* The Universe from Nothing: T=0K. (by*Israel Socratus)


socratus
-1
#1
* The existing interpretation of quantum mechanics is contrary to common sense.*
* * * * WHY?
================

* The Universe from Nothing: T=0K. (by*Israel Socratus)
====...
Maybe 99% thinks that everything began from big-bang.
A few % have another opinion:
Book 'A universe from nothing' by Lavrence M. Kruass.
===.
My opinion.
Why* everything was started from Nothing ?
Because there is fundamental fact in Nature :
The critical density in the whole Universe* is so small
that it cannot 'close'* the Universe into sphere.
And therefore the Universe as whole is flat - infinite flat.
But what to do with 'infinity' physicists don't know
and they try to escape (throw* out) concept of 'infinity'.
===..
I say that infinite (eternal) nothing has one physical
parameter: T=0K* and therefore* nothing is not nothingness.
We can use many theories to understand condition of T=0K continuum :

1) Theory of ideal gas* ( temperature is T=0K )
2) Hawking black hole radiation* ( temperature is T=0K )
3)* Bose-Einstein condensate* ( temperature is T=0K )
4) Dark energy* ( nothing is some kind of infinite energy )
5) Dark matter* ( consist of virtual particles, antiparticles )
6) SRT** ( explain behavior of quantum particles in nothingness )
7) QT** ( explain the reason and laws of quantum particles behavior )

These theories are subject for rethinking and ,by the way,
** such interpretation** obeys* Occam's* razor.
============...
P.S.
Scientists say:
Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) was proved
* ** that Big Bang* theory is correct.
* ** My opinion.
Have you see the waves on the surface of sea ?
But deep down of* the sea* , you know, the picture is different.
Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR ) is only surface of infinite zero vacuum.
Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) is a false vacuum.
Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR ) is result of work
(fluctuation) of virtual particles.
Deep down of the 'Dirac's sea'* is state of* zero vacuum* T=0K
* with potential negative virtual particles: - E=Mc^2.
And according to the 'Law of conservation* and transformation* energy/mass'
these** virtual negative* particles* can change their potential state
into real* active*positive* particles with energy E=hf.
( Casimir effect, Lamb shift )
Quantum effects (fluctuations)* are dominate in the Universe.
=====================
Best wishes
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
============================
 
socratus
#2
Together with Brandon Carter and Jim Bardeen, Hawking wrote a paper, published
. . . . .
. . . the team commented, '' In fact the effective temperature of a black hole is
absolute zero . . . No radiation could be emitted from the hole.''

/ Book: Stephan Hawking, A life in science,
by Michael White and John Gribbin, page 156./

Later, using concept of entropy and Heisenberg uncertainty principle,
Hawking changed his mind and wrote that black hole can emit
( Hawking radiation )
============================================
 
socratus
#3
Physics Professor Baumgarte Describes 100 Years of Gravity
April 1, 2015
"Special relativity is based on the observation that the speed of light is always the same,
independently of who measures it, or how fast the source of the light is moving with
respect to the observer. Einstein demonstrated that as an immediate consequence,
space and time can no longer be independent, but should rather be considered
a new joint entity called "spacetime. But special relativity describes physics in the absence
of gravity, whereas general relativity describes gravity in terms of the curvature of spacetime.

Physics Professor Baumgarte Describes 100 Years of Gravity | Bowdoin News


Today scientists are trying to reconcile Newton's absolute time and Einstein's spacetime.

========================================
 
socratus
#4
a) According to Newton, absolute time and space respectively are independent
aspects of objective reality

b) In Einstein's theories, the ideas of absolute time and space were superseded by
the notion of absolute spacetime in special relativity, and curved absolute spacetime
in general relativity

c) SRT is theory without gravity but with an absolute spacetime.
It means, we need to take Newton's absolute time and Newton's absolute space
simultaneously together in order to have Einstein's spacetime.
Newton's absolute time + Newton's absolute space = Einstein's spacetime.

d) And this absolute spacetime can be curved by masses ( for example:
by Sun masses ) in some local region of absolute Einstein's spacetime.

e) According to GRT the curvature depends on masses and its speed.
And because masses (of stars and planets) are different so every local
region has its own gravity-space and gravity-time. For example: Earth
has its own gravity-space and gravity-time,* and Venus or Mars has
another gravity-space and gravity-time. But for humans on the Earth
their Earth's gravity-space and Earth's gravity-time seems absolute.

==========================================
 
Cliffy
#5
It's all a hologram socratus. It is just you projecting the universe in your mind. Mathematics is limited to the 3rd dimension which is also a hologram. But if you like mental masturbation, have at 'er.
 
socratus
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

a) According to Newton, absolute time and space respectively are independent
aspects of objective reality

b) In Einstein's theories, the ideas of absolute time and space were superseded by
the notion of absolute spacetime in special relativity, and curved absolute spacetime
in general relativity

c) SRT is theory without gravity but with an absolute spacetime.
It means, we need to take Newton's absolute time and Newton's absolute space
simultaneously together in order to have Einstein's spacetime.
Newton's absolute time + Newton's absolute space = Einstein's spacetime.

d) And this absolute spacetime can be curved by masses ( for example:
by Sun masses ) in some local region of absolute Einstein's spacetime.

e) According to GRT the curvature depends on masses and its speed.
And because masses (of stars and planets) are different so every local
region has its own gravity-space and gravity-time. For example: Earth
has its own gravity-space and gravity-time,* and Venus or Mars has
another gravity-space and gravity-time. But for humans on the Earth
their Earth's gravity-space and Earth's gravity-time seems absolute.

==========================================

Senior writer Natalie Wolchover described this situation in another way :
Quantum Gravity’s Time Problem
December 1, 2016

The effort to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity means reconciling totally
different notions of time. In quantum mechanics, time is universal and absolute;
its steady ticks dictate the evolving entanglements between particles.
But in general relativity (Albert Einstein's theory of gravity), time is relative and dynamical,
a dimension that's inextricably interwoven with directions X, Y and Z into a four-dimensional
"space-time" fabric."

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20161...-time-problem/

===============================================
 
socratus
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

Senior writer Natalie Wolchover described this situation in another way :
Quantum Gravity’s Time Problem
December 1, 2016

The effort to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity means reconciling totally
different notions of time. In quantum mechanics, time is universal and absolute;
its steady ticks dictate the evolving entanglements between particles.
But in general relativity (Albert Einstein's theory of gravity), time is relative and dynamical,
a dimension that's inextricably interwoven with directions X, Y and Z into a four-dimensional
"space-time" fabric."

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20161...-time-problem/

===============================================

Why did scientists call Einstein's /Minkowski absolute a four-dimensional
spacetime as a " fabric " ?

And '' If space-time is a fabric, so to speak, then what are its threads? ''
Zeeya Merali
Theoretical physics: The origins of space and time

Many researchers believe that physics will not be complete until it can explain not just
the behaviour of space and time, but where these entities come from.
Zeeya Merali
28 August 2013
https://www.nature.com/news/theoreti...d-time-1.13613

I want to correct Zeeya Merali.
It needs to write:
Many researchers believe that physics will not be complete until it can explain not just
the behaviour of Gravity-space and Gravity-time, but where these entities come from.

In such description the situation is more clear.

============================
 
socratus
+1
#8  Top Rated Post
The Nature of Vacuum
Published by Mayukh on July 24, 2018
. . . it turns out that “nothing’ is one of the most interesting something !!
. . . it turns out that empty space is far from nothing.
. . . what would a perfect empty space look like?
. . .virtual particles play a crucial role in our analysis
of the nature of the vacuum.
. . quantum conservation laws must be obeyed
so most virtual particles are created in particle-antiparticle pairs

But how do we verify the existence of these elusive particles?
The 1st hint of the existence of virtual particles came in
the year of 1947 when Wills Lamb . . . .
In 1948 the Dutch physicist Hendric Casimir came up with
a brilliant scheme to detect these virtual particles and vacuum energy.
The observation is that accelerating expansion of the universe.
It is hypothesized that dark energy itself maybe vacuum energy.

A simulation of empty space was made by crunching up
calculation from the Quantum Chromo Dynamics,
the theory of fundamental particle called quarks,
which are the building blocks of protons, neutrons
and how they interact with each other.

QFT with its dependence on virtual particles and
vacuum fluctuations is one of the most successful theories
and yet its prediction on the strength of vacuum energy
seems to be so wildly off.

/ Published by Mayukh on July 24, 2018 /
The Nature of Vacuum - Understanding nothingness of space
===
Attached Images
THE ETHER.jpg (12.1 KB, 0 views )
 
socratus
#9
The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex?
/ Paul Dirac /
#
Vacuum -- the very name suggests emptiness and nothingness –
is actually a realm rife with potentiality, courtesy of the laws
of quantum electrodynamics (QED). According to QED,
additional, albeit virtual, particles can be created in the vacuum,
allowing light-light interactions
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/768.html
#
The most fundamental question facing 21st century physics will be:
What is the vacuum? As quantum mechanics teaches us, with
its zero point energy this vacuum is not empty and the word
vacuum is a gross misnomer!
/ Friedwardt Winterberg /
#
When the next revolution rocks physics, chances are it will be
about nothing—the vacuum, that endless infinite void.
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug...-of-everything
============
Today Zero Vacuum (T=0K) is banned from Physics
==============
Attached Images
images No clothes.jpg (10.7 KB, 0 views )
 
socratus
+1
#10
The Great-Fool Theory.
Once upon a time (maybe 14 billion years ago) all
the matter of the Universe was squeezed into a
''singular-point'' by the Gravity power.
Why this Great theory is fool ?
a) two electrons in the Universe would not allow
such scenario, because they hate each other.
b) the power of each electron is about 10^40 times
stronger than Gravity power.
=========
Attached Images
GBB.jpg (9.4 KB, 0 views )
 
socratus
#11
Discuss the three laws of thermodynamics.
System and Surroundings
In order to avoid confusion, scientists discuss thermodynamic values in reference to a system and its surroundings. Everything that is not a part of the system constitutes its surroundings. The system and surroundings are separated by a boundary. For example, if the system is one mole of a gas in a container, then the boundary is simply the inner wall of the container itself. Everything outside of the boundary is considered the surroundings, which would include the container itself.
The boundary must be clearly defined, so one can clearly say whether a given part of the world is in the system or in the surroundings. If matter is not able to pass across the boundary, then the system is said to be closed; otherwise, it is open. A closed system may still exchange energy with the surroundings unless the system is an isolated one, in which case neither matter nor energy can pass across the boundary.
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/in...hermodynamics/
====
My opinion.
There are two systems:
Zero vacuum system T=0K and material system ( billion and billion galaxies)
#
Absolute zero vacuum system is an infinite / eternal reference frame.
Absolute zero system is some kind of infinite dynamic energy continuum.
This zero vacuum dynamic energy continuum gives birth to potential
quantum particles that can do useful work to arise up the temperature
from T=0K to temperature of hot stars and create surrounding material world.
#
In Casimir effect, Lamb shift, vacuum fluctuations was shown the
reality of such kind of quantum particles.
====
Attached Images
 
MHz
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

The Great-Fool Theory.
Once upon a time (maybe 14 billion years ago) all
the matter of the Universe was squeezed into a
''singular-point'' by the Gravity power.
Why this Great theory is fool ?
a) two electrons in the Universe would not allow
such scenario, because they hate each other.
b) the power of each electron is about 10^40 times
stronger than Gravity power.
=========

How about all of our scientific conclusions are flawed. Science does give us a nice set of laws based on what we can observe and logic fills in the blanks. The blank not being filled in in the big-bang theory is where did the mass that is the 'known' universe come from in the first place.
I'm comfortable with 'an event' happening 14B years ago but I take it back farther to 140BYA and 40BYA being when the mass that is the universe began to clump together. Prior to that mass could still have had volume and weight but no clumping was taking place because the pieces were a long, long ways apart.
Nothing can ever get so big its own gravity detonates it. Compression adds heat, heat causes the core to expand rather than collapsing even further. The A-Bomb was an outer shell of HE that was arranged in a ball so the center of all the blasts would meet in the center and 'kaboom'.

For whatever reason all bodies of mass seem to rotate around it's own center of gravity so pretty much everything has an equator and 2 poles. The 2 poles are the weak spots in the spinning ball and that would be like removing the HE charges from top and bottom of the bomb and getting the same results.
A better explanation would use planet earth and the solar system as a model that follows the same pattern if the universe is 'fractal' in nature'.
This is a draft concept.
140-40BYA the place where matter is found stayed the same, something like the rings of Saturn or the Asteroid Belt in that there were no particles joining together 40BYA that changed and 2 bodies began to form and 14BYA the two bodies joined and because the cores were similar some matter went to the core rather than staying at the surface and allowing for a controlled expansion it went through a violent one. (in our estimation) 140B years from now the rapid expansion that is happening today may be at a different rate.


The model of the earth is it was a spinning ball that was in balance with its surrounding in that it was able to shed as much heat as it was creating for it's size. At some point the earth's gravity was able to lock the moon into an orbit that allowed the core of the moon to be pulled to the earth and when it descended to the earths for that extra matter started cracking the fragile crust.


Back to the big bang, 15BYA the universe was stable as far as collapsing in on itself then more mass came in that was so dense it descended to the core and that caused the expansion we say is going on today. I'm willing to go along but it means we are like an expanding balloon so what we see as a complete vacuum is actually a HP zone and the lower pressure is in the direction the universe is expanding into. Since we have estimations on the total mass and the expansion rathe we should be able to get a graph that shows the various pressure differences.


The above allows for a big-bang but slightly different and that would have to apply to other objects in the universe. Galaxies are long lived and we are guessing when we say we know how they work. Like the universe they have the poles as the weak spots. For the number of galaxies and number of stars we should be seeing many nova like events yet they are few and far between. Galaxies probably have a wobble like earth does and unlike the earth at the poles there are 'visible jets'. Most say that is coming out from an imploding galaxy so that could be what we call a star going nova.

In the theory that galaxies spin the other way and shed stars instead of eating them the jets would me nits of new mass that is being added to the galaxy
Hawaii sit over a spot where magma descends back to the core. Magma 2x the density of granite is is being pulled into even denser material and the volcano outflows reflect the magma that is being displaced. That is the part of the jets that we see as super nova and the dividing line is probably some distance from the core of the galaxy.


I have no idea of how fast we spin but our position in the galaxy points to us being a lot closer to going off into blackness that becoming one with the core of the Milky Way Galaxy.




 
darkbeaver
#13
. The universe is eternal, no beginning and no end, consciousness is eternal, no beginning and no end. Time is a concept and has no physicality and cannnot be conflated with energy nor matter nor space,speed and distance are also concepts. The warping of space time is perhaps the stupiest idea ever to have been contemplated by science. Consciousness is not generated by or in the brain it is recieved by the brain from the field of universal consciousness filling the universe.
 
socratus
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

I have no idea of how fast we spin but our position in the galaxy points to us being a lot closer to going off into blackness that becoming one with the core of the Milky Way Galaxy.

the picture doesn't show black hole in the Milky Way
#
Scientists Unravel Secrets of Monster Black Hole at Center of Milky Way
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...lky-way-space/
Attached Images
mbh.jpg (6.1 KB, 0 views )
 
MHz
#15
So gravity at infinity doesn'y pull mass towards itself as fast as possible but lets it swirl around and around and around andconsumes the galaxy as slow as possible.


If you are supposed to be a 'thinker' why would you post something that the 'underlying facts' are 'somebody said something'. Seriously I thought you had a few more smarts than the local trolls.


How much does the gravity of our sun slow down the light escaping from it. What is the speed of light just before it enters the 'black-hole'?


Do all the stars closer to the core of the galaxy, than we are, show the same color shift that shows they are even headed towards the core and not coming out of the core? How about the stars 'behind us', do they show a color-shift that shows they are catching up with us or is the distance getting bigger.


Maybe it is time to get you to answer that chute opening on Mars question as so far not one person here has taken that on and they are clearly liars to one degree or another in their feeble attempts to support the collective. Might as well go for a clean sweep where there is nothing but 'door-knobs' posting here.
 
MHz
#16
This is even above your pay-grade. 1:15 is zero gravity is it, lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOIj7AgonHM
Astronaut Tips: How to Wash Your Hair in Space



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2EYXqlgXWo
ISS Hair V Zero-G Airplane Hair. Fake Space.
 
socratus
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

This is even above your pay-grade. 1:15 is zero gravity is it, lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOIj7AgonHM
Astronaut Tips: How to Wash Your Hair in Space
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2EYXqlgXWo
ISS Hair V Zero-G Airplane Hair. Fake Space.

maybe to Wash Your Hair in Space is gravity effect
but Your Erection in Space is electrical effect
===
 
socratus
#18
Universe Temperature = 0°KELVIN (-273°C / -459°F)
Should 0°Kelvin Temperature be Considered
a Universal Force To do Work?
http://zerokelvintheory.com/
===
 
socratus
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

Universe Temperature = 0°KELVIN (-273°C / -459°F)
Should 0°Kelvin Temperature be Considered
a Universal Force To do Work?
http://zerokelvintheory.com/
===


4. This inefficient assumption, now proposes a modern
explanation to better understand the forces of nature.
Perhaps the negative force of Kelvin temperature has
not been fully explored.
This creates new theoretical ideas to explain: why extreme
cold temperatures emit negative force, which create
unexplained phenomena through density effects.
It also allows us to conclude, Kelvin temperature still
remains partly incomplete: for reasons that we assume,
most of the Universe to be dark and empty space.
http://zerokelvintheory.com/
 
socratus
#20
Zero-point energy in Classical and Quantum theories.
===
Zero-point energy (ZPE) is the difference between the lowest
possible energy that a quantum mechanical system may have,
and the classical minimum energy of the system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy
a) quantum mechanical system
b) classical mechanical system
Two different systems.
#
Unlike in classical mechanics, quantum systems constantly fluctuate
in their lowest energy state due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy
a) Atoms of ''classical mechanics'' at 0-K (-273°C ) are totally devoid
of kinetic energy and cannot fluctuate or move.
b) Quantum particles at 0°KELVIN have movements and vibrations .
Two different objects.
=====
Attached Images
 
socratus
#21
True Facts About Cosmology (or, Misconceptions Skewered)
Posted on January 12, 2019 by Sean Carroll

. . . some true facts about cosmology that might serve as a useful corrective.

http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/...ions-skewered/
===
 
socratus
#22
Sunday, January 27, 2019
New Scientist creates a Crisis-Anticrisis Pair
==
“There are people who think that, using just the power of our minds,
we can understand what dark matter is, what quantum gravity is,”
says Arvanitaki.
“That’s not true. The only way forward is to have experiment
and theory move in unison.”

'' . . . if you play by everybody else’s rules,
you will make the same mistakes.

If you want to make a difference, you must be willing to accept
that people ridicule you, criticize you, and shun you.
Turok wasn’t prepared for any of this.
It had not even crossed his mind. ''

Posted by Sabine Hossenfelder
http://backreaction.blogspot.com/201...nticrisis.html
======
 
socratus
#23
CMBR - Origins
The universe began 13.8 billion years ago, and the CMBR
dates back to about 400,000 years after the Big Bang.
/ the 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics./
===
Going backward in time is possible to reconstruct two scenario.
Modern astrophysicists say:
According to cosmological calculations the universe began
13.8 billion years ago from very hot state and this fact
was attested by CMBR.
(in the future the CMBR would go down to zero and then . . . )
Alternative scenario.
Going backward in time from the CMBR the temperature
was dropped to zero. From zero (T=0K) the Universe was started.
Attestations:
a) according to Thermodynamics, ''Entropy'' would change
the equilibrium zero state.
b) according to Quantum Theory, quantum fluctuations
would destroyed the equilibrium zero state.
Conclusion
Sooner or later astrophysicists view would come
to alternative scenario ( T=0K )
=======
Attached Images
CMBR.jpg (14.8 KB, 0 views )
 
socratus
#24
“The laws of physics as we understand them make
it eminently plausible that our universe arose from nothing –
– no space, no time, no particles, nothing that we now know of.”
/ Lawrence Krauss /
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141...g-exist-at-all
====
 
socratus
#25
Outline of Zero Vacuum: T=0K
----
1 - The speed of light in the vacuum c=1
We cannot reach this speed, but it exist.
2 - Low Temperature Lab, Helsinki University of Technology.
"The record-low temperature was reached in a piece of
rhodium metal, which was cooled to 100 pK, or
0.000 000 000 1 degrees above the absolute zero.
The absolute zero is the limit of all temperatures,
-273.15 °C, a temperature one can never reach.
https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/NehemieCange.shtml
We cannot reach T=0K, but we can understand it structure
#
1 - The thermodynamics of ''Ideal Gas'' explains the structure of T=0K
2 - In T=0K quantum particles in the state of Bose–Einstein condensate
3 - Quantum electrodynamics explains the Entropy of Bose–Einstein condensate
===
 

Similar Threads

1
SRT by an uneducated Socratus.
by socratus | May 13th, 2013