Further observations about physics – split files

(08) Age of universe, speed of light and other things

Further thoughts on the nature of photons

I wonder if this is a good perspective? I will write it authoritatively but it is conjecture. I introduced the idea, earlier on, that photons were were a manifestation of expanding/contracting space; at its simplest, like an expanding then contracting bubble of space. Now, light has two components; an alternating electric charge and an alternating magnetic field. I have already suggested that a magnetic "monopole" constitutes the outer "skin" of this bubble of magnetic space and the electric monopole the relativistic (SoL) manifestation of this electric bubble of space (that appears to us as tiny though someone moving with the electric bubble would see our magnetic bubble as the tiny one). Although it is still the "outer skin" of the electric bubble that is "charged", it appears to us to be very small because the electric property is "travelling" at the SoL; it appears to a "static" observer as tiny. The magnetic property, however, is static from our perspective and thus "large". The electric property is still a manifestation of cyclically expanding/contracting space but it appears to us to be almost point like. As it "travels" through the vacuum, it induces a static expansion of magnetic space with a positive (expanding) or a negative (contracting) charge on it outer "skin". This drives the electric (relativistic) component of the light wave on the crest (outer skin) of the alternating magnetic bubble – just like those old western-railroad hand driven cars. The rails are like a whole series of expanding contracting "magnetic bubbles" that disappear at zero-charge/zero-magnetic-field to reappear, immediately, one bubble length further on. Since the charge on expanding space is positive (the universe perspective) the growing magnetic field repulses the electric charge on the crest of this wave of sequential magnetic bubbles. This probably has important implications for the nature of electrons (to be thought through). [Nb, this is still problematic as we need to work out how the electric "bubble" moves from "left" to "right" skin of the magnetic bubble - hmmm.]

Further thoughts on space-time

Going back to the original suggestion that "antiversal" distance appears to us as time (and vice versa from the anti-versal perspective), let's think about a very simple "system" of just one electron (and, by implication, an antiversal positron because they only "exist" as a pair). Just as electron positron pairs can (theoretically) be segregated across an event horizon (and thus make evanescent, spontaneous electron/positron pairs persistent – ie, the tunnel between the electron and the positron of a pair becomes very elongated) so all electrons or positrons have a distant, wormhole-entangled, opposite partner (positron or electron respectively). Electrons are very stable suggesting that this "wormhole entanglement" can last a long time (be interconnected over very long distances - which equates to persistence vs evanescence). We need to remember that space is likely to be circular. That is, head off North and you will eventually come back, through the South, to your starting point. So, time is the same: head off into the future and you will eventually return to your starting point via the past (but, of course, time is only antiversal distance). From the perspective of a "point" electron, both universal and antiversal distance lie "outside" this "point". It is just that they appear to be either a feature of the future ("outbound" distance) or of the past ("inbound" distance). [This is vaguely working, I think.]

On the same theme, when we look at a galactic centre ("down the plug hole" as it were) we are seeing the manifestation of relativistic (balanced) photon pair recession. The opposite, photon pair expansion, could well appear as an accumulation of antiversal positron "shells" that appear to be extremely large in diameter. By assumption, they are invisible/non-interacting to universal matter but their influence may well be perceivable and gravity may well be a "local" manifestation of proximal/distal imbalence (just as an atom, at substantial distance, has no net charge but, as the electron shells "collide" the repulsive force becomes immense – the force that gives us the experience of "hitting a concrete wall"). So, we would expect, perhaps, to see some manifestation of this magnetically dominated (vs electrically dominated) force surrounding the galactic centre in much the same way as dark matter seems to "congregate", at large distances and in roughly spherical distribution, around galactic centres. [That is worth a thought, perhaps.]

Big bang origin or steady state generation of matter?

It has long been assumed that the big bang theory of the origin of the universe has eclipsed Fred Hoyle's steady state idea. It is easy to see how Hoyle came to his conclusion; the spontaneous generation of virtual pairs, all over our vast universe, could lead to occasionally persistent electron positron pairs that fail to "revert back" to radiation (we have tended to call this annihilation but it is really the release of "wound up" photons back to free photons); persistent particles, then, could gradually organise into hydrogen that can then "ascend" the complexity ladder to helium, beryllium, carbon, etc etc, uranium then much heavier elements [deep inside massive stars] and then to neutron stars. If the earlier conjecture on these pages is well founded, the next step is matter collapse to black holes. Now, the current view of black holes is they they form exclusively in the "2000 yrs BC to 2000 yrs AD" time direction. But the current perception proposed in these pages is that the "future" meets the "past" at the event horizon. Perspective inverts over the event horizon (to "form" the antiverse). The universe sees tantalising evidence that the universe expanded from an extremely small "kernel" (generally considered to be a singularity). However, we can still form a perspective of Fred Hoyle's steady state generation of matter that coalesces out of quantum foam. Now, as often happens in science, personalities prefer to adopt one perspective and reject another though they might both be valid, depending upon the perspective stance adopted. I guess that the photonic building blocks that disappear down a black hole (wound up as matter) suddenly reappear over great distances as the quantum foam that can form virtual particles. In reality, these may be extremely evanescent particles that occasionally survive for longer periods of time given the right circumstances. Stephen Hawking led us to one important circumstance that might generate an efficient "rectification" process; this is across the event horizon of a black hole. A torus perspective has the universe at one "tunnel" entrance of the torus and the antiverse at the opposite entrance. There is already speculation that entanglement occurs across this toric tunnel. We should be able to look out, away from from the tunnel entrance, around a wide sweep that appears to us to be "a straight line" (remember, the wave collapse to Planck size will suddenly invert as photonic waves begin to expand again – probably with inverted polarity; so the tunnel hides the point where the past reconvenes with the future). What we should see is evidence of a time inverted collapse to a black hole that looks, to us, like a big bang. So both perspectives might be justified and reconcilable. Time just becomes the equivalent of "antiversal distance"; equally universal distance becomes the equivalent of antiversal time. Buried in here is a perspective that only allows photons to dock and undock with electron shells at the speed of light (ie, at 300,000 km/sec; now this corresponds to 300,000 universal km per 300,000 antiversal km – this is a 1:1, unity ratio). Particle persistence/existence only becomes manifest once the universal "speed" is substantially less than the SoL – a universe/antiverse distance ratio of much less than 1. [I think this perspective holds a deal of promise.]

Note, although described as a torus, the actual process is more like an expanding contracting spatial sphere with the toric tunnel being "through" the collapsed sphere (entangling them), crossing from universal to antiversal side. The conjecture is that an electron is a balanced (entangled) pair of photonic spheres that pass through each other, balancing each other out. Where they reach maximal potential energy [vs maximum kinetic energy as they pass through the toric tunnel – 2 lots of 1/2mc2], they come to an expansion halt then recollapse towards the toric tunnel. Note that I have used time here but the real "sequence" are states where the universal-spacetime to the antiversal-spacetime ratio varies, as they map out to be much less than one, then equal at one and then much greater than one. This sits nicely with the string theory R to 1/R flip-over.

A thought! The Big Bang interpretation assumes an unequivocal "time forward" direction for the whole universe, ie, nothing but nothing moves in the year 2017 to 2000 direction. OK, our parish seems to be in a tsunami of "time forward" motion. But, this may just be a mass action effect. Everthing is made of waves and every wave has a hurry-up-the-passage-of-time and a slow-down-the-passage-of-time part in its cycle that produces a typical sine wave pattern. Because we see no single slow-down-the-passage-of-time amplitude that is actually large enough to reverse the local passage of time current (rather than just retard it) we don't perceive that this is even possible. However, the big bang "moment" may just be a particular point in the cycle of the largest ampliude waves and, equally, there may be a parish (deep intergalactic voids) where, if we could instantaneously transport our laboratories, we might be tempted into interpreting that we are in a steady state universe, with matter being constantly "created" (where virtual pair creation leads to the occasional persistence of rare hydrogen atoms).

Oscillating between future and past

I am beginning to form the idea that the atomic nucleus is actually a virtual "window" that connects us with the past. What follows is speculative – be warned. Although the physical location of the "antiversal" waves may be outside the electron shell, we get the illusion that they are within. Anything that has mass is expressing a property that is receding from "us" at relativistic volocities. Now, lets think about that. I have already suggested that an electron is the product of a sort of dumbell oscillation of two photons with precisely complementary properties (combined speed of approach – SoL – and frequency). When it is precisely "right" the two photons cease to travel, outwards and unimpeded, into deep space and form enough complementary expanding/contracting spheres of spatial extent to remain in stable oscillating balance for long periods (very long half life). The dumbell idea is a convenient starting point BUT it is really two, more or less, concentric (expanding/contracting) spatial spheres. As Photon A contracts to Planck size it is instantaneously receeding at the SoL and looks point like and thus particulate. As it expands it appears enveloping and the sphere seems to envelop us, manifest by a magnetic field that is, at its widest radius, not moving relative to the point at which the epicentre where the photon seems to have disappeared "down the plug hole". This only accounts for 50% of the electric charge because Photon B then appears across the "rectifying" horizon to form the complementary "contracting" sphere to complete the sawtooth pattern of the electron. We do not, then, "see" the complementary electron crossover point where photon A reaches Planck size, inverts from contraction to expansion (which we later envisage as time vs distance) and "reflects" out from the centre, inverted in charge.

Black holes! A few thoughts. At the event horizon of a black hole time slows down dramatically – even stops. We accept that. Black holes evaporate – smaller ones "fast" and larger ones "slowly". But what does this mean if the evaporation is occurring at the local (event horizon) time rather than our (sat on the surface of mother earth) time? Spagettification is an accepted inevitability as we approach a black hole. Formed matter is pulverised as it approaches the event horizon and – I suggest – could be pulverised to free photons. Part of Hawkings thesis was that electron-positron-pairs form at the event horizon and segregate (electrically) across the horizon (electrons to the "outside" and positrons to the "inside"). High energy photons may be the generators of abundant electron-positron-pairs. It is accepted that positrons act like electrons "moving" backwards in time. The implication of that is that the positrons will appear – in our past – at the event horizon. However, that horizon will also be "outside" the event horizon. Because it's in the past – form our perspective – it will "look" like an explosion into the future rather than an aggregation of matter ongoing into the past. It is already suspected that entanglement is linked to mass. I have suggested that mass may be the local imbalance of a sum zero electrical charge (universe from nothing) but, just as a non-ionised atom has, from a distance, zero charge, the fact remains that as two electron shells get very close the local imbalance of charge creates immense electrostatic repulsion (think of hard diamonds). Now, we also suspect that galaxies consist not only of well defined and visible concentrations of matter but also a more indistinct "halo" of dark matter. Could that dark matter be the manifestation of an anti-verse of positronic derived anti-matter? Several arguments have led me to suggest that a balanced antiverse – seen from the "inside" of an event horizon may act very much like a mirror-image of our visible universe but only if we could transpose ourselves to that parish. In deep intergalactic space we have a region where magnetic expansion reaches its energetic limits and then interacts with the same (energy balancing) antiversal magnetic expansion to form a very low (spontaneous) energy parish. It is close to zero energy and only rarely breaks this zero energy symmetry. For us, because they are evenly painted across every cubic metre of the universe, these occasional deviations from abolute (zero-energy balance) look like the echo of a "big bang". (NEEDS FURTHER THOUGHT)

An extension and inference of the last point is that "now" is immediately adjacent to the past and to the future in any entangled system. The perspective of what we are looking at is inverted when, for instance the immediate past is viewed from the immediate future – "universal" and "antiversal" perspectives. Now, this, I iinfer, is happening at the cosmological scale where the big bang is swallowed up by the a sort of big crunch. Our immediate assumption is that the big cruch looks like a final implosive gasp that we would be able to see. However, it would the gradual addition of new black holes that, to us, seem to be massive distances apart.

Now, just as such a huge cosmological system "swallows its tail" so, much smaller entangled systems probably do the same. So, let's look at the slit lamp experiments again. We must assume these are possibly, even probably, in an entangled time loop system. We, as observers, are utterly convinced that the origin (a past event) and the outcome (a future consequence) cannot influence each other except by setting precise initial conditions or calculating back to guage how the outcome originated. However, the universe is made of "two sided dice" who's faces always balance each other exactly – a total zero energy system – but local "transient borrowing" can lead to an apparently totally random system when we only look at the "topside" of the dice. So, in the slit lamp experiment, the magnetic environment of the origin of the photon is, from the antiversal perspective, the electronic (tiny "particle") component of the the apparent photon (and of course, vice versa). It is one system. The outcome dictates certain properties of the origin. The "cosmic sensor" will not allow imbalenced (that is – non sum-zero-energy) systems to emerge. Every universal deviation from zero must be balanced by an opposite (potentially cancelling) antiversal deviation. We have formed the belief that objects in the future can influence objects in the past. However, the past is probably just a different place separated by a SoL restriction in apparent communication. But, entanglement shows us how past and present can influence each other but only where elements are in an uncommitted dualistic state. Once committed (either by an "event" in the past or in the future) they commit to one state or the other. If we look at the past as being just a space separated "place" than here can commit over there and overthere can commit here but both can remain in a dualistic uncommited state untill this commitment is made. Matter is overwhelmingly in the committed state and creates a mass action belief that the future cannot affect the past.

In this vein, it is worth remarking that quantum physics is both intensely logical and it relies on many of the principles and rules learned in classical physics. But, yet, "no one understands quantum physics". I suspect that what we learn from this statement is that there is some component in quantum physics that defies the logic of classical physics and common (sense) experience. We are, in all probability, engaging a hidden assumption: or, perhaps, a "not so hidden" assumption. We assume that we "know for sure" that a future event cannot "alter" a past event. And this might be our problem. In the "world" of entanglement, where mirror images of particles are common (eg, electron-positron pairs – where a positron acts like an electron "travelling backwards in time") we may simply be seeing a sort of "cosmic censor" where, quantum principles outline how miriad different outcomes could branch from one another (the "many worlds" conjecture) but, it may be that a reality check of the outcome feeding back to the origin enables a wavefunction to collapse into a mat(t)erial system. This would ensure that the metaphorical "face up dice" are exactly matched by the "face down dice". So, it could be that our conceptual problem is our refusal to consider that the future can affect the past and this is our "hidden assumption". Any cause and effect manifestation that we observe courtesy of matter (mostly sensed through electron shell interactions) may be part of a closed temporal-loop-system that censors any deviation from absolute balance. We can tolerate any random distribution of all the "face up dice" as long as the "face down dice" (hidden to our common experience) are an exact balance that enforces a sum zero – universe from nothing – principle.

Some thoughts on "dancing" ("knotted") electron pairs. This diagram gives some interesting perspective.


So, could a photon be a cycle of creation then annihilation of space (creation-annihilation-creation-annihilation-creation-annihilation-etc)? But that cycle would be, somehow, collapsing space (viewed from a "forward in time" perspective) creating apparent point negative charge and expanding space (again viewed from a "forward in time" perspective) that is perceived as an encompassing magnetic "charge" (giving rise to magnetic field).

Here is an interesting perspective

"The" big bang represents a point of extremely improbable high (photonic) energy from which we observe the gradual emergence of structure (through coalescence) into a retinue of increasingly ordered structures. The temptation is to see entropy and disorder as synonymous physical properties; entropy is the antagonist of order but order is an emergent property only sustainable through energy flows. Order is absent in the high energy radiation of the big bang and the infra-red homogenisation typical of deep intergalactic space. We can regard life (say, for example, a human population with all its individual physiological mechanisms, its societal structure and the accumulated information, understanding and technological manipulation that this society creates) as the capture of highly and improbaby concentrated energy that is used to create highly and improbable structural order, by prematurely slinging out much more probable and homogenised energy (much less useful energy – speeding up the temporal decay of high to low energy gradients) then we delay the degradation of "order into disorder" and form some semblance of protracted persistence. Life has enhanced this by adding reproduction as individuals perish long before a specie does. It is a form of regeneration through which societal gains can be preserved.

We are led to believe that, in deep intergalactic space – far from there being "nothing" – there is a broiling frothy creation of "particles" and "antiparticles". The parentheses point out that a similar photon/"anti-photon" (however we can envisage something that would encompass an anti-photon) process may be occurring. Two otherwise identical photons 180 degrees out of phase could could fulfil the photon/anti-photon principle. These particles/antiparticles last just evanescently before they "annihilate" each other (return to individual photons really rather than turn back to nothing. The return back to nothing can occur by a photon interacting with its 180 degree our of phase "mirror" photon. However, such annihilation, although it is highly probable, may not occur inevitably. I think that there is a sace for saying that occasional circumstances allow for virtual pair persistence in a "rectifying " circumstance and this leads on to the generation then coalescence of particles into matter, galaxies and thence back to black hole hoizons. This "ordered" and "persistent" matter would represent but the tiniest (minisculist) fraction of all photonic activity in the universe. We perceive the heavely firmament as being dominated by islands of matter. In reality, this matter might be but the most miniscule manifestation of all that is going on. "Is going on" begs that point that, in deep intergalatic space, time probably has little meaning - if any. On the edge of a black hole time stands still. If a "big bang" scenario is just the temporal reverse of coalescing black holes and black holes are just the plug holes leading down to a "big bang" than we have a loop time scenario where time – at the event horizon – stands still. We would have a picture, then, of a collapsing expanding "universe" with time "stopped" at both the event horizon and in deep intergalact space. Then if we consider that possible advantage of saying the big bang appears to be the dispersion of radiation throughout the cosmos and coalescing black holes the dissapearance "down the plughole" back to the big bang, we have a counterflow scenario like that in Figure 15 above.