Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About hoola

  • Rank
  • Birthday 06/17/1951

Profile Information

  • Location
    colorado, usa
  • Interests
    electronics, music, theoretical physics, philosophy, politics
  • College Major/Degree
  • Favorite Area of Science
  • Biography
    retired electronics technician, antique/vintage electronics collector
  • Occupation
    none/ recycling center volunteer

Recent Profile Visitors

11829 profile views
  1. if the particles have no energy levels, then what is the casimir test measuring?
  2. the recent G-2 experiment results that show an anomaly in the levels predicted by the standard model, might indicate a variation in the natural energy levels of virtual particle pairs interacting with the muon at the times of testing, instead of being measurement errors or the standard model being incorrect. If so, this would tend to agree with the concept of the particle pairs having natural variations in the overall energy levels, in support of the dark matter/weak space idea. In a followup on a general dark matter question, would dark matter tend to collect at earth's lagrangian points? Th
  3. I have read lately that superconducting material may not only exclude magnetic fields, but perhaps also gravitational waves. Could the piezos I am using show any altered effects at liquid nitrogen temps? I doubt the piezos would be superconductive even at ultra cold temps if tested. Liquid nitro is cheap and readily available so I will try it when the next arrangement is functional and waveform patterns have been established just for fun. Hopefully they won't shatter when run cold. With the new setup I should be able to pump 20 watts into each individual element. Up to now, only about a fe
  4. Could the intermittent results be due to the off timing of the tests? A predominance of more kinetic energy on one end of the device vs. the other may change rapidly, averaging to zero, and when the experiment is shut down at the right moment, the energy differential is near it's highest, giving it a "cherry picked" but real result over the many test cycles. This would mean it needs a precise and rapidly timed on/off sequence, giving pulses of thrust instead of a steady force.
  5. Since gravitational lensing occurs with large things such as galaxies, could black holes serve the same function? If, near the event horizon with it's high gravitational gradient, would a sharp focus of light rays occur at certain distances from the event horizon? Too far away and the gradient decreases. Too close to the black hole and the information is lost, so a precise distance vs. gravitational gradient point might give a clear image to a distant observer from something far away from it. Any observation would almost certainly be positioned at an angle to the normal lensed image shallow a
  6. is not every phenomena in the universe subject to entropy...is this not a valid scientific principle?
  7. yes, they essentially become real particles, at least as stable as any free particle subject to decay. I see the "waste" energy of the annialation phase of virtual particles as dark energy, as the physical process has inherent inefficiencies.
  8. the longer virtual particles survive, the lower their energy? does this mean that the energy is lowered to zero as it is all converted to matter as in the case of Hawking radiation? Also, if the energy of long term survivors is less, so will the resultant minimum energy waste upon recombination, as in the source of dark energy idea, making it "weak space".
  9. correct, but closely related via the pair mechanism behaviors in various settings.
  10. to say the effects of the casimir test are electromagnetic in nature is not to say that they have nothing to do with gravitation. It seems to me that the "stretching of space" is accomplished within the virtual particle creation/annialation mechanism, and the duration of their brief existences has directly to do as to the "stretching" of the orbits of the pairs. The longer the pairs are kept separate mean more of an effect to the environment. The ultimate example of this is Hawking radiation, where particles are prevented from making the final step of the annialation process, therefore caused
  11. weak space is what I propose instead of the term dark matter, as that is described to be composed of invisible particles that only exhibit gravitational effects on mass. I say that the inherent inefficiency of all physical process applies also to virtual particles as they are indeed "real" albeit for a brief instant of time . During the time that they are extant in the universe, they must obey it's laws, therefore is held to the inefficiency of physical process. Conservation of energy means that waste energy must show up, so why not as the dark energy. Weak space means simply that the particul
  12. even though they are "virtual", they show up long enough to have a "real", albeit fleeting presence in the universe, or else the casimir experiment would not work. Doesn't any physical process have an inherent inefficiency? Why not these particle interactions?
  13. as to your statement: "(dark) energy doesn't have energy levels. Composite systems with attractive interactions do." Virtual particles are composite systems, with each particle/antiparticle pair under first repulsive, then attractive interactions of a certain total duration. Why not consider that the interaction periods are not identical between some pairs, then the force expression of pairs in the creation/annialation process would vary, allowing it's measured effect on the test to vary. I propose that the "waste product" of this process is what is termed dark energy and that force is pro
  14. Why can't dark energy have some variations, and if it does, how would one know? As I understand, the casimir test measures a reduction of forces as the region is restricted by the close plates. The test outputs would drop as the less propulsive space would enter the plates from one side. The drop would be temporary, and only offer a difference signal until the weak space region envelops the entire structure, thus offering no differences of pressures with which to gain a signal from. So, it would be a weak transit signal, showing only that a small blip in the readings occurred. This blip wou
  15. if dark energy has more than one energy level, it would have a tendency to congregate the lower energy points of space to areas embedded within the overall field of predominant higher energy. The higher positive forces of that field would congregate the lower energies, making those regions attractive to matter as it is carried along with the gradient of higher energy to lower. This could mimic the appearance of dark matter, and it not be a particle, but simply areas of "weak space". If this model has any validity, a possible test of what might be to do a long term casimir experiment, in that
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.