to hide
the truth about nuclear physics, and nuclear secrets.

That entire genre of physics, is merely a smokescreen, to lead people
away from the real atomic physics. Lose them and leave them, in the
particle zoo.

So how can anyone get anywhere in a field, that is 99% bs, with that
bs being supported by government and the military industrial complex?

They have been handing out Nobel prizes for this make believe physics
for years and years. And yet none of it, is true.

And no one would believe you anyways, if you said it, as I have said
it here, because every book, and every school, teaches it.

Yet they still protect nuclear secrets don't they? And they still get
worried when countries join the club.
And how difficult is it really to make a device? Well then why are
they so worried and surprised when a country builds one and wants to
test it?

Because it is kept secret and the physics is suppressed and
disinformation is used to try and curtail this huge problem we have of
our own ability to destroy ourselves with these hugely powerful
weapons.

But will we ever progress then?

Yes, private industry uses their own physics, and their own methods,
and trial and error and experiment are still part of science. Those
who just abandon the standard model and head off using some of the
more current less known models, have accomplished amazing things. Like
Bose Einstein Condensate etc.
But then in order to get published after the fact, they still have to
make it look, like they used the standard model, and somehow it all
fits into the popular physics which are taught in schools.

Its a strange situation to be sure.

But again regarding this...

"But the correspondence principle remains mathematically unprovable."

There is no math formulation, that in any way, relates one to another.
There is no chart of translation tables, like standard to metric.
There is no correlation that shows they are both part of the same
system and it is only a matter of scale.

The real physics, is about 5 dimensions.

Even if you count time as a dimension, Newtonian physics is only about
4 dimensions.

To hide the truth of this, they always say there are 11 dimensions.
lol

Here are your 5 dimensions...

3 D space, t as time, and hyperspace as the 5th dimension. And it has
a lot of names including n dimensional space or similar.

And it sounds exotic, but it can be explained quite easily...

imagine a void in space, with two expanding balloons. They have rulers
painted on them. Using those expanding rulers you measure one balloon,
it does not appear to be expanding. The ruler is expanding so it still
measures the same.

One expanding balloon looks at the other expanding balloon and says,
you are not expanding.

Yet you as observer what do you see? You see two expanding balloons.

And what axis is that? The expansion of the universe, on the t axis.
And where are you expanding into?
The 5th dimension. Into hyperspace.

OK so having said all that, its not 100 true, that there is no
translation or correspondence, because recently, within the last 10 or
20 years, advanced math concepts, have shown that ...

"The Taniyama-Shimura conjecture states that every elliptic curve can
be parametrised by a rational map with integer coefficients using the
classical modular curve; that is, all elliptic curves (over the
rationals) can be described by modular forms.

On the other hand Ribet's theorem shows that for any nontrivial
solution to Fermat's equation, an + bn = cn, the semistable elliptic
curve of Hellegouarch and Frey, defined by

y2 = x(x an)(x + bn),

is not modular. Fermat's last theorem therefore follows from the
Taniyama-Shimura conjecture."

and what this all means is that, as Einstein said, a straight line, is
a geodesic in 4 D spacetime.

You can describe 5th dimensional space, with an elliptical curve.

Not well, but you can do it.

And this is what it looks like...

You remember Einstein said, that light would bend around the sun, and
you could see it at an eclipse of the sun?

Well they did see starlight had bent around the sun.

So what is the explanation for this curving of light?

Does not light travel in a straight line?

Yes it does.

So where is this curve?

The past trajectory, has expanded, and becomes curved.

Draw a straight line, on a deflated balloon. Expand the balloon, it
is now a curve. After you have drawn it.

And likewise with trajectories. Imagine the path of the ball you throw
in the yard.

You threw it in a straight line, and spacetime expanded and made that
trajectory look curved.

And likewise with the starlight bent around the sun. The sun expanded,
and the light source, is behind the sun.

Its difficult to understand but when fully grasped, that everything is
expanding, you can then see the difference between Newtonian physics
and Einstein.
And the lie that matter is not expanding, is again simply part of the
smokescreen.
Of course it is, and the Lorrentz equations clearly show that, and
that is a major factor in relativity theory.

Why is Taniyama-Shimura so much more significant, than the Lorentz
Equations then?

Because of that magical Pythagorean Theorem, and the discovery that
the inverse square law, which applies to both gravity and
electromagnetism, is related to the Pythagorean Theorem, which is used
to determine a right angle triangle.

I know it still doesn't sound too significant yet, except, that it has
some deep fundamental meaning about the way in which the universe is
made, and how it operates, and that is that it is Newtonian, and as
consistent as a right angle triangle is calculable.
That is to say, that time, is consistently flowing, in one direction,
entropy flowing in one direction, and all these things can be measured
and predicted with precision. Whereas it used to be the common view
that quantum approximation is the best we will ever be able to obtain.
And thats true when it comes to pi, that its value goes on forever,
but when it comes to most Newtonian things, and occurrences, the
inverse square law, and Pythagorean theorem, play a large part in how
the universe operates, and the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, by
Wiles, and others, and the proof of the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture,
shows, that it cannot be any other way. That is to say, that
Pythagorean theorem, can only use squared values, it doesn't work for
cube values or any other power to infinity, only squared values, and
that ties in with the expansion of the universe according to a regular
flow of time, so that the past moment, is always directly
proportional, to the present moment.
So what that proves, is that given a sufficiently capable computer, we
could predict everything hypothetically, if we knew all the variables
at that time and under those conditions.

That is to say, that this notion of quantum unpredictability, that
anything can happen at any moment, is false.

The universe is like a clock, as Newton stated, it is just a more
complex system, than he could have imagined.

Now for the benefit of others, this is totally disregarding acts of
God, or the Gods, who will do what Gods do, regardless of the laws of
physics and are not apt to obey our laws. But! Given what we know,
about the laws of physics, the physical laws and how the universe is
made and operates, without that sort of interference, it is stable,
consistent, and completely predictable in the Newtonian sense.
A tree that falls in the forest, will make a sound, regardless of if
you are there to hear it or not.
Is it really all that surprising? Is it so amazing that Einstein was
right and Neils Bohr wrong?
We like Einstein better than Neils Bohr so I think most people are
happy it all went his way.
It will be years before it is used in any practical sense.
It is all so complicated.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Quantum physics question.
    ... and physics has not advanced for 50 years as a result. ... The real physics, is about 5 dimensions. ... with two expanding balloons. ... "The Taniyama-Shimura conjecture states that every elliptic curve can ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Part II Puny Earthlings, your clocks are too small - Physics them up
    ... First I reduce this explanation of the universe further, ... to physics it up, to convolute the terms, and to conflabergate the ... the curvature of a path through space-time, alone determines, if one ... if you were standing on one expanding yourself as well, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Part II Puny Earthlings, your clocks are too small - Physics them up
    ... to physics it up, to convolute the terms, and to conflabergate the ... the curvature of a path through space-time, alone determines, if one ... if you were standing on one expanding yourself as well, ... and when atoms and molecules combine, their mass combines, and as they ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: G/t=u
    ... expanding man model is, is simply because they don't read the ... sure nobody who knew anything in physics for sure ever ... But this world, this universe, is too boring for humans. ... Life is boring, and uneventful. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Who Should Be The Next Master?
    ... and ahead of the curve. ... It's all ego, expanding and contracting, and rushing in and out like a child's wind-up toy. ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)