Matter-manifold hypothesis

[KALSTER]

Hey guys, I posted this on another forum and was wondering what you might think of this.

 

Lets for the moment say that space itself is infinite and all matter was created in a small area as a result of spontaneous vacuum polarization. Also assume that all matter, including photons, are nothing more than folded up space and the spontaneous annihilation of matter according to their respective half lives are in fact the folded space unfolding in an instant, sending the most basic ripples possible (photons) in all directions, according to the as yet unknown propagating attributes (viscosity variables) of space. The expansion of space might be a result of the slow unfolding of all matter. So in thermodynamic terms, matter was created from nothing, but eventually it will revert to a neutral matter free state, effectively canceling out the imbalance?

 

To illustrate the folding of space as in the case of matter, imagine an infinite volume of very soft and elastic rubber. Now imagine tweezers that does not interact with the rubber, except for the tip. Now close the tweezers, gripping, say, a Planck length size of space. Twist it around in all directions making a few revolutions in every direction. Now imagine how the rubber would stretch around the spot where the particle has been created. Imagine the color changing according to the tension in that part of the rubber. Release the tweezers and the new particle stays there. Making another particle right next to it would put further tension in the rubber, increasing the circumference of the color change (gravity) as well as the degree of color change close to the two particles. To illustrate some idea of other forces, lets think of space as long piece of, say, steel cable .When a fast up and down movement is made, a transverse, two-dimensional wave is created that travels along the length of the wire. This illustrates the movement of standard particles like protons through space. If you tap the cable with a hammer, a sound is created whose speed is limited by the material properties of the cable. This longitudinal wave travels at a much faster (and maximum) rate than the transverse wave of normal matter and illustrates a photon. The speed of the matter-wave would be susceptible to the speed of the up-and-down movement (resultant force) and would increasingly be negatively affected by the elastic rebound pressure and internal friction. The elastic rebound pressure would increase indefinitely and the wave would never be able to travel at the speed of the longitudinal sound wave. This illustrates the speed of light limit.

 

Ridicule away. :|

 

Here are some Q&A later on:

 

Question:

By folding, do you mean that a further extent to the matter than we can see, is composed of hidden extra dimensional substrates that can neither react with known matter or allow for any resultant causation?

 

The matter would be analogous to the transverse wave in the steel cable, only more curled up in different directions. Matter would then travel like the transverse wave, in that it is only the curled-up shape that travels, so it would be susceptible to the elastic rebound pressure of space. As the matter moves faster, this rebound pressure would apply a greater and greater force in the opposite direction. Like the difference between falling into water from 1 meter and 50 meters. The more the force to deform the water is applied faster, the more inertia and internal static- and kinetic friction become prevalent (analogy to space).

 

Question:

But, by saying that matter was created from "nothing", doesn't that also mean that there was nothing to create matter in the first place? I would think that there would need to be at least some minuscule catalyst to the universes formation from the start.

 

As I understand it, virtual particles can spontaneously be created in empty space like in vacuum polarization. So with space and time being indefinite in this scenario, a huge creation event could have happened. However small the chance of that happening, given enough time, it would eventually happen. The initially created matter could even provide some EM fields to facilitate the creation of more matter in a sort of chain reaction.

 

Question:

In your second example, it seems like your making a more simplistic process more complicated than it needs to be. Are you basically trying to say that the properties of space time itself, have various limiting properties?

 

The second part is basically an elaborate analogy for you guys to be able to better conceptualize the conditions and the basics of some interactions in the scenario. I am a usually poor at voicing my thoughts, so I hope you can form some idea of what I am trying to get across.

 

Question:

And, isn't it also the particle with the least resistance, if any, in the vacuum of space? Well, then it is only the speed of the highest velocity discharge that we know of, it doesn't mean that there isn't another process that could succeed the discharge speed of a photon.

 

Yes, I tried to provide the analogy for that. In the steel cable, the fastest wave possible is the longitudinal sound wave produced by tapping it with a hammer. A wave can’t, to my knowledge, travel any faster than that sound wave through its medium (space).

 

Thoughts?

[KALSTER]

What I would like, if possible, is for you guys to give me an example of something known in physics and then challenge me to explain it using my model. That would do two things: possibly debunk this model as well as provide some good mental exercise for me and anyone who wants to take part. C'mon, challenge me.8)

[CraigD]

Welcome to hypography, KALSTER. We welcome pet hypotheses here at hypography, at least the ones that can be housebroken and don’t chew the furnature, and make an effort to treat even the ill-behaved ones humanely :fly:

Hey guys, I posted this on another forum and was wondering what you might think of this. …

At first glance, it sounds a lot like metaphorical descriptions of string and brane theory I’ve hard and read from lots of popular science sources. I get the impression you’re thinking of something different than these families of theories, though.

 

Some of your description, such as

Lets for the moment say that space itself is infinite and all matter was created in a small area as a result of spontaneous vacuum polarization.

appear to be involve unconventional uses of common terms. For example, vacuum polarization conventionally refers to virtual electron-positron pair production, not actual particle pair production. IMHO, rerminology isn’t too important, as long as everyone understands what’s being said, but I recommend you avoid using conventional terms in unconventional ways, to avoid miscommunication.

What I would like, if possible, is for you guys to give me an example of something known in physics and then challenge me to explain it using my model. That would do two things: possibly debunk this model as well as provide some good mental exercise for me and anyone who wants to take part. C'mon, challenge me.8)

OK – here’s a pretty essential phenomenon that any physical theory must explain:

 

The speed of light is independent of the speed of the emitter or observer.

 

If light were like a longitudinal wavefront traveling though a medium like a steel cable, we would measuring its speed as greater when moving along the cable toward its source, lesser when moving away, by almost exactly our speed along the cable. Measurment reveals that it is not.

 

This is, of course, the famous Michelson-Morley experiment result, one of the cornerstones of the equally famous Special Theory of Relativity.

 

If you’ve read much physics, KALSTER, you’ve likely worked thought this one many times already, making it not much of a challenge. It’s an important one, though, so I think a good one with which to start this thread.

[KALSTER]

Thanks for the warm welcome! Firstly, it has been a quite while since I read a non-fiction physics book; although I did some extensive reading in the past (I think both points are apparent). I also understand your point about using buzz terms and hand waving and will stick to terms others (and me) could better identify with. Some further developments have been taking place on another forum. I can't yet provide a link, so let me provide a summary.

 

In this model, all matter would slowly be uncurling. Matter is obviously attracted together to produce planets, stars, etc. Standard particles exist only as a particle-wave form of the space-time fabric itself, as I tried to explain in the OP. So the consequence of this would be that space would expand, as observed. Since gravity keeps the particles close together, the resultant extra space would show up in between galaxies, as observed. This also means that, at least particles in galaxies, would constantly be moving relative to space (the particle-wave-bundle that is, described in the OP). Space-time fabric itself in this model would possess many of the same properties as the analogous elastic, low viscosity rubber in the OP. That would include an elastic resistance to being deformed. This elastic resistance would provide for inertia. Gravity would be manifested as tension in the fabric of space-time as a result of the “pinch” that created articles. When the particle wave-bundle travels, it would increasingly be affected by this elastic rebound pressure, with some observed results: 1.The tension in space-time surrounding the particle would increase as a result of the movement inflating the particle(mass gain), 2. The particle wave-bundle would flatten out face-on with the direction of travel (length contraction). In this model there would exist certain stable configurations (shape) of the particle wave-bundle that would equate to the different particles observed. When, after an interaction, the particle wave-bundle is inflated to a state in between stable configurations, a photon or a particle would be emitted equal to the amount of deviation. Photons in this model would not be particle wave-bundles, but would instead be longitudinal sound-like waves, propagating at the maximum speed possible as it is the least affected by the elastic rebound pressure.

 

Ok, I think that covers most of it. Wow, what a way to start off this debate with such a difficult question! I will reply shortly to that question, hopefully with a plausible explanation. Thanks for your interest!

[KALSTER]

Ok, this is what I have been thinking. One feature of the model is the fact that matter waves move through space and the space released from uncurling particles is moving in all sorts of directions relative to conglomerations of matter. The earth moves around the sun, the sun around the galactic centre, the galaxy around the centre of gravity of the cluster, the cluster around the centre of gravity of the supercluster. So how could it be possible to measure the effect this has on the experiment? One has to consider frame dragging as well, since it is no longer confined to open space. In the experiment light behaves as if no aether wind exists. So the only candidate for an explanation would frame dragging. I understand that experiments to test frame dragging by the earth are being devised or already underway. I wonder if it may be possible to test the prediction of my model that frame dragging would also occur deep underground?

 

Some further Q&A on Scienceforums.net:

Well, according to the current theories, all matter was created everywhere, with a large density. Now, if you say that the matter was all created in a small area, then the center of that area would be the center of the universe. This goes against current scientific theories/knowledge.

It would only be the centre of the collection of matter that comprises our universe, as in this model space-time is infinite. So even though a centre of our matter-universe exists, we would not be able to detect it. In this model, space is still expanding (as a result of the particles uncurling) in a fairly uniform manner, so that we would see exactly what we see today from our perspective, i.e. we would still see a uniform expansion from any arbitrary point chosen.

So photons are "folded up space", but they are also "unfolded" and "the most basic ripples possible". Seems like you are contradicting yourself. By the "as yet unknown propagating attributes (viscosity variables) of space" do you mean the premitivity of space and the permeability of space? Also, by saying "annihilation" and "half-life", are you implying that radioactive things turn into photons? Cause annihilation requires matter and antimatter, whereas radioactive decay causes some particles to change into other particles, releasing energy as well.

Yeh, I guess I did contradict myself there. In this model they are the basic ripples illustrated by the sound wave in the steel cable analogy. This idea sprang into existence in my mind initially only with the premise that matter might be explained as matter-manifolds. When I started typing it down, many of the pieces fell into place consciously that I presumably have been considering subconsciously. So I included photons in the initial definition. I will fix that. As to permittivity and permeability, yes that is more or less what I meant: Most of the features one would ascribe to an infinite volume of very soft elastic rubber. As to half-life of particles, it is my understanding that individual particles have half-lives themselves, where roughly half of them would annihilate into photons after a certain period. This period is obviously a VERY long time, with protons’ half-live being calculated to well over the suspected age of the universe (in the order of 10^35 years). So it is distinct from radioactive decay, where an atomic nucleus decays into another elemental nucleus by the emission of alpha, beta or gamma radiation.

Actually, it would snap back to its original shape, bye bye particle.

Well, imagine crumpling a sheet of cellophane and releasing it. The properties of the space-time fabric (in this model) is such that it does uncurl, slowly, having isotropic expansion as a result.

It would travel faster when the amplitude is smaller accompanied by increased speed in the up-and-down movement until the wave becomes small and energetic enough for it to propagate longitudinally. This illustrates the speed of light limit.

The speed a wave travels at is pretty much independent of its frequency, amplitude and energy. The speed is determined by the attributes of the material (for a string, that would be tension and linear density).

True. The amplitude in my analogy represents the amount of tension the particle exerts on space-time (gravity as a result of mass). So the higher the enclosed area of the particle, the higher its mass, the more resistance to movement occurs (inertia). So a lighter particle would be able to accelerate faster with the same amount of force applied to it. As the particle moves faster and faster, the elastic rebound pressure of the space-time fabric gets more pronounced as the movement tries to increasingly deform the fabric at a faster rate, until a huge amount of resultant force is needed to gain a small amount of velocity. No matter (excuse the pun) how much resultant force is applied, it would still not be able to travel as fast as a non-folded sound wave (photon) would be able to travel. Such a traveling particle would get flattened in a face-on direction as a result of this resistance to deformity of space-time (length contraction). Also, the particle wave-bundle would swell as it moves faster (mass gain).

I think it recieved the worst redicule possible, being ignored. Probably because it seems mostly wrong and also unclear and vague.

I can understand that. This idea mostly exists as a mind experiment, so the terms I use is an effort to describe the mental movie of sorts. I am happy to clarify any points that are unclear. I know it is radical, whimsical and mostly devoid of proper scientific terms. In my mind, though, I can’t find any problems with it thus far. If it turns out to be incorrect because of some unassailable hurdle, it would at least have been a rewarding mind exercise. Thanks again for your attention!;)

[KALSTER]

No takers? Come on people! If I am deluding myself, you keeping quiet are just going to exacerbate things. Eventually I’ll be aimlessly wandering the streets, telling everyone that would listen that I had solved the GUT, with unkempt hair and drool running down the side of my mouth.:phones: