Principle of particle physics. Part 9
|
Principle of particle physics. Part 9
|
It is the same problem as with all limits, people try to find in physics. The concept of an "atomium" is a limitation to our thinking, in the same way, as the "big bang" is a limit to our thinking. Already Nickolaus of Kues stated many centuries ago that there is no sense of saying, there is a limit to the world; there must be the question: What is behind the limit.
As scientific authorities standardise the idea of a final universe (big bang model with an expanding, but limited universe), including the idea of "atomic particles" (elementary particles as leptons, quarks), they put unfair limitations on our thinking. In the end, the "atoms" will by synonymous for postulates and axioms, and nobody is ever allowed to ask, where these postulates come from.
So, the scientific view at nature has to be open. No such things as atoms in time or space may constrain the imagination, and no limit to our picture of the universe may be postulated.
In this sence, we have to look, how the universal hart beat interacts with the matter, and there are quite some interesting aspects and conclusions.
This "hart beat" of the universe directly reflects all matter within the universe, since all matter dynamically contributes to the universal pulse. Every elementary particle expands and collapses in accordance with the universal pulse, and thereby every atom is a sort of mirror image of the universe. And the whole universe is influenced by every single atom.
As a consequence to this, there are no two atoms or no two events, which are exactly the same. And there are no two pulses, which are the same.
This principle has already been discovered by Leibniz, who called it the principle of "indiscernability". He tried to prove it on the basis that the whole court of the kingdom Hanover could not find an exactly matching pair of leaves in the royal park. And this principle has also been discovered by Pauli, who stated that not two states within an atom are exactly the same. Leibniz proved his principle on the basis of the necessary reason ("every event has its own reason"), which is another principle and has not been proven. The Pauli principle has not been proven either.
There is a direct analogy of the cavities in the ether to cavitational bubbles in water: when water flows along a surface with high speed, one can observe cavitational bubbles. They are instable bubbles, which pulsate with very high frequencies. These bubbles are miraculously attracted to the surface, as if a strange force pulls them towards their own mirror image. And this is, what makes the cavitation bubbles so dangerous for the ships propellors: As the bubbles move towards the propellor surface closer and closer, their pulsation literally pulls metalic particles out of the surface, leaving deep cavities in the metal.
And this was the reason for people, to name the effect "cavitation"; it was not the bubbles in the water, but the deep cavities in the propellors. These cavities drastically increased the drag and reduced the efficiency of propellors.
Extensive studies, in particular at the University of Göttingen in Germany, have shown that cavitation bubbles are primarily not stable, but they pulsate instead. There are, however, stable forms of cavitational bubbles, and these are sumarised as "supercavitation".
My interest here is in the cavitational bubbles and their dynamics, as they pulsate with a very high frequency.
Let´s look at a single bubble, when the diameter is stable for a short moment. Since there is nothing in the bubble except of "gaseous water at the very small saturation pressure", the bubbles decrease in size due to the external pressure. So the bubble gets smaller and smaller, until it eventually collapes completely.
When the bubble collapses, it emits a very sharp "click", quite in the same way, as You hear a "clap", when Your flat hand hits the water surface. This sonic wave spreads all over the space, and it transfers energy from the bubble.
But, when the bubble has collapsed, the water does not stay in this position. It is reflected in itself, and so, a new bubble opens at the very position, where the old bubble collapsed before. The new bubble is very small first, but it increases in size, until eventually all the kinetic energy is compensated by the external pressure, and then the bubble starts to decrease in size. This is the moment, where we started to look at the bubble in the previous cycle.
This process happens over and over again, until parasitic effects - such as sonic wave emission - have taken off the energy from the system. This process might be compared to a ball, which has been thrown upwards, and which falls down, and bounces repeatedly on the floor, until the energy has been dissipated.
The theoretical treatment of the cavitation bubbles, however, is a bit more difficult than the mathematics of a vertically thrown ball. Physicists have introduces complex inertial potentials in order to do caluclations on the cavitational bubbles. The reason for these tricky treatments was very simple: as water may be treated as incomprssible for the main phase of the pulsation, the amount of the moved water becomes theoretically infinite, and in the same way, the energy content of a single cavitational bubble within an (infinite) ocean of water is infinity.
Some years ago, I made a theoretical treatment of the cavitational bubbles, and I realised that mathematics becomes very simple, when we introduce the virtual mass of the bubble itself. So the whole dynamics can be evaluated in this virtual mass on its own. As this mass is equal to the volume of the cavity times the density of water, the virtual mass is always finite. Although this treatment yielded very good agreements between theory and the experiments on cavitational bubbles, it was in some way unsatisfactory, as the reason for the introduction of the virtual mass was not so clear after all. We will see that this does not apply for the analogy of cavities in the ether, as I will outline in the following.
The cavities in the ether are - as I see it - in many aspects similar to the cavitational bubbles in water. The pulsation of the cavitaties in the ether happens with the universal pulse.
There is, however, a difference between the ether cavities and the cavitational bubbles. The ether is essentially incompressible, but it is not homogenous. This means that e.g. when a cavity in the ether becomes smaller and smaller there are other cavities, which will open in the vicinity. These are small gaps, which I called microcavities.
The reason for this is that the ether cannot expand or compress. So, when the ether is pushed "inwards" in order to let the cavity collapse, it is equally pulled by the outer layers. ............. So, during a single pulse of just 10-23 seconds, the whole space around an elementary particle changes dramatically: the cavity collapses partially or completely, the microcavities increase and decrease, and the whole ether is moved forward and backwards.
And, as the cavity collapses - at least partially - there is a "clapping" noise, which is heard by the whole universe in the moment, as it happens. Since the ether is - apart form the cavities - incompressible, the clapping noise travels through the universe with an infinite velocity. (Of course, this might be qualified at a later stage, but I think, it should be made very clear that the ether is not as soft as might be suggested by the speed of light in the same way, as the speed of sound is linked to the compressibility of gas or liquids. I consider the ether to be much "harder", and I have not seen any indication or need as to express the compressibility as a final value. So, the universal pulse is heard at every place in the universe at the same time - or at least within a few pulses.)
When I speek of "the whole universe", this is - in my view - much larger than the presently accepted size of a few 109 lightyears, as postulated in the standard model of physics. All research has shown that the universe is homogeneous within the presently known galaxies - apart from the cosmological red shift, which I regard as a pure and simple aging effect of light rather than as an indication for an expansion of the universe. As I have shown the analysis of the aging effect yielded quite a similar formula as the big bang theory, and this aging effect is in agreement with the general understanding of physics that all physical laws apply for all places and for all times. So, I think, I have reason to favour the aging effect rather than the big bang hypothesis. (I might add that this aging effect is due to the gravitational pull on light quanta; by contrast, the standard model of physics might either have forgotten the gravitation of light, or it is denied. In fact, there are theoreticians, who say that gravitation is linked to the non- relativistic rest mass, and since light has no rest mass at all, there is no gravitation field associated with the light quanta. This cannot be accepted, because mass and energy are two faces of the same thing; so, also the kinetic energy of a body or the relativistic mass increment generate gravitation, and in this sence, also a light quantum must have a gravitational field. This is in line with the "aging effect" of light.)
Based on this same general understanding that all physical laws apply for all places and for all times, I regard the universe as infinitely large and to be existent for an infinitely large duration (I avoid the word "periode" at this place).
Of course, it is unbelievable for me that the universe is infinitely large. But I regard my own view to be a product of my experiences, and - here on earth - there was always a sort of boundary; none of the things, which I experienced, was infinitely large, and therefore my view is restricted to finite things. The only exeption seems to be the view to the stars and galaxies. Thereby I accept the term "infinity" as real. When it comes to find a model for the universe - say: to find an analogon of the universe to things of our daily experience - one might tend to look for an analgy to a finite thing. This might even be the finite fire ball of an atomic bomb explosion. But I think, we should be prepared to accept that the universe is modeled best by something, which is at least as large as the distance to the most remote known galaxies. With this respect, there is no need to talk about any limitation of the universe - with the inevitable question: What is behind the frontier?
We may, however, dream of a finite ether block, streaching from several millions of billions of light years in the west to an even larger distance in the east. And we might think about an intelligent being, looking at this gigantic block and metering with a very sensitive stetoscope, what´s happening inside the huge block. And, since all events have a direct impact on the universal pulse, this being might exactly know, what´s going on in the universe. And, once in a while, she or he might send a message onto a loudspeaker, which couples the pulses into the ether block, and in the same moment, we might realise it, because our own body is in resonance with these words.
But this is not subject to physics, in the same way, as any speculation "what has happened before the big bang" is pure speculation and has nothing to do with physics.
...... this page is to be continued.
date of last issue: 4. 5. 1997
