How to understand Vacuum: T=0K ?

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
How to understand Vacuum: T=0K ?
==.
Physics (classical + quantum) lives under shadow of Vacuum.
I want throw light on this Vacuum.
Three theories explain the Vacuum T=0K :
a) theory of ideal gas because its temperature is T=0K,

b) QED theory because this theory explain interaction
photon / electron not only with matter but with vacuum too,

c) Euler’s equation: e^ i(pi) = - 1, because only in the
negative vacuum T=0K can exist ‘ virtual imaginaries particles’
which Euler described by his formula: e^ i(pi) + 1= 0.
=.
Without Vacuum T=0K there isn’t Physics,
there isn’t Philosophy of Physics.
====.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
==============.
 

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
Does someone want to understand
quantum theory without the vacuum ?
Does someone want to understand quantum
virtual imaginaries particles without the vacuum
and without Euler’s imaginary equation: e^ i(pi) = - 1?
Does a learned man want to understand the essence
of Existence without vacuum ?

An useless work.
=.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Euler was not describing virtual particles with that equation, it dates to the 1740s, centuries before anyone thought of virtual particles. It emerged from his analysis of Taylor series expansions of the trig functions and the definition of e.
 

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
After proving Euler's identity during a lecture, Benjamin Peirce,
a noted American 19th-century philosopher, mathematician,
and professor at Harvard University, stated that
"it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it,
and we don't know what it means, but we have proved it,
and therefore we know it must be the truth."
#
Stanford University mathematics professor Keith Devlin said,
"Like a Shakespearean sonnet that captures the very essence
of love, or a painting that brings out the beauty of the human
form that is far more than just skin deep, Euler's Equation reaches
down into the very depths of existence."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler's_identity
=====..

"it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it,
and we don't know what it means, . . . . .’
. . . but . . .
‘ Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence."
===..
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
I understand Euler's Identity, and I know what it means, and I know how to prove it, there's nothing particularly mystical about it, it just demonstrates that exponential, trigonometric, and complex functions are related. Given what we know of mathematics it shouldn't surprise anyone that its various bits are connected. It would be much more surprising if they weren't, that would almost certainly mean something was badly wrong somewhere.
 

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
Euler's Equation and Reality.
=.
Mr. Dexter Sinister wrote:
‘ I understand Euler's Identity,
and I know what it means, and I know how to prove it,
there's nothing particularly mystical about it,
it just demonstrates that exponential, trigonometric,
and complex functions are related.
Given what we know of mathematics it shouldn't surprise
anyone that its various bits are connected.
It would be much more surprising if they weren't, that would
almost certainly mean something was badly wrong somewhere.’

Mr. Gary wrote:
Mathematics is NOT science.
Science is knowledge of the REAL world.
Mathematics is an invention of the mind.
Many aspects of mathematics have found application
in the real world, but there is no guarantee.
Any correlation must meet the ultimate test:
does it explain something about the real world?
As an electrical engineer I used the generalized
Euler's equation all the time in circuit analysis:

exp(j*theta) = cos(theta) + j*sin(theta).

So it works at that particular level in electricity.
Does it work at other levels, too?
Logic cannot prove it.
It must be determined by experiment, not by philosophizing.
====..
Thinking about theirs posts I wrote brief article:
Euler's Equation and Reality.
=.
a)
Euler's Equation as a mathematical reality.
Euler's identity is "the gold standard for mathematical beauty'.
Euler's identity is "the most famous formula in all mathematics".
‘ . . . this equation is the mathematical analogue of Leonardo
da Vinci’s Mona Lisa painting or Michelangelo’s statue of David’
‘It is God’s equation.’, ‘ It is a mathematical icon.’
. . . . etc.
b)
Euler's Equation as a physical reality.
"it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it,
and we don't know what it means, . . . . .’
‘ Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence’
‘ Is Euler's Equation about fundamental matters?’
‘It would be nice to understand Euler's Identity as a physical process
using physics.‘
‘ Is it possible to unite Euler's Identity with physics, quantum physics ?’
==.
My aim is to understand the reality of nature.
Can Euler's equation explain me something about reality?
To give the answer to this question I need to bind
Euler's equation with an object - particle.
Can it be math- point or string- particle or triangle-particle?
No, Euler's formula has quantity (pi) which says me that
the particle must be only a circle .
Now I want to understand the behavior of circle - particle and
therefore I need to use spatial relativity and quantum theories.
These two theories say me that the reason of circle – particle’s
movement is its own inner impulse (h) or (h*=h/2pi).
a)
Using its own inner impulse (h) circle - particle moves
( as a wheel) in a straight line with constant speed c = 1.
We call such particle - ‘photon’.
From Earth – gravity point of view this speed is maximally.
From Vacuum point of view this speed is minimally.
In this movement quantum of light behave as a corpuscular (no charge).
b)
Using its own inner impulse / intrinsic angular momentum
( h* = h / 2pi ) circle - particle rotates around its axis.
In such movement particle has charge, produce electric waves
( waves property of particle) and its speed ( frequency) is : c>1.
We call such particle - ‘ electron’ and its energy is: E=h*f.

In this way I (as a peasant ) can understand the reality of nature.
==.
I reread my post.
My God, that is a naïve peasant's explanation.
It is absolutely not scientific, not professor's explanation.
Would a learned man adopt such simple and naive explanation?
Hmm, . . . problem.
In any way, even Mr. Dexter Sinister and Mr. Gary
wouldn't agree with me, I want to say them
' Thank you for emails and cooperation’
=.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
=.
P.S.
' They would play a greater and greater role in mathematics –
and then, with the advent of quantum mechanics in the twentieth
century, in physics and engineering and any field that deals with
cyclical phenomena such as waves that can be represented by
complex numbers. For a complex number allows you to represent
two processes such as phase and wavelenght simultaneously –
and a complex exponential allows you to map a straight line
onto a circle in a complex plane.'

/ Book: The great equations. Chapter four.
The gold standard for mathematical beauty.
Euler’s equation. Page 104. /

#
Euler's e-iPi+1=0 is an amazing equation, not in-and-of itself,
but because it sharply points to our utter ignorance of the
simplest mathematical and scientific fundamentals.
The equation means that in flat Euclidean space, e and Pi happen
to have their particular values to satisfy any equation that relates
their mathematical constructs. In curved space, e and Pi vary.
/ Rasulkhozha S. Sharafiddinov . /
===============…
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Math ain't a science? Nonsense. Sciences are philosophies used to describe the universe and its contents. Math is a descriptor of these philosophies. Logically then, it is a science in itself.
I agree with Dex; all the Euler formula does is describe the relationship between trig functions and exponential functions. Nothing mystical about it.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
a)
Using its own inner impulse (h) circle - particle moves
( as a wheel) in a straight line with constant speed c = 1.
We call such particle - ‘photon’.
From Earth – gravity point of view this speed is maximally.
From Vacuum point of view this speed is minimally.
In this movement quantum of light behave as a corpuscular (no charge).
b)
Using its own inner impulse / intrinsic angular momentum
( h* = h / 2pi ) circle - particle rotates around its axis.
In such movement particle has charge, produce electric waves
( waves property of particle) and its speed ( frequency) is : c>1.
We call such particle - ‘ electron’ and its energy is: E=h*f.



An electron follows a helical path same as planets same as suns same as galaxies
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
what's a particle?
what's a circle?
what's a wave?

how do we get a wave out of a plane circle?
a helix makes a wave the nucleus helical electron orbit make a pulse or a blink in and out the nucleus drags the electron, something like that, motion is like a snake, you've seen the two serpent staff?
 
Last edited:

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
Math ain't a science? Nonsense.
Sciences are philosophies used to describe the universe and its contents.
Math is a descriptor of these philosophies.
Logically then, it is a science in itself.
I agree with Dex;
all the Euler formula does is describe the relationship between trig functions
and exponential functions. Nothing mystical about it.

The learned men confuse the mathematical tools with the
physical reality and therefore we have math-physical fairy-tales.
=.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Mathematics is an indispensable and powerful tool where it has been demonstrated that it applies to a real world experience. However, it is inappropriate and, as Dingle points out, potentially dangerous, to give credence to deductions arising purely from the language of mathematics. The problem is that mathematicians now dominate physics and it is fashionable for them to follow Einstein’s example, with fame going to those with the most fantastic notions that defy experience and common sense. So we have the Big Bang, dark matter, black holes, cosmic strings, wormholes in space, time travel, and so on and on. It has driven practically minded students from the subject. There is an old Disney cartoon where the scientist is portrayed with eyes closed, rocking backwards in his chair and sucking on a pipe, which at intervals emits a smoke-cloud of mathematical symbols. Much of modern physics is a smoke-screen of Disneyesque fantasy. Inappropriate mathematical models are routinely used to describe the universe. Yet the physicists hand us the ash from their pipes as if it were gold dust. If only they would use the ashtrays provided.
“It seems that every practitioner of physics has had to wonder at some point why mathematics and physics have come to be so closely entwined. Opinions vary on the answer. Bertrand Russell acknowledged “Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the physical world, but because we know so little.” …Mathematics may be indispensable to physics, but it obviously does not constitute physics.”
- Klein & Lachièze-Rey, THE QUEST FOR UNITY – The Adventure of Physics.

Antigravity? | holoscience.com | The Electric Universe
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Sometimes the mathematics anticipates the physics, with probably the most famous case being the discovery of anti-matter, but probably not often enough to be a good guide to where physics should go. Lee Smolin in The Trouble With Physics makes essentially that point. The quantum and general relativity theories have been spectacularly successful within their realms of applicability and demonstrably do describe real physical things and processes, but they remain fundamentally inconsistent and incomplete. That has driven a lot of effort toward unification, with some success, electromagnetism and the nuclear weak and strong forces have been brought together and their separation in the present universe explained, but I'm inclined to agree with Smolin that physics has got lost in mathematics a bit in the last generation. String theory in all its manifestations, like M-theory and branes and all that stuff, has generated some fascinating and very creative new mathematics, but no physics. It predicts and explains nothing that existing theory doesn't also predict and explain, has no known tests in physical reality, and almost seems to predict that there cannot be any, the entities involved are too small and the energy levels necessary to probe them too high. A theory that predicts there are 10^500 universes and also predicts they will forever be undetectable doesn't strike me as legitimate physics.

And for the record DB, your cherished electric universe theory doesn't resolve any of the issues, and in fact flies in the face of the evidence.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
This is not a Birkeland Current

Posted on February 18, 2013 by Mel Acheson
Filaments of dust obscure starlight near the center of the Milky Way. Credit: ESO


Feb 19, 2013
It twists like a Birkeland Current; it’s stringy like a Birkeland Current; it’s dense like a Birkeland Current; but Everyone Knows (if they want to pursue a career in astronomy) that There is No Such Thing as Electricity in Space.
The press release for this new image of the Pipe Nebula recalls René Magritte’s painting of a pipe, on which he painted “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” (“This is not a pipe”). His point was that the image was not the thing. Images must be interpreted.
Aah! says the canny epistemologer, but so must sensory impressions be interpreted: even “the thing” is an interpretation in reference to some general, usually preconceived, ideas about the context (aka a theory). We become so used to interpreting things according to our familiar and habitual preconceptions that we are unaware we’re interpreting. “Obviously” (the word of the day for the unexamined mind), it’s gravity, what else could it be period. Modern consensus astronomers seem to miss that point.
Interpreted in conformity with consensus astronomy, this is another “dark” thing to display on their shelf of dark things: dark matter, dark energy, and really-really dark holes. It’s “a vast dark cloud of interstellar dust.” It’s “so thick it can block out the light from the stars beyond.” “The dust and gas will clump together under the influence of gravity and more and more material will be attracted until the star is formed.”
Did you notice the preconceived idea that darkened the interpretation? “nder the influence of gravity.” Anyone familiar with Alfvén’s work might have added “or electricity,” thereby admitting a twinkle of scientific provisionality into the darkness of the Closed Gravitational Mind.
The preconceived idea of the Electric Universe is, of course, a Birkeland Current. It does have a few characteristics to recommend it: The z-pinch force along a current will attract material almost like gravity does, but with important exceptions: The z-pinch force is cylindrical, not spherical (hence attracting material into filaments). It’s also more powerful, declining with the first power of the distance, not the square. The double layers that form along the boundaries of the currents tend to produce sharply defined edges on the filaments. And it has been observed in laboratory settings to trigger instabilities that might be interpreted as star-like.
But such an idea is…unfamiliar. Maybe we can call it a “dark” idea.
Mel AchesonThis is not a Birkeland Current | thunderbolts.info




DB (please excuse the lengthy article)

I wonder what the vacuum is around that immense carpet sweeper?
 

socratus

socratus
Dec 10, 2008
1,131
17
38
Israel
www.worldnpa.org
. . . the electric universe . . . ? !
=.
Vacuum energy is some kind of energy in the infinite space
between billion and billion galaxies.
In this infinite space virtual potential energy particles exist
with energy: E=Mc^2.
Using inner impulse h*=h/2pi they appears from vacuum
as phenomena with energy: E=h*f
The effects of vacuum energy can be experimentally observed
in various phenomena such as spontaneous emission
the Casimir effect and the Lamb shift.
===..
socratus