Imagine Everything

My bad, I misread & misinterpreted what MigL wrote. @ studiot What is PofLE please?

That is potentially awesome for my idea 🙂. Ahem, I mean, ty @studiot And would this energy stored massless field follow The principle of minimum energy too? So the energy has to be stressed, hmm so going back to a BH, has it ever been considered that the inside of it could be a massless field of stressed energy. And sorry 1 more, if it's massless fields being spoken about, would they not also have massless (non) particles? Perhaps positive & negative? You would have to explain how a neutron structure could exist under such a large attraction. I think I can now & I also don't see the inside as neutron related at the moment. Thank you, really, to all of you that have helped & put up with me, right or wrong as this idea will be, I appreciate it.

Thanks @MigL Have any of you known gravity to be caused by something other than mass?

Thanks @swansont

Thanks @MigL, fermions can be overcome by gravity. Interesting. Gravity is one of the bosses of the universe it seems. Fundamental perhaps? One last question please for someone/s. If science doesn't can't state the interior composition of a BH, How do you know how heavy a BH is? Is this based on Neutron Star collapse & it's weight?

I used to be paranoid before I found out it was the person behind me. I used to be a paranoid schizophrenic before I found out it was myself behind me.

Thanks studiot, that's ok actually, it was more the description of it that caught my eye. The master field. I recall on the link further back to a Sean Carroll lecture that he said that science was now considering? a new bizarre concept that maybe everything is made by fields, not particles (think I got that right) I still have @Mordred advice to drop the original sqep etc echoing in my brain & am trying to find ways to keep it short & sweet. So the master field sounded spot on. All I can think of to call it is the SP-NNPF & that;s still a lot of letters. Even the scientific term I have for them (yet to be disclosed) makes it a 5 letter description. Super Positioned Nameless Non Particle Field. I am a lazy writer I'm afraid, it's easier to abbreviate after I give you the definition of the abbreviation. And as for that thread, I kinda just browse mostly, its' interesting to see the facts that you folks come out with in your replies. I don't always understand much of what I read but sometimes the fragments of science that I have studied a bit, are brought together from your replies & make more sense to me. Question or 2 if I may Do Neutron stars leak Hawkins radiation? And how is it that you know a neutron star & BH are actually made of dense matter? I know you have the maths, have you also measured somehow the matter that is inside a BH & defined different types, like metals, gas for instance?

Hmm so if you hadn't noticed (regarding my question above), I can be as thick as I am clever sometimes. Another double I guess. I think you @studiot mentioned Sean Carroll as thinking about a master field. Thank you, this is actually how I'm seeing this idea. If everything in the universe has it's own field then my ideas SP-NNP must also have one. As well it it's own force. And also it friend Time. Its 23 days until the anniversary of my posting this idea & I am looking at posting the vastly improved (description at least) version of this idea. For the record, I saw possible DM to start with, without understanding more about other things & I'm not sure it is directly pointing towards DM but more towards, something that created the DM to start with. However now, it appears (to me for now) to not only offer a non & anti non particle but also it's own field & force. This field is how I see the universe itself. Ignoring everything else, the universe exists everywhere, all at the same time, directly or indirectly. It answers the infamous something from nothing question. Though the SP-NNP isn't totally nothing, it's as close as anything can be to being nothing. I will explain more on the 24th all going well. For now I will say this. Within this idea I see the force holding the SN-NNP's together as being the Gravit. A precursor to gravity itself.

Interesting. 🙂

Thanks

Thanks, I'm flattered. Yes VP's are very interesting, they had me quite curious for a while, as did the Dark Photon, however the road this idea is taking me towards is something that allows the creation of fields & particles & has to be everywhere, all at the same time, all the time & always has or will be. I think I am proposing something at a very fundamental level, maybe even THE fundamental level . I think it would have to be for it to exist the way it seems to in this idea & I'll also throw in Ontic as a description for it. I understood this to mean simply 'being' & it describes this NNP/F quite well. Idk, I can see it quite clearly but still learning how to put it across properly & I must stress that this all falls within the confines of this idea only. It would have to seemingly excite to some extent but mostly it would perhaps be observed as fluctuating if it is observational at all. Hope I remembered that the right way round, excite is direct measurement right? Thanks, I try, it is just an idea Yes it does, even with newton & the apple. Within this idea, I see this SP-NNP & it's accompanying SP-NNP Field. I do have scientific names for the SP-NNP, SN-NNPF & the force that holds the SP-NNP together but I will withhold them for now. I should add, like all particles seemingly, the SP-NNP- also exists within this idea. The anti SP NNP. or SN NNP- This nameless non particle is literally one step away from being absolute 'nothing' A discrete entity, interesting. It's more like the shadow of a discrete entity. Or the shadow of the shadow of a discrete entity but also less than a shadow... if I understand your question correctly. Unique construct in my model. Unique yes, I think it's uniqueness sets everything else in motion & then everything else keeps the SP NNPF going... Unique to my idea?, probably not. More likely I have got my wires crossed & it really will turn out to be nothing but a nice story. I think if it is real, science has known about it already for a while but for some reason has dismissed it or not taken it into account. That's a mighty big if btw. Nth big And that's very hard to believe, you folks seem to have gone nth places with maths & science. Still find it astounding. It does have a pattern I guess, to me it's a seemingly ordered, randomness eventually leading towards an 'assembly' where they finally become one - Ontic if you will, possibly not for the first time. I do see a wavelength/vibration but that's another part of the idea. Anyway, I seem to have written a lot again. No need to reply, hope it answers you helpfully. I won't post any maths yet but hope to in the future, no matter how bad it might be.

@Phi for All Please don't take that blank analogy the wrong way, It wasn't meant to be annoying. Not even slightly. Aside from 1 post, have you ever known me to post something annoying? I don't think anyway, though I will admit I have probably frustrated a few of you with my lack of knowledge / understanding. Maybe a better thing to have done is asked me what I'm going on about. I didn't think it would draw your ire. Or anyone's. Maybe a better idea would have also been for me to explain more too I suppose. Hmm. Ok I see your point. But for what it's worth, I was waiting to see if anyone asked about it. I will happily explain if I may. The analogy is that is it indeed 'blank' as I put it (not 'nothing', just blank), before anything is drawn onto the page, it could be anything, super positioned until written/observed. And it can be absolutely anything you can think of text or symbol wise before observation. I'm trying to put across the way I see this SN-NNP I have spoken about. The idea (which I haven't gone into fully) seems to point beyond DM, DE, as odd and OTT as I'm sure that must sound. In the idea, I see it as being the very thing that allows, create, decays, infuses with everything else. It is 'something' and 'nothing', both dead and alive as it were. It seems to work in a similar way to memory storage. Maybe super positional memory storage. In the idea, not real life. But I need to learn more about the eigen's still. Apologies for making you or indeed, anyone else frustrated, I was waiting to see if anyone asked. I know not who looks at this. And the who I do not know, I didn't think were many. My questions sometimes go un-answered so I wonder if I have asked something stupid or something. Thanks for reading this anyway Phi, nice to know you do. Though, maybe you won't now. And thanks to anyone else who has or does look at this. The idea still requires a lot of work but at some point in the future I should hopefully be able to muster up a tidy explanation of it. Please tell me if I have mis understood super position by the way.

@Sohan Lalwani Scroll up a little. Regarding the idea. I should have said the above 'blank' is analogous to how I think this SN-NNP behaves & where the SN-NNP is infused / created & decayed.

It has my very very crude understanding of maths and only in a 'SP' vector (I think) however I need to learn more before I could have faith that what I put forward would make enough sense to me & also to anyone that reads this. And it describes something that might actually be beyond DM, DE or more 'angstrom2' like? nth tiny Anyway, I came here today to write something I didn't see coming, at all if I'm honest. I'm not forced to eat my words but I have seen a few replies recently from @Sohan Lalwani and they have come across as seemingly quite mature & polite. So I should acknowledge that in the scheme of things perhaps. I won't give you +1 but it's nice to see, well done. Most people here that reply to you are usually only ever trying to help you. The rest of this reply is intentionally 'blank' but to me anyway, it gives a tldr'ish very simple overview of my idea atm. End of 'blank' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Have a good weekend

Thanks, that helps. I think. You will know if it does as it will be used in this idea. I can see it fitting in but still need to understand it more. Can I think then of eigenspace, eigenfunction, eigenvalue, eigenvector and eigenstate being used to describe pretty much anything, ever with maths being the universal language?

Taken from the net: eigenstates /ī′gən-stāt″/ Plural form of eigenstate nounOne of a set of quantum-mechanical descriptions of the possible state of a physical system, using the mathematics of eigenvectors and generally existing in a state of superposition until the moment of observation. A dynamic quantum mechanical state whose wave function is an eigenvector that corresponds to a physical quantity. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik In the orange part I have highlighted, in lay mans terms, can I understand this as being a measurement becoming a particle becoming a part of other particles/atoms/fields? And if it is say, a D quark, then the SuperPoisitioned quark would be an U quark.

It’s got to be a system where it makes sense to apply QM to it, i.e express a wave function and apply an operator. Thanks Also thanks.

I don’t know what that means. I had a thought in my head but if what I wrote didn't make sense then I think I might have gone a bit awry in the way I understand a system. I'll come back to this another time, I think it's important. For what it's worth, I was wondering about a universe sized system. One that all other systems fall into, make up & mimic somehow.

Why doesn't France have any painkillers? Because Paracetamol

Systems can have an infinite number of eigenstates. It depends on the system. The energy states of the hydrogen atom, for instance, has an infinite number of levels. But a simpler finite square well has a finite number. Yeah I worded that badly, but that's what I was trying to find out. Thanks. This idea has to be everywhere, all the time, all at the same time so these eigenstates are very interesting. As is entanglement but I guess I need to go re read up on that. No, to say “due to entanglement” gets cause and effect backwards. Entanglement is a two-particle situation. You can describe superposition in a single system. Can that one system also be as big as it can be tiny, so to speak? A system made of other systems, made of other systems... ?

Interesting. So does that mean there can only be nth eigenstates in a system that are required by that system? It would have to be a minimum of 2 due to entanglement? Or am I remembering incorrectly. If I'm way off, no need to explain. I appreciate what you have said. I can do some research. Thanks

Forenote, I couldn't seem to edit the word links to normal, I haven't placed links on purpose except for the wiki site directly. It was copied and pasted from there. May I ask, if the next bit is what you science guys calls measurement? In various interpretations of quantum mechanics, wave function collapse, also called reduction of the state vector,[1] occurs when a wave function—initially in a superposition of several eigenstates—reduces to a single eigenstate due to interaction with the external world. Taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse Can I also take from this that the eigenstate is the superpositioned non measurement (or pre measurement) and that the wavelength collapse is also known as measurement? Interaction with the external world meaning, other fields? other particles?

Thank you @StringJunky It's a very odd but also very very interesting scenario isn't it. Sorry if went slightly OT, didn't mean to take anything away from your original post.

Thanks for posting this @StringJunky Interesting stuff. Is the twin slot experiment also, almost directly, evidence of superposition. (We just can't see it right?) Showing the effects of said superposition projected into the multiple slots they create on the other side.?

This is for my future reference, thanks joigus Gravitons, provided they exist, should not have mass. Interaction carriers having mass would violate gauge symmetry. Gravitons, provided they exist, should be sourced by anything having local energy density, not particularly hyper-dense sources. Gravitons, provided they exist, should not undergo any appreciable clustering themselves.