Keep it Simple

[WillieB]

When the first version of The Incremental Universe was posted on this site one of the comments was something on the order of “It doesn’t have any math.” That was and still is true. But what comes first? Is it the logic or is it the math? It seems that logic should first be conceived and, secondly, the mathematics should be used to confirm the validity of the logic. And if the logic used is backed up by conformance to many of the known universal truths and if it offers possible explanations for many previously mysterious conditions existing in our universe then it deserves an effort to advance that logic through the use of mathematics. However, the problem is that the author has not been educated in higher mathematics. Therefore he is placing the logic in plain view and asking that anyone who is capable attempt to reduce that logic to a mathematical state which will serve to advance the concepts.

 

Before you go to the site to study the logic you should be aware of some of the areas in which the paper offers explanations:

 

1. It lays the basis for an explanation for the existence of quantum entanglement.

 

2. It provides a more comprehensive and believable explanation for the creation of and the transmission and exchange of electric and magnetic field forces than simply assigning these functions to the “exchange of virtual photons.”

 

3. It provides a basis for the existence of and the formation of matter itself.

 

4. It can explain gravitational forces and why these forces are apparently transmitted at infinite velocities.

 

5. It incorporates the existence of inertia and momentum.

 

6. It incorporates an explanation of why E = mc .

 

7. It explains why mass, time, and length varies with velocity.

 

8. It explains the existence of Zero Point Energy including those ephemeral “virtual particle pairs” and Planck Particle Pairs

 

9. It explains the “dual nature of matter.”

 

10. It tackles the real meaning of mass.

 

11. It lays a basis for an explanation of what heat actually consists of.

 

There is no doubt that a full comprehension of the principles of the concept requires some study and contemplation. If this doesn’t arouse your curiosity………..Stay tuned! This is and always will be an ongoing project. There is more yet to come. See further posts below.

[WillieB]

UNIVERSAL POLARIZATION = QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT?

 

If we don’t dream we wither, if we don’t think, we die.

 

Don't read this until you have studied and comprehended the original paper.

 

During the period in which the characteristics of the incremental universe were being formed in my mind I became involved in a conundrum: given the polarization capabilities of the increments why is it that they all are not perfectly polarized throughout all of space? This question dogged me for some extended period until I convinced myself that, due to the random angles of their encounters, their polarizations would remain randomly dispersed. Recently in contemplating the phenomenon known as quantum entanglement I revisited the question of universal polarization and an alternate possibility has begun to form. I ask the assistance of everyone who participates in this forum to bring it to fruition.

 

Let’s presume that universal polarization does, in fact exist but it takes on a much different format than that which I originally feared could or should take place due to the polarization characteristics of the increments. Under this presumption, and I freely admit that at this point it is no more than speculation, each and every one of the increments is at the center of an infinite number of imaginary lines or radii that spherically extend from it in every direction. Each and every increment on those lines is perfectly polarized both in their spin vectors and their flow vectors at any given instant. Both the spin vectors and the flow vectors will be perfect compliments of one another dependent upon the direction of extension from that increment. Opposite directions will yield opposite spins and flows. To me, attempting to visualize what these conditions would yield when measured macroscopically actually induces dizziness. Would it result in a uniform variation of polarizations throughout space? Is this phenomenon n extension of the uk force?

 

As I understand it, experiments confirming the existence of Quantum Entanglement, in which some type of communication apparently is exchanged at superluminal and possibly infinite velocities between two entangled sub-atomic particles (usually electrons or photons), must be performed in very carefully controlled circumstances. This is accomplished by stimulating an atom or molecule so that two electrons or photons are emitted on precisely opposite paths. When the characteristics of these two entangled particles are measured at remote locations it appears that the two particles have communicated so that these measured characteristics will correspond or be precisely opposite one another. As the two particles are separated by such a distance to prevent signals being exchanged at the speed of light the physics community has concluded that they are mysteriously linked to one another or “entangled.”

 

I submit that such a scenario as described in the second paragraph above would explain the existence of Quantum Entanglement. What do you think? It’s fun to speculate and, who knows, it may lead to some answers. Let’s hear from you!

[WillieB]

Don't read this until you have studied and comprehended the original paper.

 

I am still keeping it simple but, even when I am playing golf my mind wanders to find more areas in which the characteristics of the IU offer a potential explanation of a phenomenon for which no credible explanation previously existed. This time electrical resistance, conductivity, and superconductivity have come to the fore. I know that what follows is not perfect in its presentation. Let’s work together to improve it.

As well as the ease with which a material’s atoms can release their electrons the conductivity of any conductor is measured by the capability of its constituent atoms and molecules to freely adjust the polarizations and orientations of the flows and spins of their increments so that the resistance to the movement of the passing electrons is minimized. Conversely resistance is measured by the inability the material to readjust the polarizations and orientations of its constituent atoms and molecules so that the freedom of movement of the passing electrons is impeded. The resistance to the movement of the electrons increases the rate of contacts between unlike increments of like spin which results in mutual annihilations and increases the presence of free pb’s which are not associated in the orbits of the increments. Part D, item 9 of the second edition of the paper deals with the nature of temperature and heat. It pointed out that temperature rises due to an increase in the presence of or density of free pb’s. The existence of an electrical current in a conductor will increase the rate of contacts between unlike increments of like spin and thus will increase the rate of their mutual annihilation and the density of the unassociated pb’s. These free pb’s will be “batted around” by any passing increments including those associated in bonds to form the electrons involved in the electrical current and will serve to further increase the resistance of the conductor.

What happens to the orbits of the increments as a result of their contacts with the free pb’s? It is posited that the radii of the orbits, and hence the volume of the increment, actually increases. Hence as the density of the free pb’s increases the number and duration of contacts between increments also increases. Conversely, as temperature drops the number and duration of contacts between increments decreases. (And, perhaps the velocity of the increments’ orbits decreases. After all, we know that a photon of light can actually be brought to a stationary state at absolute zero.) These conditions hold true for both the increments of the electrons forming the current as well as the increments composing the electrons and hadrons of the material of the conductor. At some point the temperature will reach a point which allows a reduction of the volume of the increments and in contacts between increments to the extent which permits a perfect polarization of the conductor’s increments as well as those composing the electrons of the current. This condition eliminates contacts between unlike increments of like spin and eliminates the presence of free pb’s.

A current in a superconductor is known to repel an “invading” magnetic field. The perfect polarization present in the conductor rejects any polarizations externally imposed and thus the effect of the magnetic field is nullified.

Any thoughts? Any suggestions?