The words implicit and explicit seem to describe all that “IS”

Introduction

Implicit non-local coordinates explicit information that explain the following types of phenomena in physics and our everyday lives are:-

A. Consciousness and intuitive awareness.

B. How and why implicit metaphysical events occur. These include clairvoyance, telekinesis, out-of- body experiences, hands-on healing and ghostly apparitions such as some people claim they have experienced.

C. How implicit non-locality is always appearing to ‘lurk’ beneath the surface of all implicit things and events and “secretly” influences our lives.

D. All things are possible (regardless of size or type) in physics at the implicit quantum level. There is no exception to this!

E. All things and events, including life forms, are correlated to wider universal reality in both explicit and implicit forms.

F. The entangled nature of all explicit things and events in relation to the wider universal (implicit) nature of all things also means that the vast amounts of information that we learn about and experience in our lives are directly related to the manner in which we think and make decisions.

Note:
Although I have written earlier works with respect to the implicit and explicit nature of all things, in view of the results of the two recent experiments I will progressively amend or rewrite material in these works and post them. This is so as to make them more representational of the now proven existence and meaning of non-locality in physics.

Experimental Evidence Supporting the existence of (implicit) non-locality
(Both experimental results were publicly released in reputable physics journals in August 2018)
Experiment 1:

Cosmic Bell Test using Random Measurement Settings from High-Redshift Quasars

Dominik Rauch,1,2,∗ Johannes Handsteiner,1,2 Armin Hochrainer,1,2 Jason Gallicchio,3 Andrew S. Friedman,4 Calvin Leung,1,2,3,5 Bo Liu,6 Lukas Bulla,1,2 Sebastian Ecker,1,2 Fabian Steinlechner,1,2 Rupert Ursin,1,2 Beili Hu,3 David Leon,4 Chris Benn,7 Adriano Ghedina,8 Massimo Cecconi,8 Alan H. Guth,5 David I. Kaiser,5,† Thomas Scheidl,1,2 and Anton Zeilinger1,2,‡
Conclusion for this experiment:
Quote:
“Conclusions. For each Cosmic Bell test reported here, we assume fair sampling and close the locality loophole. We also constrain the freedom-of-choice loophole with detector settings determined by extragalactic events, such that any local-realist mechanism would need to have acted no more recently than 7.78Gyr or 3.22Gyr ago for pairs 1 and 2, respectively—more than six orders of magnitude deeper into cosmic history than the experiments reported in Ref. [38]. This corresponds to excluding such local-realist mechanisms from 96.0% (pair 1) and 63.5% (pair 2) of the relevant space-time regions, compared to ∼ 10−5% of the relevant space-time region as in Ref. [38] (see Supplemental Materials [45]). We have therefore dramatically limited the space-time regions from which local-realist mechanisms could have affected the outcome of our experiment to early in the history of our universe. To constrain such models further, one could use other physical signals to set detector settings, such as patches of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), or even primordial neutrinos or gravitational waves, thereby constraining such models all the way back to the big bang—or perhaps even earlier, into a phase of early-universe inflation [31, 38]. Such extreme tests might ultimately prove relevant to the question of whether quantum entanglement undergirds the emergence of space-time itself. (For a recent review, see Ref. [58]).”
https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.05966

Experiment 2:
Testing Local Realism into the Past without Detection and Locality Loopholes
Ming-Han Li,1,2 Cheng Wu,1,2 Yanbao Zhang,3 Wen-Zhao Liu,1,2 Bing Bai,1,2 Yang Liu,1,2 Weijun Zhang,4 Qi Zhao,5 Hao Li,4 Zhen Wang,4 Lixing You,4 W. J. Munro,3 Juan Yin,1,2 Jun Zhang,1,2 Cheng-Zhi Peng,1,2 Xiongfeng Ma,5 Qiang Zhang,1,2 Jingyun Fan,1,2 and Jian-Wei Pan1,2
Conclusion for this experiment:
Quote:
“In conclusion, we perform a null hypothesis test which rejects local hidden variable models taking place as early as 11 years before the experiment with high confidence. Looking into the future, our experiment may serve as a benchmark to progressively rule out local hidden variable models deep into the cosmic history by utilizing the randomness in quasars of high redshift or even cosmic microwave backgroud in future experiments. Further, we may find interesting applications in device-independent quantum information processing [21, 32, 59–65]. Scaling up the spacetime extension in the local realism test is being actively pursued [66, 67]. The same system may also help to examine the hypothesis for human free choice [3, 6, 8, 52, 68–71] and gravitational effect [72, 73] and to address collapse locality loophole [74–77].”
https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.07653

This blog should be read as an extension of my blog entitled The inescapable duality of all “things”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why I think David Bohm is a hero of science

Bohm cared to get to the bottom of all things, including reality

It is no secret that I feel David Bohm is amongst the deepest thinking and cleverest scientists of all time. Bohm dared to think about and explain what many other scientists of his generation thought was ludicrous, and was prepared to embrace the most profound ideas of Eastern philosophy into his scientific theories as well.

If you take time to look more closely at the life and times of David Bohm in the attachment, I think you will see the man to be scientifically very insightful and gifted, and a person with a deep sense of personal and social morality as well. He said that each individual in his life is in total contact with all other things (phenomena), including us with each other (his implicate order model). Furthermore, if mankind takes the time to recognize this connectedness then the problems of the world would sort themselves out.

I think if you can understand where Bohm is coming from with his views about science and life in general, you will understand my instinctual views as well, together with the reasons why. I have incorporated two secondary works about the life, times and beliefs of David Bohm. I feel you will find them reasonably straightforward to read and his words gripping and challenging, even if you do not agree with them.

A biographjy of David Bohm

The inescapable duality of all “things”

Why recent physics experiments with respect to non-locality are likely to change the nature and style of scientific research forever

Introduction

There can now be little doubt that our space-time universe is “swimming” in a sea of without time metaphysical non-locality. The world of physics continues to largely ignore this reality. Yet this dilemma in science has persisted for more than fifty years. The phenomenon of quantum entanglement has been widely accepted in quantum theory by scientists. Quantum entanglement means that something, like a particle, can influence something on the other side of the universe instantly. Albert Einstein referred to this non-physical action as being “spooky action at a distance”. This spooky action is in violation of both Einstein’s special and general relativity theories. However, what has been left unresolved in physics is a similarly spooky phenomenon entitled non-locality.

Non-locality theory demonstrates that “all things” in the universe act in a coordinated way, even though no force passes through the space between them. This active coordination in the universe, when combined with quantum entanglement theory, points to the fact that the universe seems to have a mind of its own, and at the same time is aware of not only itself but of all things taking place within it as well.

What is important for this presentation is that as recently as August 2018 two highly respected experiments [see below] have demonstrated that not only is entanglement spooky, but non-locality is as well. This means that space-time is both physically real [local] as well as being non-physical [non-local]. This non-locality is metaphysical because it is beyond physics, and therefore cannot be measured. Non-locality simply “IS” and so it is not provable by means of normal verifiable lab testing methods. However, both non-locality and entanglement have for many decades been mathematically testable theories, as are mathematical predictions made therefrom.

In summary, both local and non-local phenomena in the universe [even before the Big Bang] are in a state of concurrent correlation. Furthermore the possibilities of there being reasons why such correlations exist [loopholes] have now been permanently defined by the two experiments that I have cited. The implications of these two experiments are profound.

The implications

1] Both Einstein relativity models are incomplete. The single neo-Lorentzian physics model might be a more pertinent model because it is without time [a prerequisite] and the mathematics relating to both models is very similar in each case.

2] Faster-than-light influences are possible.

3] Nature is non-local and by means of both Quantum Entanglement and Non-Locality theories, “all things” are possible in the universe.

4] Nature violates local [physical] causality. The common cause of all that “IS” is non-local.

5] As a result of point 4 above, physicists must now consider a theory of common cause of reality.

6] Physicists must now consider that causal influences are not limited to the speed of light in the universe, or alternatively, that events can be correlated for no observable reason.

7] Physicists should ask themselves if correlations do not imply a cause, then ask themselves if they should look for other causes of events.

8] Implicit measurements and outcomes can be known before they can be explicitly known.

9] The theory of Quantum Mechanics is incomplete.

10] Entanglement and Non-Locality theories can jointly make the impossible happen in the universe.

11] Physicists must look again at reality and decide if they think it is irreducibly random, or alternatively whether it is without knowable cause and is non-local. This means how the settings of one measuring device can influence the readings of another instrument irrespective of distance, location or time.

12] Non-local correlations demonstrate that in any laboratory, nature can mathematically answer any question without knowing which questions are being put to it from another laboratory in another location.

13] Simultaneity in physics can be demonstrated and can be shown to not only be related to the speed of light.

14] Non-Locality theory addresses the following inexplicable type of phenomena in physics, as follows:

14.1] Consciousness and awareness

14.2] Where the properties of particles come from.

14.3] Where charge and mass come from.

14.4] How metaphysical out-of-body experiences, clairvoyance, intuition, telekinesis and suchlike might occur non-locally and manifest themselves in the manner that they do.

14.5] Demonstrate how non-locality is always lurking beneath the surface and events. This includes all things we think about and do.

14.6] All things are possible in physics at the Quantum level [possibilities to do “something”, whatever they might be].

What follows is a descriptive answer as to how the mystery of non-locality can be better understood in physics

The following quotation is from an article written by Howard Wiseman in the 19 June 2014 edition of Nature magazine entitled “Physics: Bell’s theorem still reverberates”.

Quote:

“Two shady characters, Rowan and Colin, approach you, claiming to have a large supply of these impossible squares. When you ask to see one, Rowan says: “No, it doesn’t work like that. For each of our squares, I will reveal one row, and Colin one column. But you can choose which row and which column you want to know.” You reply: “Do you think I was born yesterday? In each instance, Rowan can say any of his four possible answers (001, 010, 100 or 111) and Colin can choose whichever of his (000, 011, 101 or 110) do not conflict with Rowan’s. For example, if I ask for the second row and the third column, and Rowan says ‘001’, then Colin just has to choose an answer with 1 as the middle entry, either 011 or 110.”

But Colin persists: “What if you prevent me from hearing not only Rowan’s answer, but even the question put to Rowan? Take us far apart, and lock us in rooms that shield all forms of communication. We will still give consistent answers 100% of the time.” You think to yourself: “In this case, their best strategy would be to each carry (or memorize) a predetermined list of answers to all possible questions. In a given trial, the respective answers that Rowan and Colin carry would have to correspond to squares that differ in at least one of the nine entries, because of the constraints on the rows and columns. If I conduct enough trials, choosing the questions at random, I will catch them with inconsistent answers soon enough.”

So you agree to the trial as suggested; you ask questions in one room and an assistant in the other. To your consternation, Colin and Rowan give consistent answers every time. How is this possible? Are they communicating, despite all your efforts? No, they are using pairs of ‘entangled’ quantum particles — each pair of particles was jointly prepared in the same way, and then one kept by Rowan and one by Colin. With each trial, Rowan picks the next particle in his store, measures one of three different properties (depending on which row you ask for), and gives you one of his four possible answers based on the result of his measurement. Colin similarly processes his next particle, the one paired with Rowan’s. By the ‘magic’ of quantum entanglement, their results are correlated precisely so as to simulate an impossible square.”

Evidence:

Remarkable evidence that non-locality in physics is real

These two experiments demonstrate that all “things” in the universe act in a coordinated way even though no force passes through the space between them. These words strongly imply that the universe is aware of itself and furthermore the conditions at the time of the Big Bang were without time and non-local as well.

Experiment 1:

Cosmic Bell Test using Random Measurement Settings from High-Redshift Quasars

Published by the American Physical Society on the 20th of August 2018

Dominik Rauch,1,2,∗ Johannes Handsteiner,1,2 Armin Hochrainer,1,2 Jason Gallicchio,3 Andrew S. Friedman,4 Calvin Leung,1,2,3,5 Bo Liu,6 Lukas Bulla,1,2 Sebastian Ecker,1,2 Fabian Steinlechner,1,2 Rupert Ursin,1,2 Beili Hu,3 David Leon,4 Chris Benn,7 Adriano Ghedina,8 Massimo Cecconi,8 Alan H. Guth,5 David I. Kaiser,5,† Thomas Scheidl,1,2 and Anton Zeilinger1,2,‡

Conclusion for this experiment:

Quote:

“Conclusions. For each Cosmic Bell test reported here, we assume fair sampling and close the locality loophole. We also constrain the freedom-of-choice loophole with detector settings determined by extragalactic events, such that any local-realist mechanism would need to have acted no more recently than 7.78Gyr or 3.22Gyr ago for pairs 1 and 2, respectively—more than six orders of magnitude deeper into cosmic history than the experiments reported in Ref. [38]. This corresponds to excluding such local-realist mechanisms from 96.0% (pair 1) and 63.5% (pair 2) of the relevant space-time regions, compared to ∼ 10−5% of the relevant space-time region as in Ref. [38] (see Supplemental Materials [45]). We have therefore dramatically limited the space-time regions from which local-realist mechanisms could have affected the outcome of our experiment to early in the history of our universe. To constrain such models further, one could use other physical signals to set detector settings, such as patches of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), or even primordial neutrinos or gravitational waves, thereby constraining such models all the way back to the big bang—or perhaps even earlier, into a phase of early-universe inflation [31, 38]. Such extreme tests might ultimately prove relevant to the question of whether quantum entanglement undergirds the emergence of space-time itself. (For a recent review, see Ref. [58]).”

https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.05966

Experiment 2:

Testing Local Realism into the Past without Detection and Locality Loopholes

Ming-Han Li,1,2 Cheng Wu,1,2 Yanbao Zhang,3 Wen-Zhao Liu,1,2 Bing Bai,1,2 Yang Liu,1,2 Weijun Zhang,4 Qi Zhao,5 Hao Li,4 Zhen Wang,4 Lixing You,4 W. J. Munro,3 Juan Yin,1,2 Jun Zhang,1,2 Cheng-Zhi Peng,1,2 Xiongfeng Ma,5 Qiang Zhang,1,2 Jingyun Fan,1,2 and Jian-Wei Pan1,2

Conclusion for this experiment:

Quote:

“In conclusion, we perform a null hypothesis test which rejects local hidden variable models taking place as early as 11 years before the experiment with high confidence. Looking into the future, our experiment may serve as a benchmark to progressively rule out local hidden variable models deep into the cosmic history by utilizing the randomness in quasars of high redshift or even cosmic microwave backgroud in future experiments. Further, we may find interesting applications in device-independent quantum information processing [21, 32, 59–65]. Scaling up the spacetime extension in the local realism test is being actively pursued [66, 67]. The same system may also help to examine the hypothesis for human free choice [3, 6, 8, 52, 68–71] and gravitational effect [72, 73] and to address collapse locality loophole [74–77].”

https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.07653

Readers should especially note that the majority of my science writings are focused upon the concept of physics non-locality theory. Physics relating to non-locality and entanglement can be mathematically proven, but cannot currently be measured in a laboratory. This means that my ideas about physics employing concepts of non-locality and entanglement are statements rather than theories. The mathematics relating to both the experiments above have been proven. Because of this, the onus is on unbelievers of beyond physical physics to disprove my statements. An extension to this blog is The words implicit and explicit seem to describe all that “IS”

References:

Ref. 1]

What the theory of Quantum Entanglement is and what does it mean in science.

Ref. 2]

A significant amount of information in this blog is derived from Wiseman’s writings as well as from the Scientific American article entitled: How Einstein Revealed the Universe’s Strange “Nonlocality”, by George Musser on 1 November 2015.

A statement with respect to the 1887 Michelson and Morley Ether experiment

I am of the unequivocal opinion that the Earth is moving through a fluid like ether which is space itself

Having conducted extensive research I am of the unequivocal opinion that the Earth is moving through a fluid-like ether which is space itself. I have come to this conclusion for a number of important reasons. I feel that the primary reason is that in the physics community there remains confusion and antagonism with respect to the original 1887 Michelson and Morley ether experiment results. This is together with the later Dayton Miller results of 1929 to 1932. In my opinion this is because of the divorce between physics theoreticians and down to earth field experimentalists. Loyd S Swenson seems to affirm these words when he said: “The origins of relativity theory may be explained in various ways, but one neglected factor in that summation is the way different canons of scholarship in physics and history have effected the selection of data and the narration of relationships between experiment and theory…” “…linear and sequential development that cannot be justified.”

The importance of these words are that physics history has lead to the contemporary conclusion that the original 1887 Michelson and Morley experiment was a null result, and this is incorrect. I discuss this matter at greater length in my blog entitled “The day science lost its way“. This blog also looks at the politics amongst physicists and analysts that dominated the debate at that time. Extensive quotes from different parties are included in it as well.

A contemporary independent science analyst [M.P.] has written the following words with respect to this debate. The analyst points out that the words in a statement made by Einstein in 1920 in respect to his General Relativity theory are in contradiction with later experimental findings of other distinguished physicists at that time. I cite the analyst’s words as follows:

Quote:

“Ether and the Theory of Relativity
Albert Einstein, May 5th, 1920

Ether and the Theory of Relativity

“….according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether……….But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it…”

What this means is that in General Relativity Theory, space has physical properties, and therefore can be considered to be an ether. However unlike a liquid or gas which consists of molecules, the space of General Relativity Theory does not consist of parts that can be identified as being in motion.

In addition, General Relativity Theory predicts that measurements of the speed of light are not affected by motion through space. This implies that experiments such as the Michelson Morley experiment that attempt to detect such motion, by comparing the speeds of light in different directions, should detect no effect.

However, on page 206 of the following paper, one reads the following:
The Ether-Drift Experiment and the Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth

Dayton C. Miller, Case School of Applied Science
July 1933, Reviews of Modern Physics, Volume 5.

“……Michelson and Morley performed the historic experiment in the northwest room of the basement of the Main Building of Adelbert College in Cleveland in 1887; their entire series of observations was of six hours’ duration…….

……The brief series of observations was sufficient to show clearly that the effect did not have the anticipated magnitude. However, and this fact must be emphasized, the indicated effect was not zero; the sensitivity of the apparatus was such that the conclusion, published in 1887, stated that the observed relative motion of the earth and ether did not exceed one fourth of the earth’s orbital velocity. This is quite different from a null effect now so frequently imputed to this experiment by writers on Relativity….”

This implies that the Michelson Morley experiment DID detect motion relative to space which contradicts the prediction by General Relativity Theory that such experiments couldn’t detect such motion.

Dayton C. Miller was confident of what he said, because he had repeatedly performed Michelson Morley type experiments a sufficient number of times to eventually arrive at a speed and direction for the motion of the earth relative to space (or relative to ether if you prefer that term).”

The same analyst went on to discuss Einstein’s concept of General Relativity ether with respect to the Dayton Miller results.

Quote:

“In General Relativity Theory space is an ether but the idea of motion cannot be applied to it. So according to this theory, even though the earth is orbiting our sun at tremendous speed, and orbiting the center of our galaxy at even greater speed, we are entitled to consider the earth to be at rest relative to space itself.

This is a comforting idea, though the experiments by Dayton C. Miller and Michelson Morley seemed to show that the earth is in fact moving relative to space.

However, a feature of these experiments is that the speeds

Varied wildly, and,
Their values calculated using Newtonian physics theory were too low to be credible.

Eg. Here are the speeds calculated by Miller using Newtonian physics theory during the course of a 24 hour period. The heavy black line is a running average.

Notice that the speeds vary a lot and are only about 5 .. 15 km/s, whereas the orbital speed of the earth is about 30 km/s, so to obtain credible speeds Miller had to multiply his measured speeds by a factor that would make his final values compatible with the orbital speed of the earth. That wasn’t difficult, but he didn’t have a theory to explain why this factor was needed.

The lack of theoretical justification for this factor he introduced would have made his results suspect.
And as the large variations of determined speed are not consistent with the concept of the earth traveling through a motionless ether (which was the traditional idea of an ether), that raised questions about his results as well.

Perhaps for those reasons, most physicists chose to ignore his results in favor of relativity theory which simply predicted that detecting motion relative to space couldn’t be done.”

In summary, these words mean:

1] The dynamic three space theory of Cahill (and other dynamic space theories similar to it such as the Awareness Model) is fully consistent with the results of the Michelson and Morley and Dayton Miller experiments.

2] Traditional Ether Theory is not fully consistent because it doesn’t predict the variations of speed which are seen.

3] Einstein Ether is not consistent because general relativity predicts that zero speed should be seen.

With respect to Einstein it should be remembered that he progressively changed his mind over time with respect to there being a motionless (sea like) ether. For example in a lecture that he delivered in 1924 Einstein said “…but every theory of local action assumes continuous fields and also the existence of an ether.” You will find two important statements made by Einstein with respect to his views about ether in my blog entitled “The great ether debate”. The quotation cited can be found therein.

I acknowledge that Einstein’s words were mostly related to his theory of General Relativity and that they had no specific relationship with his theory of Special relativity. However, I point out that Einstein in his statement in 1920 said that ether was necessary for his theory of General Relativity to make sense. My point is that how is it that when Einstein was working to develop a progressive unity theory of everything could he employ an ether continuum in one model and not the other. This is more especially so if you consider my blog entitled: “The inescapable duality of all things“. Einstein died before he could complete his unity theory.

It is only after Einstein began to change his mind about ether that around this time that the wider scientific community began to ignore Einstein’s views relating to ether. They saw ether as having no role in the continuing development of contemporary physics models. I also strongly believe that you should note Einstein’s concern about the null result or otherwise with the 1887 Michelson and Morley experiment (together with the later and more sophisticated experiments of Dayton Miller cited below). Einstein also questioned that both his Special and General Relativity theories would be invalid in their then current form. They would have become significantly different theories.

Einstein said with respect to this matter:

Quote:

“Should the positive result (meaning the Michelson – Morley experiment) be confirmed (it eventually wasn’t), then the special theory of relativity, and with it the general theory of relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. Experimentum summus judex. Only the equivalence of inertia and gravitation would remain. However, they would have to be a significantly different theory”

Source: Albert Einstein in a letter to Edwin E. Slosson, July 1925

I urge you to peruse Cahill’s opinion about ether theory as well as those of M Consoli and A. Pluchino commencing on page 445.

Additionally I suggest that you consider a detailed essay written by Loyd S. Swenson written on the same topic in 1970. The title of Swenson’s paper is “The Michelson-Morley-Miller experiments before and after 1905”.

I have drawn attention to the well documented divorce between physics theorists and experimentalists with respect to the long standing ether debate. What must be kept in mind with respect to this debate is that regardless of a disagreement between theorists and experimentalists is that there was no doubt in Isaac Newton’s mind that ether exists. He also expressed the opinion that there are small particles in the ether. (This seems to align with the debate about particles that exist in respect to the dynamic Awareness Model) that links local space foam to a non-local awareness continuum. Here is what Newton had to say about his concept of ether:

Quote:

“I do not know what this Aether is”, but that if it consists of particles then they must be exceedingly smaller than those of Air, or even than those of Light: The exceeding smallness of its Particles may contribute to the greatness of the force by which those Particles may recede from one another, and thereby make that Medium exceedingly more rare and elastic than Air, and by consequence exceedingly less able to resist the motions of Projectiles, and exceedingly more able to press upon gross Bodies, by endeavoring to expand itself.”

Source

Apart from the Michelson and Morley, Dayton Miller, Cahill, Ives and numerous other experiments relating to the existence and properties of an universal ether conducted over a period of nearly a century, contemporary physicists have never become convinced that a universal ether exists. Today I provide what I consider to be sound reasons as to why this universal reluctance by contemporary physicists to positively accept ether into their modelling should change. I present you with two references relating to ideas and experiments conducted by Morris to consolidate my position in this blog. These are a physics paper entitled “Perth-Muenster REG-REG Correlations: Remarkable New Evidence for Dynamical Space” and a separate open access repository (zip file)  archive supporting Morris’s paper with data.

The abstract for Morris’s paper is as follows:

Quote:

“We have obtained new evidence for dynamical space by applying correlation analysis to a year of data from a Random Event Generator (REG) device located in Perth, Australia and from another in Muenster, Germany, recorded between July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013. The results obtained are consistent with results obtained by applying similar analysis to data from a REG located in Manchester UK and the REG in Perth. Consequently evidence for dynamical space is mounting. For each day we applied correlation analysis to determine travel times for putative waves. Then wave speed and direction, over each 24 hour period, were determined by fitting to the observed travel times, theoretical curves of how travel times would vary with Earth rotation. We thereby derived an average incoming RA, declination and speed for the waves of each day. A probability density plot of the incoming directions exhibited a peak near RA = 4.5 h, consistent with previous determinations of incoming space flow direction by Reginald Cahill and Dayton Miller. Moreover, removing Earth orbital and gravitational inflow velocities from the observed wave velocities allowed a peak of higher density to be obtained, which is consistent with predictions of Dynamical 3-Space theory. The peak indicated a most probable incoming galactic direction of RA = 4.50 h, dec = -80.6 deg. Probability density plots of speeds indicated a most probable incoming galactic speed of 502 km/s.”

I present this blog to you as a statement. It is a statement not only because of the explicit [local] contents herein but also in respect the words cited in my blogs entitled “Why is there no precise dividing line between microscopic and macroscopic phenomena” and “The inescapable duality of all “things”“.

This blog forms a unit of information with respect to my conceptual unity theory.

Another look at the Planck length

I refer to it as the Planck line

The definition of Plank length below is a very elementary one, which can be found in Wikipedia. However, it can be broadly described as follows:

Quote:

“Physicists primarily use the Planck length to talk about things that are ridiculously tiny.  Specifically; too tiny to matter.  By the time you get to (anywhere near) the Planck length it stops making much sense to talk about the difference between two points in any reasonable situation.  Basically, because of the uncertainty principle, there’s no (physically relevant) difference between the positions of things separated by small enough distances, and the Planck length certainly qualifies. Nothing fundamentally changes at the Planck scale, and there’s nothing special about the physics there, it’s just that there’s no point trying to deal with things that small. Part of why nobody bothers is that the smallest particle, the electron, is about 1020 times larger (that’s the difference between a single hair and a large galaxy). Rather than being a specific scale, The Planck scale is just an easy to remember line-in-the-sand (the words “Planck length” are easier to remember than a number).”

http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/05/q-what-is-the-planck-length-what-is-its-relevance/

The Planck length has a more formal meaning as well:

Importance of Planck

Quote:

“… The idea of a fifth dimension is not new (our fourth dimension including time, plus one other)” “… extra dimensions needn’t be curled up as small as the Planck scale, their effects could be felt by particles at lower energy” “… unification happened when the forces were still weak enough to be handled by conventional mathematical techniques” “… researchers were amazed because unification at a such low energy was supposed to be impossible” “… Fortunately, a fifth dimension comes to the rescue” “… The implications of being able to observe events on the GUT (grand united theory), string and Planck scales are truly mind boggling. We would for the first time be able to see strings, the ultimate foundation stones of reality. And with the Planck scale lowered, experimental tests of quantum gravity-the long sought unification of Einstein’s theory of gravity with quantum theory-might just be around the corner” “… For physics however, the consequences are huge” “… Suddenly, people are seeing extra dimensions as not just a theoretical theory but as every day things whose consequences we could actually measure” “… If (unification) occurs at lower energy, it would change everything, including our picture of evolution of the Universe from the big bang” “… Even simpler laws of physics would change …” “… the discovery (of a timeless fourth dimension) is simply another vital piece of the cosmic jigsaw”

Source:
New Scientist, Volume 2157, page 28

You will notice that this latter Planck article also talks about the possible discovery of other dimensions, including where I noted the possible discovery of a timeless fourth dimension within this process. I argue that the fourth dimension can be located at the Planck length. This blog is also very relevant to my blog: The awareness model of physics. A new understanding about reality science. You will see where I mention other universes and dimensions in that blog.

The awareness model of physics

A new understanding about reality science

The Awareness Model of Physics [Primordial-Awareness, i.e. PA] considers the concept of physical reality at its deepest level. It presents ideas that are considered mostly without merit in the wider physics community. This is because such ideas cannot be tested by conventional scientific experiments. I focus my attention by looking at reality science as being one that is informational because it removes the need for me to be unduly prescriptive and descriptive with my use of language. Furthermore I think that by doing so my readers are likely to better follow my line of thinking even though they may not fully understand the wider message that I am attempting to convey to them.

I have written numerous articles with respect to my beliefs about informational science. Because of this I will not go into undue informational detail in this blog today. My position is that I have firm ideas about what scientific reality may look and feel like and so it can be described and discussed as such. The following chart provides scientific insight into the deepest levels of my thinking with respect to holistic Awareness physics. It provides a platform for the short and more informative discussion that follows it.

My discussion about this chart is in two parts. These are:

1] Informational matters that relate to the pre Big Bang epoch

2] Informational matters that relate to the post Big Bang epoch

Part 1: Informational matters that relate to the pre Big Bang epoch

The sub-quantum level of informational reality is Primordial-Awareness (PA). PA is without time. PA has a self organising property that lead to a neural-network type of structure. This organising property was influenced by means of the effect of a thought. [Thought] Thoughts are influences that are not bound by the laws of quantum theory. For purposes of descriptive simplicity they can be best described as being an undetectable effect emanating from a neutral charge that informationally means something. This something might be the symbol of i that science commonly recognises as being the “something” [matrix] within all “things” that might exist. It is from this thought that the condition of patterns of thoughts emerged that became both effects [something that exists] and the effects of thoughts.

These affects and effects were also influenced by the self organising properties of PA. Both single thoughts and patterns of thoughts mean something in with relation to PA. This is because each thought has a short-term memory that causes them to have a minimal intuitive sense of self-awareness and self-guidance. This is in respect to themselves as well as PA. This also means self meaning, relevance and embryonic self-importance. In other words the PA and thought nexus became an ever increasingly semantic process of self referential informational construction.

In this process weaker thoughts that the system itself did not feel were conducive to the well being and further development of the wider system were discarded and allowed to die. This includes branches emanating from such weak thoughts. This is more particularly so because such weak thoughts had no further meaning to the system as a whole. As the thought neural network system began to further evolve and grow the system began to intuitively sense that it was not only just a condition that could effect itself but it also had its own energy type. When the system realised this it then morphologically [relating to the form or structure of things] learned to not only understand itself by means of its own energy but also adapt itself to speculate about its own sense of purpose and wider ability to do “things”. The word speculate here means to test new and safer growth enhancement opportunities and potential on behalf of itself. It remains intuitive as it had been all along since it separated from the effect of the neutral charge. Each wider system-effect of speculation became a junction-point [node] of new opportunities and growth to do something.

These new opportunities and growth became not only new nodes of informational action relating to growth and the stunting and destruction of existing growth in order to keep itself “healthy”. This is in line with what I said earlier. This is as though it were a human neural network system. Each node can be seen as though it were a neuron maintaining and expanding its own infinitesimally small ‘patch’ of the wider reality PA system. These nodes can also be seen as cells. These cells are influenced by means of the wider inherent energy within the system itself. These cells also have their own meaning of some type. They also have meaning with respect to their being differing energy types, influences and effects. This means that the PA neural network system is informationally dynamic. This means it has the capacity to influence a great number of types of structure and also the diverse range of ever-growing energy types that helps it to be innovative and informationally constructive. This also means becoming ever more aware of its own holistic self as a single matrix of informational something.

This countless number of energy types (together with these same allied processes) morphologically manifested themselves as patterns of pixels but not observable ones. In other words the original node junctions I talked about are embryonic sub-quantum elementary particles. Each pixel, together with their own short lived memory also began self organisation themselves into patterns. These patterns in turn organise themselves into clusters and packages of self referential information that mean something with respect to the wider PA neural network system itself. This information, together with its inherent energy derived from within itself influences the employment of its own new wide range of energy types to influence the emergence of electrons of energy. These new electrons of energy became separately referential to the clusters and packages of pixels. In other words electrons became entangled with the pixels from which they were influenced and conditioned by in the first place.

It is this entangled relationship between pixels and electrons that became an ever growing and meaningful field of information with respect to PA that had become the continuum for the reality system. This new and ever growing entangled information system became more adventurous and creative with itself. This is to the extent that the combined natural energy of the system, together with the unknowable diversity of energy types that emerged from the primary energy condition in the first place, became entangled into a single system of a matrix of informational oneness. This informational oneness embraces all the inherent informational experiential knowledge that I have talked about within the wider PA system thus far.

You will notice that I have included the energy type of electrons as being a central player in my description of the ever expanding and ever greater diversity of the condition of informational reality. This is the reality that I have entangled with PA in order to give informational reality a descriptive meaning, purpose and some type of a without time future. It is this entangled relationship between PA and my description of informational reality that is the fundamental ether relating to all that ‘IS’ within the wider matrix of entangled reality. This matrix is motionless. All things and events are relational to the ether. This includes our 3D dimension. Our Earth moves through this same “sea” just as Einstein believed it would need to do in order to validate his theory of general relativity. It is this same ether type, but not necessarily the same type of condition, that is the inherent ether of our 3D universe. For purposes of convenience I have chosen to avoid widening the scope of this reality ether effect to include other universes and dimensions. However, it is because of this unknowable and monumental concentration of energy types and associated diversity of informational processes and event related thereto that influenced the wider condition of PA informational reality to be as randomly explosively as it is bound to be. By this I mean by means of influencing the conditions and effects for the evolution and creation of universes and dimensions.

Part 2: Informational matters that relate to the post Big Bang epoch

In the post Big Bang epoch the pre Big Bang ether ‘field’ retained its PA entangled relationship with electrons. This includes the short-lived informational memories brought forward by electrons in their relationship with the massive diversion of energy of the Big Bang. In the post Big Bang epoch new information was influenced to be created along the same lines as it was in the pre Big Bang epoch. All new different energy types, conditions, influences and effects were ‘born’ that related to a 3D geometric universe. These same energy types and their associated conditions then became related to objects, events, movement, velocity and time as it relates to clocks and the speed of light. It is the ‘natural’ ether of PA (like a sea) that became the ‘motor’ that ‘fired-up’ the universe as we understand it to be. The natural PA ether retained its entangled state with electrons. The PA ether retained its motionless state as it was in the pre Big Bang epoch. Furthermore conceptual pixels of knowledge and information then became the physical means through which the universe can be said to be both aware of itself as well as all ‘things’ and events that are taking place at any given time. Within this process PA remains without time but pixels of information are both with and without time as pixels were originally derived from PA by means of the original pre Big Bang entangled patterns of thoughts processes that I have discussed and explained.

It is from this informational ether energy type nexus that different energy types (including conditions) emerged that were relevant to a 3D geometric reference frame. The ether became the energy type and influence for all ‘things’ related to the new 3D geometric reference frame. This included the energy effect of magnetism that was one of the energy effects that emanated from the Big Bang explosion. It is the nexus relationship between electrons and their associated short term spin memories with magnetism that created the necessary energy field type for the effect of electrical energy fields (electricity) to emerge. This includes the conditions for negative, positive and (temporary) neutral charge that gives ‘dynamic- life’, meaning and purpose to the wider 3D universal system. This is a system centred upon and entangled with the concept of PA entangled informational ether. It is this wide ranging entangled form of informational 3D ether that is the informational link to the pre Big Bang type of reality PA ether. PA is the dynamic (essential) common link between the two. It is the common awareness between the two that has no boundaries. It is important for you to note that there is no precise dividing line between microscopic and macroscopic phenomena. This in turn further supports my idea that all “things” are somehow entangled with each other.

I urge you to peruse my blog entitled “Albert Einstein and the great ether debate” with respect to you better understanding the confusion that exists in the physics community as to whether historical Ether theory is a valid theory of not. Also with respect to Ether theory you are urged to review my statement concerning my views relating to why I think Ether theory should be incorporated into wider contemporary physics modeling.

The Awareness Model is supported by an experiment.

Readers should know that the major difference between the Awareness model and the Hiley-Bohm models of physics is that the Hiley-Bohm model has been mathematically constructed to be compatible with the Relativity model of physics whereas the Awareness model is validated by a described experiment. The Hiley-Bohm model also embraces all phenomena whatsoever in a single reality-frame. [The Process physics model does this as well].

Here is a summery of the key points in the immediate foregoing words as they relate to the 3D universe as well as the subsequent consequences they have in the universe.

1. The universe is undivided and is aware of itself and of all ‘things’ and events taking place within it.

2. All things and events are somehow connected to each other by means of physics quantum entanglement theory.

3. All things and events are both informational and have energy as well. This includes information that is a condition and effect of thoughts that include imagination.

4. The universe has intelligence and thus there are hidden geometric forms in the universe that help to not only understand the universe itself and what the rules of nature might be.

5. All things and events in the universe are in ever-changing densities, averages and ratios with each other and as thus they are representational of the holistic nature of the universe.

6. The natural backdrop to reality (inertia) is Primordial-Awareness.

7. There are two concurrent times in the universe. One is clock time and the other one is without time.

8. Forces are by-products of objects and events.

9. The principle energy force of the universe is unknowable but it is describable. It simply ‘IS’

10. Space is like a web of limitless interpenetrating fields that can be demonstrated to be functions, energy types with their associated conditions, influences and effects.

11. It is not known in physics science how electrons maintain their structural integrity and furthermore it does not yet know where mass or charge come from. (I say that they come from the dynamic nature of PA).

12. There is nothing smaller in physics than elementary particles like electrons. Electrons are structureless so they are not crushable because they have nothing to crush into. This is why elementary particles like electrons, quarks and gluons are the fundamental building blocks of the universe. Without them the ‘contents’ of the universe would largely not exist. This is why the short lived informational spins of electrons might be seen as the analogical father of all elementary particles in the 3D universe. They are without structure and uncrushable because they are the natural pixels of the matrix of informational PA reality. (They are called point particles in physics).

13.The electromagnetic field (fields within fields) can be seen to be something like analogical entangled fog particles that fill all of space. It exists in every reference frame of space and moment in time. The electromagnetic field can be seen to be stationary with respect to itself and only moves when fields of (from yet to be discovered scientifically sources) charge that ‘influence’ to move at different velocities. These velocities are related to the strength of the field of charge that mean something. This means the PA ether field.

14. Electricity might best be seen as an inert condition and influence relating to the stationary electromagnetic field. This is when this electricity condition and influence becomes an electrical field effect of its own (electricity). This is at the point when the electromagnetic field moves with respect to any nearby energy field of charge. The strength of the electrical field (electricity) is related to the speed of the electromagnetic field in relation to the charge of the field.

15. Electrons in the ether field have natural spin. This spin has a short-term memory. This stored information is transferred by electrical impulses to the nuclei of minerals like phosphorus that also have informational spin. The spin of the phosphorus nuclei have a much longer memory span that that of the spin of electrons. It is this entangled relationship between the PA ether fields that influence both the energy and types of energy that allows our mind and brains to think.

16. There is an inescapable duality of all “things” in the universe [and probably wider reality as well].

Appendices:

The relationship between the Awareness model of physics and a supporting experiment

I care to talk about entanglement

Albert Einstein and the great ether debate

Why is there no precise dividing line between microscopic and macroscopic phenomena?

The inescapable duality of all “things”

This blog forms a unit of information with respect to my conceptual unity theory.

How Mandelbrot’s fractals changed the world

Did you know that the whole universe is fractal?

I think that this article written by Jack Challoner will stir your imagination about he magical nature of fractals.

Challoner writes for BBC online news magazine

Quote:

“In 1975, a new word came into use, when a maverick mathematician made an important discovery. So what are fractals? And why are they important?

During the 1980s, people became familiar with fractals through those weird, colourful patterns made by computers.

But few realise how the idea of fractals has revolutionised our understanding of the world, and how many fractal-based systems we depend upon.

On 14 October 2010, the genius who coined the word – Polish-born mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot – died, aged 85, from cancer.

Unfortunately, there is no definition of fractals that is both simple and accurate. Like so many things in modern science and mathematics, discussions of “fractal geometry” can quickly go over the heads of the non-mathematically-minded. This is a real shame, because there is profound beauty and power in the idea of fractals.

The best way to get a feeling for what fractals are is to consider some examples. Clouds, mountains, coastlines, cauliflowers and ferns are all natural fractals. These shapes have something in common – something intuitive, accessible and aesthetic.

They are all complicated and irregular: the sort of shape that mathematicians used to shy away from in favour of regular ones, like spheres, which they could tame with equations.

Mandelbrot famously wrote: “Clouds are not spheres, mountains are not cones, coastlines are not circles, and bark is not smooth, nor does lightning travel in a straight line.”

The chaos and irregularity of the world – Mandelbrot referred to it as “roughness” – is something to be celebrated. It would be a shame if clouds really were spheres, and mountains cones.

Look closely at a fractal, and you will find that the complexity is still present at a smaller scale. A small cloud is strikingly similar to the whole thing. A pine tree is composed of branches that are composed of branches – which in turn are composed of branches.

A tiny sand dune or a puddle in a mountain track have the same shapes as a huge sand dune and a lake in a mountain gully. This “self-similarity” at different scales is a defining characteristic of fractals.

The fractal mathematics Mandelbrot pioneered, together with the related field of chaos theory, lifts the veil on the hidden beauty of the world. It inspired scientists in many disciplines – including cosmology, medicine, engineering and genetics – and artists and musicians, too.

The whole universe is fractal, and so there is something joyfully quintessential about Mandelbrot’s insights.

Fractal mathematics has many practical uses, too – for example, in producing stunning and realistic computer graphics, in computer file compression systems, in the architecture of the networks that make up the internet and even in diagnosing some diseases.

Fractal geometry can also provide a way to understand complexity in “systems” as well as just in shapes. The timing and sizes of earthquakes and the variation in a person’s heartbeat and the prevalence of diseases are just three cases in which fractal geometry can describe the unpredictable.

Another is in the financial markets, where Mandelbrot first gained insight into the mathematics of complexity while working as a researcher for IBM during the 1960s.

Mandelbrot tried using fractal mathematics to describe the market – in terms of profits and losses traders made over time, and found it worked well.

In 2005, Mandelbrot turned again to the mathematics of the financial market, warning in his book The (Mis)Behaviour of Markets against the huge risks being taken by traders – who, he claimed, tend to act as if the market is inherently predictable, and immune to large swings.

Fractal mathematics cannot be used to predict the big events in chaotic systems – but it can tell us that such events will happen.

As such, it reminds us that the world is complex – and delightfully unpredictable.

More of Jack Challoner’s writings can be found at Explaining Science

A biography of Benoit Mandelbrot can be found here