03.02.10
Posted in Uncategorized at 9:11 am by Administrator
The entire subject of shadow people is both fascinating and controversial. To date, science has offered little in the way of an explanation for the reported phenomenon, other than the standard responses they have for any paranormal phenomena, which is in my opinion a cop out. The official hypotheses are:
1. Pareidolia
In most instances, witnesses report seeing shadow people in the peripheral areas of their vision. This area of vision is linked to the areas of the brain that recognizes patterns, however it provides less detail to the brain than macular (center-forward) vision. This can lead to a condition known as pareidolia, in which the brain incorrectly interprets random patterns of light/shadow or texture as being familiar patterns such as faces and human forms. The same condition can also be observed in macular vision in low light conditions, or when viewing a complex but random image. A common example would be perceiving a shadow, thrown by an item of furniture in a darkened room, as being a person.
On the other hand, our peripheral vision is also very sensitive to the invisible light spectrum. Our perception of Infrared and Ultraviolet occur in this area of vision. Is this a factor?
2. Hypnagogia
Also known as waking-sleep, hypnagogia is a documented physiological condition in which a person is part-way between sleeping and waking. During hypnagogia, a person can be conscious and aware of their environment, but also in a dream-like state where they can perceive images from their subconscious. People experiencing waking-sleep commonly report the sensation of lights or shadows moving around them, as well as other visual hallucinations. A feeling of dread is also a sensation that occurs when experiencing hypnagogia. Hypnagogia is sometimes known as ‘the faces in the dark phenomenon’ because those who experience this state commonly report seeing faces while experiencing waking-sleep. Similar hypotheses have been put forward linking this condition to a number of other apparent paranormal experiences, including alien abductions, paranormal nocturnal visitations, and religious experiences such as contact with angels or demons.
Additionally, this condition has been used as a catch all solution to UFO/Alien abductions, Sleep paralysis, and other paranormal related phenomena. While this may be the case in some instances, it certainly isn’t the case in all.
3. Chemical agents
The use of narcotics and psychotropic agents, including methamphetamine, cocaine, MDMA (Ecstasy) and LSD, can produce shadow human shaped hallucinations. Dopaminergic drugs such as pramipexole can sometimes cause these hallucinations. Common over-the-counter medication can also have a similar effect if taken in overdose (see diphenhydramine).
While I have seen this statement made repeatedly I have never seen any data whatsoever to back this up. In my opinion this is pure conjecture.
4. Electromagnetic fields
Demonstrated in laboratory conditions, electromagnetic fields have been demonstrated to interfere with the functions of the temporal lobe; creating altered states of perception in which auditory and visual hallucinations can occur.
A second example of recreating this phenomenon in a laboratory setting, researchers used electromagnetic fields to recreate many of the experiences reported during paranormal encounters including those of shadow people. Researchers have also documented correlations between variances in naturally-occurring magnetic fields and areas where paranormal events have been reported.
The primary source for this is of course the study performed by Dr. Michael Persinger in his God Helmet experiment. The issue here is these EMF waves were of a specific frequency to trigger specific effects, and were stimulating the brain via a very close proximity using an electrode. While this works in a lab, it is not a condition encountered in the field. To penetrate the skull, EMF has to be very intense, which would be an environmental anomaly also worth investigating for source. Since nearly all background EMF is in the 60 Hz range, and 60 Hz EMF is not associated with visual stimulation that creates hallucinations of shadow people, another source for the EMF needs to be identified. If that fails, then we have a deeper mystery. But back to Persinger, his work needs to be duplicated far more before we accept this as a norm and not an artifact. Studies do indicate that 1 in 3 people have a sensitivity to certain frequencies of EMF, but again, this would not explain all occurances.
5. Neurological conditions
Certain neurological conditions, such as photosensitive complex partial seizures and Dementia with Lewy bodies, have also been known to cause sufferers to see shadow people.
Again, this is a nice explanation, but not a realistic one. So what is a shadow person?
Folklore tells us about a number of paranormal beliefs for shadow people that have been drawn from various religions, parapsychology, metaphysics, demonology, and the occult. These include:
1. Specters
One proposal is that Shadow People represent a Thought form (egregore), ghost or demon that was created by events in which extreme physical/emotional stress/trauma has taken place, or which have been purposefully summoned through black magic or other occult practices. It has also been claimed by many paranormal pundits that they are unattended shadows or shades, said in some cultures to be similar to that of a ghost: a flicker of a life unable to end for some reason.
This may be true but we will have to prove it.
2. Interdimensional
A second belief is that they are creatures from another reality whose “dimension” occasionally overlaps with ours, allowing them to be partially visible, or that they represent creatures that exist on a separate plane of existence.
Based on my own research this line of thinking has the most validity if a shadow person turns out to be a being or entity. Again, we will have to prove this.
3. UFO
A third belief is that they are in some way related to Grey aliens, or to the Reptilian humanoids found in conspiracy beliefs such as those promoted by David Icke and others.
Again there is no proof. So I decided to determine what could cause the phenomena scientifically, and I stumbled upon an interesting concept. This concept involves the sub-atomic particle known as the “anti-photon”. My jorney took me through several lively conversations with physicists and other scientists from various yahoo physics groups on the web. Let me share some of the conversations. I will use only first names to protect identities.
My questions are in bold, with reposnses.
“This may seem odd, but since a photon is associated with light energy, is
there a corresponding opposite particle, that would be associated with a
lack of light, or even darkness? Perhaps a particle that cancels light?”
Here is what I got back:
“This could be the antiphoton.
The antiphoton is also a photon, exhibiting right handed spin, going the opposite way. There is no real left landed light in this world, but it would be present as exchange of momentum between positrons in a world of antimatter, where it would be the light, not darkness. In this world it would in theory cancel right handed light of equal frequency, annihilating the state space they animated. But in a trick of time, by exhibiting change, as I understand it, the resulting implosion will generate equal energy right handed photons from the right handed vacuum energy filling the gap. We see this happen in effect in electron positron interaction, which when interacting over a distance, is equivalent to right handed light and left handed antilight interaction. The cancellation results in a contraction of local spacetime that exhibits our notion of attraction and the other half of how handedness exhibits charge. Repulsion of like spins, and hence like charge, is by discrete expansion of local space time by instantiating independent state exhibiting photon exchange of momentum away, not fundamental by the magical influence at a distance on everything in the universe ordinarily associated with the notion of charge.”
-Jim-
Upon which I replied:
This is what I suspected, that there was an anti-photon.
Then I received:
“Remember that what is ordinarily called the antiphoton is just another
right handed photon. You may hear often that a photon is its own anti
particle.
But there is also the notion of the left handed photon, which is a
true antiparticle as it has opposite spin.”
-Jim-
“The question is does it cause an annihilation when contacting a photon of equal but opposite spin?
Opposite spin always cancels. In one sense that is all that happens
fundamentally in the quantum. The trick is that change propagates so
energy is often not always lost by such annihilation and may be in
effect doubled, conserving energy on average relative to a global
perspective.”
-Jim-
“Also, can a group of anti-photons co-exist in an environment without causing an annihilation if it does not encounter photons of equal spin?
We call momentum exchange between electrons photon exchanges, and we can call left handed anti photons exchange of momentum between positrons, these can coexist in space and do not necessarily annihilate. Since our world of matter is exhibited predominantly by electrons rather than positrons, annihilation of left handed light by electron interaction seems highly probable. However, when we see repulsion of two positive charges we are witnessing what is in effect, momentum exchange by exchange of left handed photons.”
-Jim-
You are helping me a great deal here. I will tell you why I am fishing here. I photographed a phenomenon commonly referred to as a shadow person. It is essentially a man-sized shadow of a person, but it is really more like a total absence of light. I believe the reason for this phenomenon is due to a quantum singularity of sorts, and I am trying to determine what it really may be. It occurs to me that a collection of anti-photons may be the culprit. On the other hand, there are still many unanswered questions, but it is a start.
“You may be on to the Dark force here, if we can measure it, it is more than a mere memeion, it has high energy, and great power.
In our manifest information ecology the dark force prunes, such that it may bloom. Much is in the memeion realm, efficiently propagating the meme supply chain, on every imaginable communication channel, chemical, biological, mental with interactions relatively between layers exhibiting reciprocal relations indirectly, mostly undiscovered.
Quantum spin is not turning around at all but seeming to have turned around in both directions to have ended up facing the same way, in a punctuated existence, exhibited only at full cycles, without substance between repetitions of meme propagation.
I consider particles to be memeions as subatomic particles are without independent substance intermittently exhibited as a pattern in the surrounding logical action, and because all particles and objects in this world instantiate a memeion translator or repeater in the information universe.
It would be very cool if the dark force was directly measurable in the visible light frequency. There are so many ways we experience the dark force, many of them very good, tough love. Creation and destruction go hand in hand in the construction of the machinery of our memetic world. Creation is always favored in the ecology since what exists is what repeats. Science is about what is repeatable. Memes are about patterns that repeat and transform as is existence itself.
Bi local quantum events happen on every scale and are apparently all that is happening in a realm where all levels of memetic interaction interact with each other in twisted hierarchies of control which can account for psychokinetic action as memetic, mental kinetic logical process. .Even the electron turns out to be nothing more than a meme we associate with a pattern of logical extression that repeats intermittently in a quantum logical system.
Saying left handed photons are a way of understanding the physical action of the dark force in our right handed world is valid. Left handed antimater action is our undoing in the world of matter. But to understand how it happens we can forget the photons as there are only perception of momentum exchanges we call photons as a cancelling, doubling, or conservation of action that is both logical and physically manifest. We need to consider the participants.
We might have a darkness of reflected light like a shadow, where antilight is directed by a directed listening for it. Or it could be like a resonance in space causing the migration of positrons to an object like region of space acting as anti muon memeons resulting in entropy of space time intervals in the visible light range.
I am not confident you will find the dark force in the visible range. Nature is always surprising in the channels it uses. It does not oblige us by using what we might expect. I believe mental and chemical effects of the dark force provide sufficient in mechanism at much lower energies accounts for experience. My own psychokinetic experiments to the contrary were as if there was a conspiracy of our collective mind making measurement of such effects taboo, contradicting our subjective experience of it. I don’t really believe the conspiracy theories; I think it is just constructed in surprising ways we have not imagined yet, at more efficient, lower energies, with more redundancy than it appears on first analysis.
The physical universe apparently has a collective quantum logical nature. Science models nature as a machine and that machine apparently has a discrete logical, memetic nature where memetic realms interact in collectively determining reality. It is equivalently an information system, more specifically an ecology of information.”
-Jim-
“I have thought about that possibility as an explanation for dark matter being antimatter and having antiphotons in its space. I still think this can be a right solution but it could be not so simple because light is additive and even getting null like in interferences it reappears afterwards. I believe what can cancel light is a strong magnetic field with the opposite spin.
Regards”
Globus
“Information loss in quantum systems is local to a system. Globally quantum action is never really lost and is purely additive by its synthesis. But decay, and entropy of a quantum system is what is expected to be experienced.
Antimater in our world might tend to have local entropy or darkening resulting from annihilations, but lots of ordinary light can also result.
A simpler explanation of dark matter is the effectively higher energy density, and hence greater mass, of the vacuum energy in the vicinity of mass due to space time warping.”
-Jim-
“I believe what can cancel light is a strong magnetic field with the opposite spin.”
-J-
“Pseudo left handed light is created with strong magnetic fields. Indirectly these could produce a darkening effect. But remember that a strong magnetic field is just what we call the effect of an inbalance in the number of up and down electrons and there is synthesis of space time at different rates in different directions as only like spins interact.
The whole system creates as much space time intervals as are destroyed. The destruction, or quantum logical contraction of twisted spacetime intervals is apparent in the attraction we see between opposite up/down orientation magnetic poles. The handedness, left/right is independent of up/down orientation and is not really canceled in a magnetic field, it is simply allowed to a lesser or greater extent by allowed interactions of like orientation. But the view that it is canceled in parts of the system cannot be said to be wrong.”
-Jim-
“Hi David,
It is not such a daft question as it sounds. According to Newton there should be an opposite reaction not just possible but evident. I get around this problem by uses two phases for a light photon with my F wave. In the 3D phase it acts as a real 3D particle (putting aside wave/matter duality for now) and in the 4D phase it acts as a real 4D particle. However I go a bit farther than this and say that anti particles are really those existing in 4D. The more they are shunted into 4D the more anti particle properties they exhibit.
Yours sincerely,”
-Alex-
I am leaning more towards a frequency perspective than a phase perspective. I am not sure phasing results in any significant factor.
“Hi David,
This is another feature of light that you have noticed!
It never seems to be out of phase. Even when bent around a massive star it eventually corrects itself.
I believe the answer to this is given by describing the cubic expansion of light in Newton’s cube.
To travel from corner to corner you need to travel at square root of 2 times the speed of light and the square root of 3 times c going from opposite corners of the cube.
I think I designed the Fwave as 1D light in 2D as 2F1. What matters really is that the F wave does elongate as we go above the speed of light. At the same time it reduces in amplitude so exactly the same work is done for one phase!
With my assertion that there is a restitution of space and time it seems obvious to me that the interaction of F waves or light will create a combination as for normal waveforms (eg water).
Light is further constricted by the properties of our 3D that exert an upper bound on the speed of light albeit that it acts as an inter dimensional force between 3D and 4D.
Now if we consider two opposing lights rays they don’t cancel each other. Fwaves for an electron would act like this.
Perhaps (I have not considered this before) the reason for this disparity is that the light photon is constantly acting as a form of energy that converts to mass and back to energy continually.
The chances of two light rays hitting each other in 3D at the peak of their phase is extremely unlikely.
Even if they did light spreads out so only the light at the centre line of the two light cones would cancel.
As far as I know this is the first explanation for this phenomenon.
Yours sincerely,”
Alex
“So what else is vital here? What happens when a photon and an antiphoton collide?
The two annihilate. A gamma ray is released.”
-Dim-
I think about a tx-plane of Minkowski’s space in which a photon moves (in the direction of increasing x). Time will also increase (the positive direction of t-axis). The Minkowski space is an R-invariant for electromagnetic phenomena occurring within it. Math-wise, R=PT (the relativistic reflection) 4-inversion, P is the space reflection, and T is the inversion (sign change) of time. Consequently due to the R-reflection, the directions of all axes are reversed, and time for photon subsequently flows backward. This would be the antiparticle property (I believe according to Stueckelberg-Feynman-Strel’tsov interpretation). This adequately demonstrates the negative energy of antiparticles.
This would be a clear indication of an antiphoton! As per Jim, he points out another vital difference between the photon and antiphoton. If the photon spin is directed along the momentum (the helicity λ=+1), then AFTER reflection, the momentum direction reverses but the spin direction (as an axial vector) does not change, in other words the helicity changes (λ=-1), then the distinctive observed difference of an antiphoton versus a photon would be the opposite sign of helicity, correct? I make this assumption based on the fact that an antineutrino is different from a neutrino. The lepton charge of the neutrino of course masks the fact that for massless particles the helicity sign is the indicator of antiparticle or particle.
May I then assume that the same valid reasoning can be applied to the photon analogues such as the graviton and the gluons (the quanta of gravitational and nuclear fields)? If the antigraviton differs from the graviton by the helicity sign only, then the antigluons can be distinguished from the corresponding gluons by the opposite “color charge”.
Or am I completely missing the point?
I think I lost everyone after that one. Everyone except Alex that is….
“Hi David,
I find it hard to dispute what you are saying. I note that Minkowski space is an R-invariant. This is similar to my saying that the 3D and 4D phases use exactly the same amount of energy. I don’t dispute that things work in reverse the direction of a ray of light does not effect its action. What we are looking for is cancellation.
I don’t believe that this exists. If we have two lamps turned on the light directly between them does not cancel; even if we allow for phase offsetting by moving them apart.
I suppose this can lead us to suggest that two light sources act to combine their
total output as if they were a single source. It is not easy at all to answer why this is so. Your finding about the change in helicity as it changes (ë=-1) reminds me of the orthogonal change between 3D and 4D phases of my F wave. Perhaps I am thinking about this all the wrong way? Let me put forward a suggestion off the top of my head…
I had presumed that at the peak of the photon’s 4D phase it consists
entirely of matter (and so too the anti-photon). Is it possible to have an anti-photon that is totally energy at this point in the phase? I suppose so but it would not traverse into 3D at the end of the 4D phase.
Unless of course I am missing something (assuming anti-photons exist).
Idea!
It would not be 100% matter at this point but 100% anti-matter so the possibility of crossing the 3D/4D boundary could exist. So I am not saying that anti-photons exist but I think they could do at least theoretically. Explaining this against observed behavior is problematic though.
Yours sincerely,”
Alex
Ok, so after all of this mumbo-jumbo quanta talk, what does it all mean?
It means the effect of what we call a shadow person may be able to be measured. While I have dismissed the cluster of dark particles known as anti-photons to be a possible cause via thought experiments, (anti-photons are a form of anti-matter, and may be the result of an interaction between time, space and a parallel universe, but would cause a very violent explosion if the encapsulating magnetic field failed) but I do believe there is a particle that absorbs light involved, and this too could also be the result of an interaction between time, space and a parallel universe . It would go far to explain why we measure Gamma radiation spikes in the proximity of this type of phenomena.
But either way, it reveals hope. If we can measure it, we can prove what it is.
Permalink
01.11.10
Posted in Uncategorized at 10:42 pm by Administrator
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/newbay/scn_201001/#/34
Permalink
09.16.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 9:03 pm by Administrator
Dangerous Knowledge Attached is a film about something we should all pay attention to. Settle back, get some popcorn and enjoy….
Permalink
09.15.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 7:11 pm by Administrator
Hey everyone. I realize it has been a long time since I wrote a personal blog, but to tell you the truth, I have been working on a book and writing a blog sort of takes the back seat when competing with that endeavor. I am not yet finished, but have taken time out to write this, as it has to do with an experience I recently had.
Specifically, I had a very unusual thing occur while I was in Williamsburg, Va. Labor Day weekend. I was in a house built in 1690. I watched a pewter salt shaker (kind of heavy) slide across a table by itself. I had a very high EMF modulating between 6 Hz and 9 Hz and appeared to be generated from approximately two feet off the floor about two feet ENE of the center of the room, based on triangulation readings from my three field detectors. This spontaneous EMF just materialized in thin air with no apparent source. Ion count, both positive and negative increased dramatically over 500%.
At the end I had a short burst of gamma radiation, about 350 mRADs
Now here is what that translates into with physics….Special thanks to Tony Bermanseder!
350 mrad=3.5 milliJoules for N.f=E/h~5.25×10^30 Hz
Now fine-structure this ‘frequency-energy’ equivalent into the measured gamma frequencies, say the basis ZPE (Zero Point Energy)-electron/positron frequency of 2.5×10^20 Hz. The observed energy is equal to so 20 billion electron-positron annihilations. Since the ‘telekinetic’ movement has no external energy input as source the energy supplied derives from the ZPE as stated.
The positional calibrations are varied, as holofractal magnification/diminution can apply on many scales. One very important boundary condition is the Schumann Harmonics. The perimeter of the earth is 40,000 km as a light path on the surface and has a Schumann basis of 7.5 Hz (300,000,000 km/s/40,000km). Consequently, at this frequency, otherwise ‘obscured’ phenomena will occur. This frequency also allows the light-matter interaction (characterized in the probability of the electromagnetic alpha fine-structure constant as 1 in 137) to maximize.
Another important calibration parameter is the ’size’ of the ‘merkabah’, being the Sqrt(15) as wavelength for a frequency of 77.46 MHz. This ‘merkabah’ frequency then is in harmonic to the Schumann frequency in 1:10^7. The Schumann frequency so has a minimum at 7.5; but many other resonances and harmonics.
So called ‘paranormal’ phenomena depend on a given region of space-time to become temporarily ‘isolated’ to partake in the holofractal nature of the universe.
What I have observed, so represents such an isolation, most likely having become ‘induced’ by either some ‘emotional, say suppressed’ energy or possibly from a transmitter at least 2 million kilometers from the center of the earth. Or quite simply, a “ghost”.
The Force required for the movement derives as follows:
F=dp/dt=d(mv)/dt=mdv/dt+vdm/dt
Use m=moGamma=(hf/c^2)/Sqrt(1-[v/c]^2)=(hf/c^2)/Sqrt(u)=(hf/c^2).f(u,v,t)
dm/dt=(dm/du)(du/dt) and where u(v)=1-[v/c]^2 for du/dv=-2v/c^2
dm/dt={(hf/c^2)(-1/2)Gamma^3}(-2v/c^2)dv/dt
F={dv/dt}(m+[hfv^2/c^4]Gamma^3) as the relativistic extension of Newton’s Law.
The first part applies to a constancy in mass m and the second engages special relativity. However this assumes that the frequency f remains constant as photonic inertia f=mc^2/h.
Then allowing the frequency f to vary:
F= dp/dt=d(hfv/c^2 Gamma)/dt=(h/c^2){f.d[vGamma]/dt + vGamma.df/dt}
F=(h/c^2){f.(v^2/c^2+1-v^2/c^2)Gamma^3.dv/dt + vGamma.df/dt}
F=(h/c^2){fGamma^3.dv/dt + vGamma.df/dt}
F= mGamma^3.dv/dt + (hvgroup/c^2).Gamma.df/dt)
F= Standard Acceleration Force + Quantum Alpha-Force; the latter normally ‘occultized’ due to the minuteness of the multiplier (h/c^2~10^-50).
The resonance or wormhole time differential for frequency is the entropy counter 9×10^60 as the square of the source frequency (of the wormhole).
In plain English, there is a very good chance I discovered an interdimensional wormhole.
I also know from personal experience, that the manifestation of a 4th spatial dimension superimposes onto the ordinary Minkowski metric. As said, the requirement for such a dimensional intersection (3D+T with 4D+T) is the encapsulation of a region of space.
This region is quantized in the following manner:
VolumexAngular Acceleration (df/dt)=NxUniversal Constant=NxElectron-Diameterxc^2
V3=2pi^2R^3 as dV4/dR for V4=pi^2R^4/2
Then the normal hyperspace vector is: R/4 related to the Planck-Area quantization of Black Holes (The surface area of a BH is quantized in Planck-Areas/4 as entropy count).
It is now possible to calculate the maximum resonance state for maximum entropy df/dt=fmax^2 and which crystallizes the wormhole boundary, ie. the Black Holes Inner Event Horizon and amenable to both activation as a sourced White Hole or a Sinked Black Hole.
For N=1 then; V=500/9×10^60=5.555×10^-59 cubic meters (or ‘quarto’ meters in V4)
For V3: R3=1.41×10^-20 meters as Compton-Radius with energy 14.03 TeV (yes this is the maximum energy for the LHC at Geneva, thus designed)
For V4 : R4=1.832×10^-15 meters and a ‘reduced’ energy of frequency 2.6×10^22 Hz or 0.11 GeV.
Recalling, that the calculations above invoke the maximum resonance state it nevertheless becomes apparent, that the practical utility of wormholes should engage the muon-mass (about 106 MeV), which then becomes coupled to the base-pionic quark-antiquark associations either charged (pion+- ~140MeV) or neutral (pion0~135 MeV).
Now the truly exciting thing about this is it throws open a new physics, because of the manner the quantum geometry (or blueprints) arrange the wave-functions of the quarks, coupled top leptonic rings.
The muon is a ‘heavy’ electron, due to the fact, that the up-down coupling is energy wise insufficient to transverse the nucleon diameter (about 5 fermi as an electron probability distribution and about 3 fermi as the size of a proton).
So forming resonance states of the up-quark as a charm quark and a resonance state for the down quark as a strange quark, will increase this energy to the required levels.
Detailed analysis then reveals how the unitary SU(3) symmetry of the standard model ‘falls into place’ as emergence of the quark-lepton family couplings.
There is a conundrum in regards to the wormhole utility however.
Quantum mechanics is precisely applicable and useful at the (3 fermi) scale of the classical electron radius, say in QED.
At larger scales, the quantum field theories come into play and with it the ‘classical electron’ is rendered as a ‘point particle’ with the associated difficulties of renormalization and finitization of working parameters, such as position and momentum.
Now in the calculation above, the ‘muonic electron’ requires a frequency of so 2.6×10^22 Hz for a 4-Radius vector of 1.8×10^-15 meters (2/3rds of the electron radius).
Therefore the requirement becomes a change in the frequency of the ‘muonic electron’ to accommodate a ‘matching’ of the frequency upon a quantized holofractal background.
In the case above, decreasing the muonic electron frequency by a factor of 1.51 would attain this harmonization between the 3-dimensional electron limit and its 4-dimensional extension. Then a frequency of 1.72×10^22 Hz would be able to ‘tap’ into the matrix-background defined ‘classical electron radius’ also at that frequency Eigenstate.
But most important, the 4th spatial (Kaluza-Klein) dimension of the hyperspace must become congruent with the 3rd spatial Riemann dimension for the ‘phenomena’ to manifest.
This physics is wormhole physics only in its fundamentals; what I term wormholes opening up and closing is the dimensional intersection of the Kaluza-Klein 5D with the Minkowski 4D. While I am fond of parallel universes, I realize they are not necessary, and now consider the hyperspace intersecting the Minkowski space.
Multiverses are a physical reality, however they remain ‘frozen’ until the Minkowski metric naturally ‘opens’ up the 4-radius as described in the above.
Then all of the spacetime presently embedded in an 11-dimensional ‘Strominger Matrix’ of extremal Black Hole Equivalence becomes 5-dimensional, with the ‘opening of wormholes’ as portals and conduits into outer space and ‘higher dimensions’ becoming ‘common place’. Hence the wormhole is a dimension in and of itself creating a connecting web that allows for entanglement to be possible. The c-invariance will hold, however due to the 4-Radius and the volumar quantization indicated above, the ‘tyranny of the metric’, will become infused by a ‘easement of the de Broglie phasechanges’ with ‘Velocity’ as the light path/time also becoming a scale factor R(n) multiplied by frequency modulators {V=R(n)F}.
Or then again, maybe not.
BUT I do have an extraordinary headache.
Permalink
08.03.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 8:02 pm by Administrator
By Andrew Chaikin
Editor, Space & Science
The irresistible, mind-boggling fantasy comes to just about everyone, sooner or later: What if everything we knew, our whole universe, was just a speck of dust on someone’s shoulder?
Of course, that’s not an idea astronomers take seriously. But many cosmologists are giving serious thought to a more scientific question: Do other universes exist?
At first glance, you can’t help but wonder how anyone could have the chutzpah to ask a question like that. We can barely figure out this universe, and now we’re wondering about others?
Believe it or not, theorists have an answer. And the answer appears to be, Yes.
To understand why, you have to go back to the Big Bang, that mysterious, mother-of-all-explosions that most astronomers believe spawned our universe. One second, according to theory, there was nothingness. The next, our cosmos sprang into existence. Nature seems to have pulled off the feat of getting something — in fact, everything — for nothing.
As unimaginable as that sounds, it comes straight out of the theory of quantum mechanics, a set of mathematical rules that describe how the universe works on the smallest scales, inside atoms. Quantum mechanics says that matter and energy can appear spontaneously out of the vacuum of space, thanks to something called a quantum fluctuation, a sort of hiccup in the energy field thought to pervade the cosmos.
Cosmologists say that a quantum fluctuation gave rise to the Big Bang. And the thing about quantum fluctuations is that they can happen anywhere, any time. And if our universe was born out of a quantum fluctuation, say theorists, then it’s possible that other quantum fluctuations could have spawned other universes.
There’s a reason some theorists want other universes to exist: They believe it’s the only way to explain why our own universe, whose physical laws are just right to allow life, happens to exist. According to the so-called anthropic principle, there are perhaps an infinite number of universes, each with its own set of physical laws. And one of them happens to be ours. That’s much easier to believe, say the anthropic advocates, than a single universe “fine-tuned” for our existence.
But there’s a problem. If these other universes exist, there’s no way for us to detect them.
Of course, as University of Arizona astronomer Chris Impey points out, there are parts of our own cosmos that we can’t observe, because light from those extremely distant realms hasn’t had time to reach us. “We know that our own physical universe is substantially, maybe enormously larger, than the visible universe,” Impey says.
That doesn’t mean, however, that Impey is prepared to accept the idea of other universes. For one thing, he says, cosmologists don’t really understand the nature of quantum fluctuations, “because we dont have any quantum gravity theory yet.” That means the idea of multiple fluctuations, and multiple universes, is “truly speculative.”
Other astronomers are even more forceful in their resistance to the idea.
“It’s not a testable idea,” says Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University. Because the different universes would not be detectable by one another, he says, “You can’t really prove it exists or doesn’t exist.” When you talk about multiple universes, Steinhardt says, you’re not talking about science anymore. “In my view, you’re into metaphysics.”
Not everyone rejects the multiple-universe idea out of hand. At the University of California, Virginia Trimble is more accepting. “I find it neat. In much the same way that I think it would be neat if there were reincarnation.”
Not exactly a resounding scientific endorsement.
But Andreas Albrecht, a cosmologist at the University of California at Davis, says the question isn’t open for debate. Why? You can’t argue with quantum mechanics. “As far as we can tell,” Albrecht says, “that’s the fundamental language that Nature speaks. Nature doesn’t answer questions for certain; it answers questions by giving probabilities.”
And in quantum mechanics, “There’s a possibility that almost anything happens.” Including other universes. And if cosmologists are queasy about that, they don’t have a choice. “It comes out of the mathematics,” Albrecht explains. “It’s forced down our throats.”
“Quantum mechanics will not give up these other alternatives on its own,” says Albrecht. “And we really don’t know what to make about that. On one hand it sounds totally metaphysical. On the other hand, it’s all we have to work with at the moment.”
So, how would Albrecht answer Impey, and Steinhardt, and others who challenge the idea of a multiple universe?
“I would say, ‘Your instincts are great, but do something with them. Give me a theory that doesn’t have multiple universes.’ And they’d be stuck.”
That’s not to say Albrecht agrees with the anthropic advocates. All the “fine-tuning” which they believe is too good to be true, is only true for life as we know it. Of the advocates, Albrecht says, “They don’t know a thing about life. They don’t know what it takes to have life in the universe. There could be forms of life out there that we haven’t even thought of! It’s really stupid.”
There is no shortage of published scientific papers, articles, and books on the anthropic theory, including some by experienced cosmologists. And there’s some good science involved in these studies, Albrecht says, if you take out the stuff about the anthropic principle.
“People get into these studies because they are intrigued because there are real scientific issues to address. Then they say, ‘Oh, this looks familiar, I’d better call it anthropic,’ and they start using all these buzz words. But they [alienate] a large part of the scientific community when they do that. It’s a kind of sloppiness.”
“Science is about trying not to be sloppy, but it’s hard because we’re human. This is an example of our humanity creeping in and getting in the way of sheer rationality. I think with time it will get much better.”
“In the end,” Albrecht says, “we may understand that there are a bunch of other universes, but it won’t be the way the anthropic guys want. There’s a lot of room between the total smorgasbord that the anthropic people want, and just having a few extra universes around.”
But if these other universes do exist, are we really destined never to detect them? Some theorists have speculated that gravitational energy from other universes might leak into ours, and that someday we might figure out how to detect it. But even the most open-minded cosmologists say that’s a long shot at best.
“That is also pure speculation,” says Impey. “It’s maybe reasonable speculation, but it’s speculation in a very similar vein to the speculation of someone like Kip Thorne about wormholes and time travel and white holes and black holes. It’s very careful speculation by a highly trained theoretical physicist who knows what the boundary of the current theory is.”
It wouldn’t be the first time that a wild idea turned out to be right.
A bit more than 100 years ago, in the second half of the 19th century, Albrecht says, most scientists didn’t accept the idea that matter was composed of atoms — an idea supported not by direct observation, but by inferences based on theories of temperature, heat, and viscosity.
“Atomic theory had some great things to say about that, and seemed to give a consistent, unified picture,” Albrecht says, but “the majority of physicists at that time didn’t really believe atoms existed; they thought it was just some flight of fancy.”
Like quantum mechanics, Albrecht ponts out, atomic theory was a construction that went way beyond what anyone could see 100 years ago. And if it’s a challenge for scientists now to embrace wild ideas like other universes, he says, that just comes with the territory.
“So far, everything we’ve done to try to understand the universe has pulled us out of our shell, so to speak, and made us think about things that are way beyond what we see, and way beyond what we’ll see in the foreseeable future. So we’re just stuck with that… Unfortunately, it’s part of the nature of always being at the frontier of what we understand.”
Permalink
07.03.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 8:46 pm by Administrator
Dr. Machio Kaku
http://mkaku.org/home/?page_id=423
Will these concepts be proven by a theory of everything?
Last June, astronomers were toasting each other with champagne glasses in laboratories around the world, savoring their latest discovery. The repaired $2 billion Hubble Space Telescope, once the laughing stock of the scientific community, had snared its most elusive prize: a black hole. But the discovery of the Holy Grail of astrophysics may also rekindle a long simmering debate within the physics community. What lies on the other side of a black hole? If someone foolishly fell into a black hole, will they be crushed by its immense gravity, as most physicists believe, or will they be propelled into a parallel universe or emerge in another time era? To solve this complex question, physicists are opening up one of the most bizarre and tantalizing chapters in modern physics. They have to navigate a minefield of potentially explosive theories, such as the possibility of “wormholes,” “white holes,” time machines, and even the 10th dimension! This controversy may well validate J.B.S. Haldane’s wry observation that the universe is “not only queerer than we sup- pose, it is queerer than we can suppose.” This delicious controversy, which delights theoretical physicists but boggles the mind of mere mortals, is the subject of my recent book, Hyperspace.
Black Holes: Collapsed Stars
A black hole, simply put, is a massive, dead star whose gravity is so intense than even light cannot escape, hence its name. By definition, it can’t be seen, so NASA scientists focused instead on the tiny core of the galaxy M87, a super massive “cosmic engine” 50 million light years from earth. Astronomers then showed that the core of M87 consisted of a ferocious, swirling maelstrom of superhot hydrogen gas spinning at l.2 million miles per hour. To keep this spinning disk of gas from violently flying apart in all directions, there had to be a colossal mass concentrated at its center, weighing as much as 2 to 3 billion suns! An object with that staggering mass would be massive enough to prevent light from escaping. Ergo, a black hole.
The Einstein-Rosen Bridge
But this also revives an ongoing controversy surrounding black holes. The best description of a spinning black hole was given in 1963 by the New Zealand mathematician Roy Kerr, using Einstein’s equations of gravity. But there is a quirky feature to his solution. It predicts that if one fell into a black hole, one might be sucked down a tunnel (called the “Einstein-Rosen bridge”) and shot out a “white hole” in a parallel universe! Kerr showed that a spinning black hole would collapse not into a point, but to a “ring of fire.” Because the ring was spinning rapidly, centrifugal forces would keep it from collapsing. Remarkably, a space probe fired directly through the ring would not be crushed into oblivion, but might actually emerge unscratched on the other side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge, in a parallel universe. This “wormhole” may connect two parallel universes, or even distant parts of the same universe.
Through the Looking Glass
The simplest way to visualize a Kerr wormhole is to think of Alice’s Looking Glass. Anyone walking through the Looking Glass would be transported instantly into Wonderland, a world where animals talked in riddles and common sense wasn’t so common.
The rim of the Looking Glass corresponds to the Kerr ring. Anyone walking through the Kerr ring might be transported to the other side of the universe or even the past. Like two Siamese twins joined at the hip, we now have two universes joined via the Looking Glass. Some physicists have wondered whether black holes or worm- holes might someday be used as shortcuts to another sector of our universe, or even as a time machine to the distant past (making possible the swashbuckling exploits in Star Wars). However, we caution that there are skeptics. The critics concede that hundreds of wormhole solutions have now been found to Einstein’s equations, and hence they cannot be lightly dismissed as the ravings of crack pots. But they point out that wormholes might be unstable, or that intense radiation and sub-atomic forces surrounding the entrance to the wormhole would kill anyone who dared to enter. Spirited debates have erupted between physicists concerning these wormholes. Unfortunately, this controversy cannot be re- solved, because Einstein’s equations break down at the center of black holes or wormholes, where radiation and sub-atomic forces might be ferocious enough to collapse the entrance. The problem is Einstein’s theory only works for gravity, not the quantum forces which govern radiation and sub-atomic particles. What is needed is a theory which embraces both the quantum theory of radiation and gravity simultaneously. In a word, to solve the problem of quantum black holes, we need a “theory of everything!”
A Theory of Everything?
One of the crowning achievements of 20th century science is that all the laws of physics, at a fundamental level, can be summarized by just two formalisms: (1) Einstein’s theory of gravity, which gives us a cosmic description of the very large, i.e. galaxies, black holes and the Big Bang, and (2) the quantum theory, which gives us a microscopic description of the very small, i.e. the microcosm of sub-atomic particles and radiation. But the supreme irony, and surely one of Nature’s cosmic jokes, is that they look bewilderingly different; even the world’s greatest physicists, including Einstein and Heisenberg, have failed to unify these into one. The two theories use different mathematics and different physical principles to describe the universe in their respective domains, the cosmic and the microscopic. Fortunately, we now have a candidate for this theory. (In fact, it is the only candidate. Scores of rival proposals have all been shown to be inconsistent.) It’s called “superstring theory,” and almost effortlessly unites gravity with a theory of radiation, which is required to solve the problem of quantum wormholes. The superstring theory can explain the mysterious quantum laws of sub-atomic physics by postulating that sub-atomic particles are really just resonances or vibrations of a tiny string. The vibrations of a violin string correspond to musical notes; likewise the vibrations of a superstring correspond to the particles found in nature. The universe is then a symphony of vibrating strings. An added bonus is that, as a string moves in time, it warps the fabric of space around it, producing black holes, wormholes, and other exotic solutions of Einstein’s equations. Thus, in one stroke, the superstring theory unites both the theory of Einstein and quantum physics into one coherent, compelling picture.
A 10 Dimensional Universe
The curious feature of superstrings, however, is that they can only vibrate in 10 dimensions. This is, in fact, one of the reasons why it can unify the known forces of the universe: in 10 dimensions there is “more room” to accommodate both Einstein’s theory of gravity as well as sub-atomic physics. In some sense, previous attempts at unifying the forces of nature failed because a standard four dimensional theory is “too small” to jam all the forces into one mathematical framework. To visualize higher dimensions, consider a Japanese tea garden, where carp spend their entire lives swimming on the bottom of a shallow pond. The carp are only vaguely aware of a world beyond the surface. To a carp “scientist,” the universe only consists of two dimensions, length and width. There is no such thing as “height.” In fact, they are incapable of imagining a third dimension beyond the pond. The word “up” has no meaning for them. (Imagine their distress if we were to suddenly lift them out of their two dimensional universe into “hyperspace,” i.e. our world!) However, if it rains, then the surface of their pond becomes rippled. Although the third dimension is beyond their comprehension, they can clearly see the waves traveling on the pond’s surface. Likewise, although we earthlings cannot “see” these higher dimensions, we can see their ripples when they vibrate. According to this theory, “light” is nothing but vibrations rippling along the 5th dimension. By adding higher dimensions, we can easily accommodate more and more forces, including the nuclear forces. In a nutshell: the more dimensions we have, the more forces we can accommodate. One persistent criticism of this theory, however, is that we do not see these higher dimensions in the laboratory. At present, every event in the universe, from the tiniest sub-atomic decay to exploding galaxies, can be described by 4 numbers (length, width, depth, and time), not 10 numbers. To answer this criticism, many physicists believe (but cannot yet prove) that the universe at the instant of the Big Bang was in fact fully 10 dimensional. Only after the instant of creation did 6 of the 10 dimensions “curled up” into a ball too tiny to observe. In a real sense, this theory is really a theory of creation, when the full power of 10 dimensional space-time was manifest.
21st Century Physics
Not surprisingly, the mathematics of the 10th dimensional superstring is breathtakingly beautiful as well as brutally complex, and has sent shock waves through the mathematics community. Entirely new areas of mathematics have been opened up by this theory. Unfortunately, at present no one is smart enough to solve the problem of a quantum black hole. As Edward Witten of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton has claimed, “String theory is 21st century physics that fell accidentally into the 20th century.” However, 21st century mathematics necessary to solve quantum black holes has not yet been discovered! However, since the stakes are so high, that hasn’t stopped teams of enterprising physicists from trying to solve superstring theory. Already, over 5,000 papers have been written on the subject. As Nobel laureate Steve Weinberg said, “how can anyone expect that many of the brightest young theorists would not work on it?” Progress has been slow but steady. Last year, a significant breakthrough was announced. Several groups of physicists independently announced that string theory can completely solve the problem of a quantum black hole. (However, the calculation was so fiendishly difficult it could only be performed in two, not 10, dimensions.) So that’s where we stand today. Many physicists now feel that it’s only a matter of time before some enterprising physicist completely cracks this ticklish problem. The equations, although difficult, are well-defined. So until then, it’s still a bit premature to buy tickets to the nearest wormhole to visit the next galaxy or hunt dinosaurs!
Permalink
06.29.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 4:26 pm by Administrator
My professional site at the Audio Engineering Society has been updated: http://www.aes.org/aes/david-rountree
Permalink
06.16.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 7:24 pm by Administrator
Join me as I return to Destiny Debbie’s radio program on Blog Talk Radio.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Destinydebbie
Tune in Friday, June 19th from 6 to 8 P.M. Eastern time.
I have NO idea what we are going to talk about, but I am sure it will be good!!!
Permalink
06.15.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 7:03 pm by Administrator
Tune into http://www.wrnjradio.com/streaming.php or in the Hackettstown Area, tune your radio to 1510 AM or 92.7 FM Tuesday, June 16th to hear me give a live reveal concerning the Gilbert Pa. case. The show starts at 3:10 P.M. Take care!
Permalink
06.10.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 8:11 pm by Administrator
Awhile back, I joined several yahoo groups that dealt with theoretical physics and Quantum Mechanics. I did this to advance my own knowledge of physics, and to bounce my ideas and theories around with folks who would give me accurate feedback. At first of course I didn’t mention my specific area of research, but eventually it came out that I was investigating the paranormal. There were a few utterances but for the most part, it was accepted. I believe this was totally due to my scientific approach and the nature of my posts. I also tried to spread a little humor along the way, which is of course, my nature.
I have to say I have learned an awful lot just reading what others are posting. I have contributed in areas where I have a sprinkling of knowledge, but I have read far more than I have written. Recently, I got an interesting E-Mail from one of the members of Theoretical Physics. I have included it below:
“David, my name is Robert Roudebush and I have enjoyed your posts on the Yahoo theoretical physics group and I thought you may find my attached short paper on spacial dynamics of great interest. This work was a 10yr study of gravity and GR from a classical and mechanical point of view and I did not start out looking at the paranormal but in the end it was staring right at me. After you read my paper you will see a connection between every bit of mass within you to all the mass of our entire gravitationally bound Virgo super cluster of galaxies. Also your personally bound space energy will continue to return to your center of mass long after you are dead! I do not know how to interpret this and am looking to you and your expertise in the paranormal. I hope you can understand my proposal for if my writing is clear enough you will see the far reaching implications of it.
With greatest respect,
Robert”
At first, I thought Robert had made a typo, using “spacial” instead of “spatial”. But then I read his paper, and realized that perhaps “spacial” was a far better word to coin! While the paper may seem deep, it is easy to understand conceptually. Please read it and come back to the rest of the blog.
http://spinvestigations.org/A_PROPOSAL_ON_SPACIAL_DYNAMICS.pdf
After reading it, I wrote back to Robert.
Robert,
I just read your paper. I am extraordinarily interested in the Space Sink Emitter concept. This fits in very nicely with my own thoughts on the possible source of certain paranormally classified phenomena. The fields I suspect resonate at different frequencies. Our normal perception has a limited frequency response. Heightened perception, such as a shamanic induced state, will slightly expand that frequency response. But it will only allow for a “ghost” of the real matter or energy to be perceived. I suspect this is also due to the spatial relationships of two parallel universes that are in phase, but at differing resonances. I also believe that portals between these existences occur, and that energy can travel back and forth through the portals, via a stabilization caused by exotic matter, crossing as well. In the case of my thoughts, our matter would be exotic to the parallel universe, and vice versa. Hence, for a brief period, and opening occurs. While it will not allow a physical body to pass back and forth, (not yet anyway) it does seem to allow EMF to pass. The consequences of this Electromagnetic Force transference is significant, but it’s true meaning remains elusive to me at this point.
This ties in rather nicely to your ideas on Space. The interface is the key. Where the spaces touch is where hell breaks loose. We are now measuring the effects, not the source, so the interface IS the vital point of observation. You have hit upon this notion precisely. Time of course is a variable landscape. The interface may touch multiple spatial points on this landscape, hence another possible source of certain paranormal effects.
I certainly need to think about this a lot more, but these are my initial thoughts based on my own research. I have measured the spontaneous appearance of energy from a nonlocal-source. Nothing physical could have produced or propagated it. This leads me to the portal theory. The question is what triggers the interface?
Your thoughts are appreciated.
I hope you don’t mind but I am sharing this with my research partner, John Keegan.
I didn’t have to wait long for his reply.
“David, thank you for the rapid reply. Feel free to share this with others. I thought you would understand my paper and you got it right away. “But it will only allow for a “ghost” of the real matter or energy to be perceived. I suspect this is also due to the spatial relationships of two parallel universes that are in phase, but at differing resonances.” The ghost is a manifestation of the spacial energy of the associated mass. The key here is space. If space is not the background but a principal player in physics then it is easy to comprehend other spacial dimensions as coexistent with ours. Mass then becomes a property of space; energy, form and resonance of space. There is no true meaning to distance or size with the SSE so parallel universes can coexist without occupying the same space. Remember; space is emergent but not fundamental. Further study of the SSE as it merges to form BHs may momentarily create a link with parallel SSEs and allow bridging between universes Also did you see the reason the spirit energy remains long after death and the oneness we have with huge and tiny volumes of space. If most of the universe is composed of space we are really well connected. Wow this gets involved and I am not up to speed in this field of metaphysics so I hope you and your associates can make sense of it. Like I said before, I am just trying to unravel the mystery of gravity.
Thanks again for your time,
Robert”
Yes, Robert, I do get it. We are all Quantum Surfers, riding the standing wave to the finite! Space flowing into mass and out again is revolutionary! Essentially, our energy propagates through time, mass and space. Even after we die, our energy continues on, traveling the conduits of the Space Sink Emitter grid, allowing us to be here long after we left.
While Robert was working on a solution for the issues with General Relativity, he has in fact stumbled on a possible solution for the existence of paranormal phenomena.
We would both be interested in any feedback from his paper.
Permalink
