Date:   8/17/2005 1:42:18 PM ( 19 y ago)
Popularity:   message viewed 1287 times
URL:   http://www.curezone.org/blogs/c/fm.asp?i=990057

The Structure of Nothing . According to my peasant logic: 1 + 1 = 2.
Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, all matter
(all elementary particles and all quarks and
their girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks,
all kinds of waves: electromagnetic, gravitational,
muons… gluons field ….. etc.) – was assembled in a “single point”.
It is interesting to think about what had surrounded the “single point”.
EMPTINESS- NOTHING….???
Ok!
But why does everyone speak about EMPTINESS- NOTHING in
common phrases rather than in specific, concrete terms?
I wonder why nobody has written down this EMPTINESS- NOTHING in
the form of a physical formula ? You see, every schoolboy knows that
is possible to express the EMPTINESS- NOTHING condition
by the formula T=0K.
* * *
Once there was a “Big Bang”.
But in what space had the Big Bang taken place
and in what space was the matter of the Big Bang distributed?
Not in T=0K?
It is clear, that there is only EMPTINESS, NOTHING, in T=0K.
Now consider that the Universe, as an absolute frame of reference is
in a condition of T = 2,7K (rests in relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change and decrease.
What temperature can this radiation reach?
Not T=0K?
Hence, if we go into the past or into the present or into the future,
we can not escape from EMPTINESS- NOTHING .
Everyone knows about the “singular point”, but nobody knows that it is
EMPTINESS- NOTHING! To understand it, it is necessary to ask a question:
What geometric and physical parameters can particles have in T=0K?
Can they have a volume?
No.
Then they must have the geometrical form of a flat circle: C/D =p= 3,14.
But what these particles do ?
Nothing.
They are in a condition of rest: h = 0. So, maybe they are dead?
In order to answer of this question, it is necessary to more clearly understand
EMPTINESS- NOTHING.
* * *
Has this EMPTINESS- NOTHING a border? No! It has no borders.
EMPTINESS- NOTHING is indefinite. Let's identify it by the formula: T=0K = ∞
And what about time in the EMPTINESS- NOTHING ?
Independent time is absent.
Time in EMPTINESS- NOTHING is indissolubly merged with infinite space.
Stop!
But you see, such space is described by Einstein in Special Relativity Theory.
In SRT, space also has a negative characteristic and there also,
time is indissolubly merged with space.
Only in SRT, this EMPTINESS- NOTHING has another name:
Negative four-dimensional (Minkowski) space.
Then it is possible to conclude that SRT describes the behaviour
of the circle-particles in T=0K.
* * *
In agreement with SRT, these circle-particles can be in two conditions of movement:
To fly rectilinearly with a speed of c =1.
In this kind of movement , it is named a “quantum of light”, ”photon”.
2) To rotate around its own diameter and then its form and
physical parameters will change according to the Lorentz transformation.
In this kind of movement, it is named the “electron”.
* * *
But what is the reason for the movement of circle-particles?
In the EMPTINESS- NOTHING, nothing can influence the condition of rest.
Quantum theory gives the answer to this question.
1) The rectilinear movement of the circle-particles depends
on Planck's spin :h = 1.
2) The rotary movement of the circle-particles depends on the spin
of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck: ħ = h / 2p.
* * *
Very strange particles surround the "singular point ".
These circle-particles can be in three conditions:
1) h = 0 ,
2) h = 1,
3) ) ħ = h / 2p
And they can independently decide what action to take.
So it can work only with particles that have their own consciousness,
which is not static but can develop.
The development of consciousness scale goes " from vague wishes up to a clear thought ".
* * *
Best regards.
Socratus.
http://www.socratus.com
"If consciousness is in fact defined (and different) at every moment of time,
it should also be related to points in space:
the truly subjective observer system should be related to space-time points."
from "Quantum Theory and Time Asymmetry", Zeh (1979).

 

<< Return to the standard message view