Usual caveat. Not a physicist, don't take anything here too seriously, blah blah blah. This is the most recent version of an email I sent to somebody - I write each email uniquely, partly because I try to cater it a little bit to my perception of the person, partly because I try to stay one step removed from the usual crackpot pattern of "Mass emailing physicists". I also try to limit extensive descriptions to physicists who appear to have an interest in crackpot theories; otherwise I try to limit myself to asking whether or not the person is interested in reading a lot of nonsense. Also it helps me get used to expressing these ideas in English, as my thought processes do not resemble language at all.
The thoughts have been refined a little bit. Earlier versions appearing in this blog should be considered superseded by this one wherever relevant. I forgot to mention the lack of a role dark matter plays in the ideas here, so a quick refresher which may make more sense shortly: Dark matter is probably made unnecessary because G is probably still increasing at the distances involved. Can't calculate it to be sure, but I think it is probably accurate.
Shortish introduction, the bad: The ideas are all probably wrong. Worse, I guarantee I will use words entirely incorrectly. Even worse, I don't even have my own internal dictionary which I can use to convey these ideas, because I don't think verbally. I can't draw you a picture, because I don't think visually either. So most likely this will make a sort of sense that is nearly entirely incongruous with what I am actually trying to convey. Also, there will be next to no math, because my attempts to mathematize things fail immediately at the "Try to determine constants" step, partly because an infinite number of constants would probably work. Also, I am a programmer, which seems to have a bizarre amount of overlap with "total physics crackpot".
The meh: The collection of ideas is version... uh, let's say 20, because I haven't actually been keeping track. Version 1 attempted to assert an additional kind of polarity. Version 4 or 5 had something to do with treating light waves as five dimensional rotation - I don't remember that one very well, as it was fifteen or so years ago. So I have been systematically rejecting obviously broken ideas as I have learned more. Unfortunately, I have reached a point where I cannot figure out how to reject the current version, mostly because it is incredibly resistant to my attempts to mathematize it. (It feels like an integration problem I faced in statistics, in which coordinate conversion was necessary to complete the integration, but I didn't know that mathematical trick so just kept hammering my brain into a wall.)
The good? Well... I think there might be something here. The ideas started out with neither uncertainty nor energy quantization baked into them, but both popped out of thought experiments. (That part seems potentially useful even if everything else is wrong.). Other weird things keep lining up.
The basic idea: There is a single "force", which I'll call gravity out of habit, which is a decaying wave. Sin(ln(distance)), with some inscrutable constants, replaces the constant G, for the Newtonian version. (I have no idea how to modify a tensor equation, so the relativistic version is well beyond me.)
So, moving from big to small, the cosmological constant is a repulsive phase, then gravity for attractive, then the weak nuclear force, then the strong nuclear force (of particular note is that a graph of the strong nuclear force does strongly resemble sin(ln(distance))), and then things get weird because "attraction" and "repulsion" are simplifications, and the "reality" of the forces is that the coordinate system itself is being warped so that points are closer or farther away, and our unified force is propogated along the very coordinate system it is changing. I am guessing that there are multiple phases crushed together by gravity, which is why quarks aren't generally very stable outside of atoms, and also why chromodynamics is so odd. Short version, however, is a closely nested series of alternating forces in which particles form a soup, in which repulsive and attractive forces largely but not completely neutralize each other, but stretching the soup causes the particles to align with increasingly strong bonds. Quarks.
Now, particles in this system are all singularities - collections of "mass" dense enough to prevent any of the mass from escaping. Because the force alternates, mass accumulates to very specific points, when the repulsive Force one layer out prevents any new mass from entering. Hence, we have particles of consistent mass. Now, one critical piece is that antimatter has a unified field of opposing polarity - repulsive where matter is attractive, and so on. I think this allows electrons to work, since we don't have electrical force, although there is a lot of handwaving and imprecations of "transfer of negative (because antimatter) angular momentum" to make it so electricity possibly-works.
Uncertainty arises from a combination of two factors: First, singularities cannot have meaningful positions, since a position would be information which cannot escape the singularity. Second, an imprecation of Einstein-Rosen bridges, because all particles here are not merely singularities, but white holes. I don't have a clear idea what this means, but I don't think I am unique in that regard.
Energy quantization arises directly from uncertainty, because probability distributions collapse when energy is released, and energy gets released with the least ambiguity when it is released as a result of reaching a critical threshold. Thus we get the Born probabilities - imagining light shining on a phosphorous needle point-on, the probability of energy arriving at any given point matters more than once, because it is continuously deposited rather than by a single photon, and the first electron to re-emit collapses the whole distribution (since there is no energy left in the distribution). Even though light is a wave and not a particle in this system, electrons don't have specific positions, so it is fine, albeit weird, for a single electron to absorb all the energy in an entire segment of the wave. Thus wave/particle duality, as well.
Miscallenous thoughts I set aside when writing the above: Bosons are all varying wavelengths/frequencies of gravitational waves. Light is a gravitational wave, and its apparent function as the signal particle for electricity is just a function of it being the right scale. Mass can be thought of as light that gets sufficiently dense that it cannot escape itself (hence why shining lasers at gold foil produces electrons). The end of the universe as we know it might take the form of all matter at our scale being crushed down into a quarklike soup for a new scale of the universe to begin to take shape, as this set of laws of the universe are scale-invariant. Matter loses mass as it falls into a gravitational well (I am pretty sure this is true in conventional physics, as I can construct a thought experiment in which any other result seems to violate conservation of mass/energy, but haven't found anything confirming it.) because less mass is necessary/viable to maintain a stable white hole when space is already compressed.
This is... the abbreviated version, attempting to hit the highlights. I have no idea how much sense that will make to someone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment