Further observations about physics – split files
(10) Where is the shadowy univer? And more ...
So! What evidence is there for a shadowy anti-verse that is in intimate "contact" (?entanglement) with our immediate universe. Well, there is dark matter for a start. It appears to be "local" but surrounding rather than immediately adjacent to visible matter; and some hysteresis of average position is often observed. Then there is the shadowy universe of neutrinos. Plain electrons, muon electrons and tau electrons (with their antimatter partners) have a "reflection" of simple, muon and tau neutrinos (with their anti-matter partners). As I have pointed out earlier, there is a suggestion that the decay of tau and muon neutrinos into lower energy neutrinos may, possibly, be interpreted as decay "starting" at what we regard as the arrival point rather than the source point and reaching maximal decay at the emission point. This suggests a temporal/place inversion. By place inversion I am implying "source" "target" inversion from the anti-verse's perspective.
A pendulum analogy
Look at this diagram 
What it shows are two contra-oscillating pendula. Let's call them "entangled" – inasmuch as – whatever the (currently) right hand pendulum does, the (currently) left hand pendulum also does but in a perfectly mirrored trajectory. At the zenith of its travel, the potential energy is mfh (where m is the mass of the pendulum, f is the restoring force – in practice, gravity (g) is often the restoring force – and h is the height from the nadir to the zenith of the swing). What we can now see is that the system has twice 1/2mv2 kinetic energy at the cross-over point (where v is the instantaneous velocity at cross-over). A collision of the pendula at this point could – potentially – lead to the total release of the stored kinetic energy into "pure" (radiative) energy. We can extrapolate this analogy to two contra-oscillating magnetic fields one of which starts on the left in "positive-time", shrinks to zero (Planck) size at the cross-over point then "expands" in "negative-time" – and vice versa, of course, for the second [entangled] magnetic field. Let's currently leave the meaning of negative-time – but, note, it is a characteristic feature of a sine wave where time slows then speeds up alternately in each cycle and negative time flow would be particularly apparent if we happened to be travelling along at the same speed as the progressing sine wave. So, the analogy with two contra-oscillating photons, as a description of an electron/magnetic field system, is now – I think – a little stronger. There are experiments where two photons can be "entangled" in this fashion and it appears, in one experiment, to require very particular conditions, one of which is a very low temperature and a catalytic atom. This would suggest that the extrapolation of a two (electron) to three (electron) muonic system of "photon-dances" could give rise to more energetic fermions (this could be extrapolated to tau – ?5 photon – electrons; and even onwards, to ever more energetic – and thus ever more improbable – fermions). The point electric charge is only "apparent" as the electron pairs move "away" from the observer through the zero (Planck) point. This point size, below a minimum (Planck) size, is probably virtual. It appears to us as though the collapsing magnetic field has disappeared down the "rabbit hole" but it has simply passed through the Planck point to become an expanding magnetic field that is added, quantum fashion, to our enveloping magnetosphere (effectively space itself). The apparent rectification of the two contracting photons creates a sawtooth electron made from the negative phase of two photons (negative representing "contracting"). Should you have not already have made this inference, if the contra-oscillating magnetic field disappears down the "rabbit hole" at the speed of light, the energy of the two photon electron system is mc2 where v becomes c (the speed of light). The mass is now directly related to the magneto-electric restoring force – by analogy with the potential energy at the zenith of the pendular movement. Gravity, by analogy, might be the subtle result of being closer to the negative charge than the antiversal positive charge (analogous to chemistry's Van der Waals forces). At large distances (space-times), the electromagnetic potentials appear to be exactly balanced with zero-sum overall potential energy.
It is interesting that the language is about the speed of light, not the velocity of light. Should we regard the constancy of the speed of light to be a reflection of the velocity of light at the point of docking/undocking into electron shells then the light we see is released (undocks) from fermion orbitals, of some form or another, and joins a receiving (docking) fermion orbital. That is how we detect its presence. A photonic packet has to be just right at release and just right at absorption to join and constitute an observable system; the light wave connects origin and destination into a system and is subject to SoL constraints. As we accelerate one particle of a system pair of particles (entangled? pair) we notice that, as the separating velocity increases, so the mass of the receding particle appears to ramp up exponentially as it approaches recession at the speed of light. Should the model of a two photon electron be correct, then we have a situation where each one of the photon pairs has an expanding and a contracting magnetic sphere (the fully expanded field probably gives rise to space itself and we can envision that stuffing more oscillating photon pairs into a potential space may result in a cumulatively larger volume of space). It is tempting to regard this oscillating system rather like the pendulum, where the closing velocity at cross-over is twice v. That would mean, on current understanding, that the negatively charged rectified state (electron) cannot "dock" with the positively charged rectified state (positron). Rather like neutrinos, we might expect the "antiversal" fermion to be able to pass through countless miles of lead without interacting with the "universal" matter (we are largely talking about the electron shell here as the immediate manifestation of matter). So that is, perhaps, what neutrinos are – "antiversal" positrons/electrons (literally – overwhelmingly positrons). As with any sinusoidal oscillation there will be a "time" retarded and "time" advanced phase in the oscillation. Here, this provides a direct link to a retarded/advanced position that, in turn, gives rise to a false illusion that time is a vector that is separate and independant from position. What we ("universal" side of the "rectification") see is from the the time advanced portion of the oscillation and we are looking "back" towards the time retarded portion of the oscillation. And that probably looks like an enveloping and ghostly (remember neutrinos) cloud of "dark matter". However, at the "now point" of crossover, the universal electrons will lie Planck distance apart from the antiversal positrons. By the time we register the "now" event, it will be well in our past (a different position subtended into the past). Electrons/positrons are point like particles (Planck sized?) representing the "down the rabbit hole" contraction of an alternately expanding then contracting pair of magnetospheres. The superluminal crossover probably provides the rectification mechanism that gives rise to a sawtooth fermion "fabricated" out of two contra-oscillating photons. So, except in strange conditions, we see dominantly electrons form the "universal" side and, should we be capable of translocating to the "antiversal" side, we would only see positrons (but they would seem identical to an electron seen on the "universal" side). I am progressively warming to this set of ideas. However, this is wrong as it stands - I have not figured in the substantial "speed" of electrons around an atom. This will all change but it is a start and exposes the simplicity of the mc2 equivalence of mass; and the idea that neutrinos are "antiversal" electrons/positrons needs much more analysis.
More on this theme. A way around this theme might be that – indeed – the universe and antiverse are mirror imaged. "Time" (I suspect all time will be reducible to distance) is circular. For "volume" (distance cubed) this could be envisaged as matter being generated by quantum uncertainty throughout the vastness of space (exemplified by conditions like those that caricature deep intergalactic space). It is "generated" in a balanced and mirrored manner and, when rectification conditions occur,it gradually coalesces (hydrogen to helium to iron to uranium to neutron stars to black holes on both the the universal and antiversal sides. At the point of rectification, "time" apparently reverses, so that we (on the universal side) sense that the antiversal side is running from condensed to diffuse in the reversed manner. But that is simply a distance thing, where to antiverse appears to us to be diffusing into the past. (This needs deeper explanation - I think I see it but the words are not well formed.) The universal side "sees" the antiversal side as a virtual image that appears to be within the individual atomic electron shells. Due to a speed of light limit to electron shell docking/undocking, anything light wave moving faster (OR SLOWER) fails to interact with the electron shell. Contrariwise, the antiversal perspective is likewise mirrored. Entropy is running in the reverse (time) direction in the two BUT the universal and antiversal perspective leaves the view from each side as appearing to run in a highly improbably compaction of energy to a highly dispersed distribution of energy. The atomic nuclei of the universes atoms a virtual image of positron shells on the antiversal side and the atomic nucleuses of the antiversal side are a virtual image of the electon shells on the universal side. We would booth see them as running in the same highly concentrated to highly dispersed manner. The one place where the collapsing magnetic fields pass each other at crossover of the field pairs is where electrons are "orbiting" the atomic nucleus at a very substantial proportion of the SoL. Add "spin" into that and the velocity of approach and regression of universal fermions and antiversal fermions immediately near crossover should be twice the SoL. That is, they cannot dock or undock with one another. Their local "presence" is real but they are ghostly particles with respect to each other. At a distance, the speed of the electron's monopole appears to be averagely static with respect to our measuring devices. I need to think through how this affects antiversal positrons (which may manifest as neutrinos and why, then, these are moving near the SoL. That could be a condition of them being close to discernable under unusual conditions (vs never discernable under "observer" static conditions).
So how do you (accusatory I) account for free neutrons and free protons? (That is, those nuclear components "unbound" by electron shells.) Need to think that through closely BUT free atomic nuclei are a property associated with very high temperatures - a broiling froth of hot electrons is not far away.
So how does time "emerge"? This is the way I am inclining. Let's just talk of electrons for the moment. These are formed by interacting photons that "whizz back and forth from Universe to antiverse "sides" (same electrons and positrons occupy the same volume space but unable to interact as they photons cannot dock unless in precise trajectories and speeds (velocities). So, antiversal "matter" is ghostly and largely unobservable (unable to interact with matter). This forms the rectification process that leads to an entangled pair of photons across the crossover point. Spacetime co-ordinates are "made" from position (within the enveloping magnetic swarm-field - universal) but has an entangled antiversal component (the other half of the rectified photon pair). These can be (are) separate positions EXCEPT at the point of immediate crossover. Once we have a swarm of entangled photon pairs, we have a myriad individual "nows" (crossovers) that inevitably look like points in the past once sensed by adjacent "nows". The greater the swarm, the greater is the antiversal distance – and this equates to us universal creatures as time rather than distance. I think this works – just about.
A thought on the "speed of light": we characteristically think about the speed of light as a tiny photonic "space bullet" plough its way from point A to point B at the SoL. However, if the point is right that entry into a electron orbital system and egress from it can only occur at the SoL then we can have two separated systems travelling away from each other where the light appears to leve the source at the SoL and yet still arrive at its destination at the SoL. What happens to accommodate this conundrum? Well the wavelength of the light from source to destination is what changes. If the destination is moving away, the emitted light packet is red shifted (it is not able to transfer as much energy). Contrariwise, if they are converging then emitted light packet is blue shifted and it is able to transfer a lot more energy. This suggests to me that an umbilical connection, through light, is real. The source and destination are never separated by this umbilical. Cause and effect are probably parochial constraints that we notice. Take, though, the combined universal/antiversal entanglement into account and the temporal flow is reversed for one half and cause and effect are also reversed but hidden within the ghostly antiverse (and that fits well with the decay of tau and muon neutrinos "starting" at the destination and decaying towards palin neutrinos at the source (as we see it).
I have recently seen a suggestion that the big bang has an identical, mirror image, "anti"-universe and this idea accounts for many of the conundrums we see in a straight "time-forward" perspective. As I see it, every element of the cosmos is "painted" on a "photon" created universe where various degrees of compaction can occur. So from electrons (two "dancing" photons, through three, five and even seven or more dancing/entangled photons, all increasingly improbable and increasingly evanescent in our parish) to quarks and baryonic matter, neutrons, neutron stars through to black holes all representing increasingly wound up/compacted "strings" of light (analogy intended). Now my vision is that the mirroring occurs at every level; an electron has a mirror image "antiversal" positron; composite hydrogen atoms have a mirror image antiversal antihydrogen; a neutron star has an antiversal neutron star. The apparent time flow from within the anti-universe would appear the same as in the universe but, viewed (if it could be easily observed) from the universal side, the time flow would appear backwards to us. In a way, this can be compared to two strings along which a constricitng ring can be slid as in this diagram:
Remember that the antiverse and the universe are (in my vision) superimposed over one another, occupying – pretty much – the same volume of space both at the most expanded and most constricted parts (coincident spatial [magneto]spheres). But, because of the apparent rectification they interact weakly if at all (possibly brought about because they are "moving" too fast (even too slow?) relative to each other to be able to interact (universe with antiverse) with each other and dock into an "electron" entity). The antiversal distance is perceived, from a universe perspective, as time (and likewise universal distance is perceived as time in the antiverse). So, we have a structure in which isolated electrons are wound up only slightly and neutron stars are wound up "in extremis". The universal/antiversal depth is small for an electron but extremely deep for a neutron star. I think this works quite well and better that the image of a mirror image universe occupying very distant spatial and temporal locations. Remember, also, that once the photonic wave reaches a minima (? equivalent to a "Planck size") it "reflects" 180 degrees out of phase "through" this "Planck point" and out again. So it's a "progressive" concentric constriction towards a minimum, "passes through" the minimum then back out in a concentric expansion. As the overall "concentricism" on a universal scale is virtually in the same space, the only place for "movement" is at very small distances where a "travel" into the "Planck point" and out again may involve a small apparent movement (as suggested in the diagram and it may include rotational "movement") from "left" to "right" and vice versa. This might be enough to generate an apparent superluminal velocity difference that results in universal matter being unable to interact with antiversal antimatter. It is only in statistically rare instances, where circumstances conspire to get the odd photon element into a velocity frame close to the SoL, that interactions can take place (as, for example, in a neutrino detector tank). Where positrons are clearly "visible" in the universe's space-time, they have formed in the universal velocity frame. If they form in the antiversal velocity frame, then they look like neutrinos. If we go back to Fig 10 (earlier in this script), we can imagine contra–rotating pairs of expanding/constricting photonic spatial spheres (perhaps constituted from multiple spatial discs); at full expansion, they are equatorially centred on the toric funnel (expanded to billions of light years distance for the largest) and at these extremes, time flow, that only becomes apparent in the toric funnel, is non-existant. That's my take on it.
An aside: falling into a black hole.
Perhaps I am being thick and missing something important but is the idea of falling "comfortably" into a black hole and coming out intact (structure in = structure out) somewhat naive? If I fell onto an asteroid, the impact would be gentle and I might well bounce: fall on to the moon from 10 metres and I'd probably be able to comfortably survive the event: fall onto the surface of a neutron star and I would be flattened to a film thinner than gold leaf. So, why is it so different if I fell into (onto) the event horizon of a black hole? Why would I be able to survive in my current form? Why should the sequence of progressive compactification suddenly change when passing "through" the funnel of a rotating black hole (the hydrogen to helium to oxygen to iron to uranium to neutron star sequence - with intervening steps). If it does suddenly change then does this indicate compactification is conplete and will now "reverse" with the progressive "evaporation" back into pure photons. Is the event horizon effectively a dense mass that is just as or more destructive than the surface of a neutron star? Because it is conceived as a "hole" it makes us comfortable with the idea that we might fall (intact) through the event horizon into the hole. Could it be that I would be "pulverised" to pure photons that, in Hawking radiation style, are emitted over the full course of 13.7 bn years (for time at the event horizon comes to an effective halt - falling in at 100 years post big bang will seem little different, in that parish, to falling in 13.7 bn years later. Perhaps the hole is a unobtainable mirage or virtual entity and I would fall no further than the event horizon. The singularity might well be a virtual entity. Is this worth thinking about this perspective.
Aside: wave and particle nature light
Thinks: the wavelike properties of light will occur in the magnetic (expanding magnetosphere) phase of the oscillating wave. The particulate properties of light will correspond to the Constricting (disappearing) part of the spatial expansion/constriction wave. There is a phase change from -ve constriction to +ve expansion either side of the zero size "point". Effectively, the negative phase has a slight advance into the future and the positive side a slight retardation towards the past. It is this tiny "point" in the size transition that confers particle like properties. It is the larger higher amplitude magnetic expansion that confers wave like properties.