Matter, Gravity, Expanding Universe

Hi alienx,

I assume that you wrote these papers, but I'm not sure what you are asking for. Is it alternatives to the "chapter" titles, or to the methods/math, or what?

regards,

S

Hi S,

Thanks for reading some or all of it.

Putting the paper on the blog was to invite general comments because it takes an alternative view to strings and branes that has beset researchers for the last 20 years or so.

I have discounted both theories of Relativity and relied on the very basic measurements such as the electron radius.

As the zero-point field has been largely ignored because introducing it into 'standard physics' makes the math very 'hairy', I set about asking whether it could be responsible for gravity and got the result at the end.

Ok, I went the long way around but got somewhere using two propositions a lot simpler than the Principle of Equivalence.

Regards,

Alan

"CAN IT BE SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN THAT THERE IS LIFE AFTER DEATH?"

Is there any material evidence that after death there is anything left but the gradual deterioration, change, and transformation, of the composite materials of which the once living body was composed into elemental substances?

If not then there is nothing to which the scientific method can be applied, this question to the questioner having exhausted all possibilities.

Therefore, to pose the original question itself is absurd.

As to the other issue raised in those papers which I only thought worth briefly scanning, i.e., the universal theory of everything.

Many believers in life after death are vehemently opposed, and those who ought to see the issue before the ends of their nose, don't see it, but said theory exists. It is the concept of evolution, not simply of organic living things, but rather of everything in the universe, vis., a specific study of any part of existence gives us an understanding of the development (evolution) of that part. This is true as to the existence of the universe, Big Bang, or of the smallest micro-organisms, i.e., bacteria, virus', composite chemicals, elements, etc.

The relationship of the evolution of the part to the evolution of the whole constitutes, in my understanding, the theory of the whole or everything.

My comment here is not to ignore the as yet inexplicable connections between electromagnetic forces and gravity, which given our present understanding of physics are likely related and in the end explicable, but rather to attack and disperse the continuing attempts to cast existence and being into realms of mystery.

Unfortunately, that I fear is the point of view and intent of the questioner.

There are no mysteries, only unknowns with which we live and through scientific method, which knows only material facts and existence, attack and resolve adding to our store of knowledge.

Nonetheless, the simple fact is we are latecomers to events, the universe existing hundreds of billions of years before us.

Jack Jersawitz

Hi Jack,

Thanks for the powerful stuff you wrote.

I'd be very interested to know the fate of the 'animal' e-m field after death as very partially researched by Korotkov. For me, if CPT violation is the norm that physics cannot accept except in a minority of odd cases, there could exist possibilities which is the conclusion drawn in the paper.

Regards,

Alan.

Alan,

this is the first I'm responding to something in Cr-4 due to a book I've been workings on for quite some time.

The reason now being of how you went about explaining some of your concepts is very well put and to see done from a human-being is excellent.

I for one Know that life does go one in an existence that for now wishes to remain suppressed and with the advancements being made with nano and when CERN fires up , the ways in-which to further the proof of this existence is inevitable unless we destroy ourselves in the process.

All that is studied from cosmic realizations can be found in the inter-workings of us as human beings and the way in which we procreate.

Hello,

Thank you for your kind comments.

Some of us ask is this all there is and will believe one thing or the other without evidence, which is what belief is.

All I have done is take some evidence and extend it into speculation.

Regards,

Alan.

Yes, but once the speculation is transmitted out into the comos the answers will come.

"I'd be very interested to know the fate of the 'animal' e-m field after death as very partially researched by Korotkov."

Alan,

What I wrote was in support of science and the nonesense that I perceived early on was your objective, ensured that I did not read but a few lines of your papers.

I don't know who this guy Korotkov is but it is very clear that you are interested, as you admit, in speculatively extending his assertions, I assume something about electromagnetic fields about the body of some poor animal I hope he didn't kill just so he could look for fields he speculated would exist as proof of life after death, as more speculation, and as well as putting forward speculation as a method of science.

It is true that science starts with the speculations of the alchemists who spent an awful lot of time and energy, which would have earned them more of the gold than they found by trying to turn lead into gold, but who, at least some, because of their observations of repetitive phenomina attached to some materials and process', developed at least the beginnings of scientific method.

In fact that was unavoidable because the truth of the matter is "All that is real is rational; and all that is rational is real."

Now you might assert on various grounds that it is rational to think there is life after death.

But Hegel, who was the author of that statement also said as qualification "In the course of its development reality proves to be necessity."

The simple fact is that humankind for tens of thousand of years has speculated just as you are, about life after death.

Yet in all that time that belief has not been necessary to our development of scientific method and reality has never proven it necessary except as an oppiate for poor unhappy folks who have not yet figured out how to solve their social problem.

I guess that for us who seek reality we will have to accept that there are with us speculators who seek a reality, like life after death, for which there has never been shown any material evidence and thus no reality.

I can well imagine that around the body of that poor animal your Korotkov found some sort of field. If it was not a field generated by electrochemical processes of the body's matter beginning decay then it could just as easily have been any of thousands of other fields with which in every part of the world, we are always surrounded.

But it is a long and deep gap between that and life after death.

I found the issue of an all inclusive theory of everything far more interesting, perhaps because of my own perception that folks are chasing their tail rather than recognizing its existence in the essence of their science.

j.

Hello,

Konstantin Korotkov is a Russian medical man who used Kirlian photography on living patients.

That form of photography does not use film but a charged metal plate that is able to be processed to form an image of what it detects.

Korotkov demonstrated that around say, a finger, the hand, the leg etc. is an aura or field that alters from healthy to the unhealthy individual and can be used as a diagnostic tool.

Using that he was able to diagnose a variety of diseases without surgical intervention.

Later, he used Kirlian photography on those who had died, finding that the 'aura' can persist for up to a week following death.

Korotkov's up to date website now outlines the use of equipment more sophisticated.

In the paper, I have recounted a summary of the work of Saxton-Burr, also a medical man, who attached e-m detecting equipment to trees.

Regards,

Alan.

Kirlian Photography!

More speculitive nonesense!

C'mon Alan. Wherever there is matter in motion, or for that matter as with the Kirlian charged field, there are fields of one sort or another.

Be that as it may, there is still no connection between that and the life after death nonesense.

What is it about you guys? Something you eat? Drink? Smoke?

j.

Hi Jack,

I haven't read the Korotkov paper. You said:

"I guess that for us who seek reality we will have to accept that there are with us speculators who seek a reality, like life after death, for which there has never been shown any material evidence and thus no reality."

Scientists have postulated various types of 'dark matter' to explain things in the universe like galaxy formation. One of these is called 'shadow matter'. Here is a quote from Richard Morris' book Cosmic Questions:

"Shadow matter would not be seen because light is a form of electromagnetic radiation, and matter that was not affected by the electromagnetic force could neither emit nor reflect light. And it could not be felt because it is electromagnetic forces that hold atoms and molecules together. If you tried to grasp a chunk of shadow matter, your hand would pass right through it."

Such matter would be real, but we would have no concept of it except to see it's effect on galaxy formation and the like. It may have a completely different set of laws that apply to it except gravity, and may constitute 90% of the matter in the universe.

regards,

S

So who is Richard Morris? What is his claim to an understanding of the material universe. Do you just quote books because they are books, i.e., if somebody printed it, it is true.

Why should I not rather believe the good Bishop Berkeley who asserts all this exists only in the mind of god? After all Berkeley has been printed in many books.

Is reality what is printed in books?

j.

It doesn't matter who he is, he most likely didn't postulate it himself. Do you only believe somebody with good credentials? There are some of them who are cranks. The point is that just because you can't see or touch something doesn't prove that it doesn't exist (as you claimed)

"Why should I not rather believe the good Bishop Berkeley who asserts all this exists only in the mind of god?"

You can believe whom you want, you will anyway. I think the bishop has it slightly wrong; it exists because of the mind of God.

S

Standards guy you have a problem, to wit, you put words in other peoples mouths.

"The point is that just because you can't see or touch something doesn't prove that it doesn't exist (as you claimed)"

But then again perhaps you don't perceive that. I know better than to assert that if we "can't see or touch something [that] proves it doesn't exist."

The reason you did not understand me was precisely the fact that you seem to be one of those folks who despite a lack of evidence that something exists is intent on accepting the possibility, the speculation without evidence, of its existence.

The hard fact is that if no material evidence exists for one or another nut case assertion of something for which there is no evidence, one would be a fool to assert that it exists or does not exists or even to speculate it may exist. One would be a fool to chase such things as "shadow matter" a nut case renaming of the "dark matter," so named because physicists have determined that given their measurements, there is a massive amount of matter of some sort in the universe that for one reason or another we do not perceive. That of course is why they call it "dark matter," i.e., things in the dark are unperceived.

If things are unperceived, beyond the fact that measurements tell us something unseen exists, that is a hell of a different ball of wax from asserting that because we can't touch or see something does not mean it does not exist.

Truth is I can't see any intelligence in some of the stuff said here and since the marker of homo sapiens sapiens is intelligence perhaps some of you don't exist.

j.

This page left intensionally blank.

Hi,

There was a paper published some years ago concerning the splitting of E8 x E8 symmetry into baryonic and shadow matter. Even if the splitting was roughly similar, non-baryonic matter would unlikely form 90% of the so-called unseen matter/energy.

Alan.

Hi alienx,

I have not have time to read your article. I looks mathematically intense! I am not too mathematically inclined, but I intend to read it. As far as proving life after death for sceptical scientists and others, good luck. God requires faith, so sceptics will not likely find evidence. "Faith precedes the miracle" seems to be his motto. I have seen some miracles and so have many others.

regards,

S

Good Morning Standards Guy,

Thanks for your email.

As you intend to read the long paper on Matter, Gravity etc., let me help out a little - I'm not that enamoured with maths either.

The paper, like so many others,depends on the word 'if'.

If the basic structure of space is a lattice of solitonic nature, maybe by stochastic resonance solitons eventually take a form that physics calls sub-atomic particles. However, these particles that nevertheless have a wave nature remain subject to bombardment of radiation from the lattice (zero-point radiation). It is the effect of the ZP radiation on sub-atomic particles (as soon as they become such particles) that alters them in a way that bestows on them an attractive nature for each other. In 'neutral' charged atoms, that attraction is called gravity.

The second paper was an opportunity to say that a certain line of existing research by Korotkov could go further. In passing, I could not resist giving the Anthropic Principle and Relativity a hard time.

Kindest Regards,

Alan.