Is quantum physics actually space/time ?

[jlivingstonsg]

-----------------------------------------------------

In the movie Interstellar(2014) they live on planet Gargantua near a black hole and time is moving much slower. One hour on the planet would be 7 years on earth.

Lets say time moved much slower on the planet. They would see the planets and stars moving like white stripes in the night sky.

The planets would seem to be as a cloud around the sun in its solar system.

They would see time and the speed of light in space moving much much faster than on the planet.

Now lets say it is like that in micro-cosmos.

Time is moving much faster in particle physics.

Our time is much slower than in micro cosmos.
When a electron is moving around the nucleus,  its time is much faster.
It is moving much faster than the speed of light.
And that is why we see the electron like a cloud around the nucleus.
When we dectect the electron we interact and disturb its time and it, for that detection moment, is in our time and we see it as a particle.

When we dont detect it, it is again back in its microcosmic higher time speed and seem to be everywhere around the nucleus or in the universe.

I believe I can expain quantum physics with space/time.
Anyone here interested?

 

Regards from Sweden

--------------------------------------------------------------------

[swansont]

1 hour ago, jlivingstonsg said:

When a electron is moving around the nucleus,  its time is much faster.
It is moving much faster than the speed of light.

What is the evidence that makes you think it’s moving faster than c?

[joigus]

1 hour ago, jlivingstonsg said:

Our time is much slower than in micro cosmos.
When a electron is moving around the nucleus,  its time is much faster.
It is moving much faster than the speed of light.
And that is why we see the electron like a cloud around the nucleus.

An electron moving around the nucleus cannot exceed the speed of light. It can get close to the speed of light though. In fact, if you assume just that, you can get a limit on Z (the atomic number) for a hydrogen-like atom which happens to be of the right size (somewhere over 100). This matches the experiments.

OTOH, fast-moving objects have a much slower coordinate time (measured from the inertial system from which their speed is perceived as "fast") than their proper time (measured from a reference system that moves with them). That's why high-energy muons from cosmic rays have much longer decay times as perceived from us.

[exchemist]

3 hours ago, jlivingstonsg said:

-----------------------------------------------------

In the movie Interstellar(2014) they live on planet Gargantua near a black hole and time is moving much slower. One hour on the planet would be 7 years on earth.

Lets say time moved much slower on the planet. They would see the planets and stars moving like white stripes in the night sky.

The planets would seem to be as a cloud around the sun in its solar system.

They would see time and the speed of light in space moving much much faster than on the planet.

Now lets say it is like that in micro-cosmos.

Time is moving much faster in particle physics.

Our time is much slower than in micro cosmos.
When a electron is moving around the nucleus,  its time is much faster.
It is moving much faster than the speed of light.
And that is why we see the electron like a cloud around the nucleus.
When we dectect the electron we interact and disturb its time and it, for that detection moment, is in our time and we see it as a particle.

When we dont detect it, it is again back in its microcosmic higher time speed and seem to be everywhere around the nucleus or in the universe.

I believe I can expain quantum physics with space/time.
Anyone here interested?

 

Regards from Sweden

--------------------------------------------------------------------

No this is incorrect. The ke of electrons in atoms is consistent with a speed <c. In fact, the explanation for the colour of gold is that, with very high nuclear charge in heavy atoms, the notional speed becomes a significant fraction of c, requiring a relativistic correction to the orbital energies.  But still <c, obviously. More details here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_quantum_chemistry

So I'm not very interested in your idea, I'm afraid. 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by exchemist

[jlivingstonsg]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

What is the evidence that makes you think it’s moving faster than c?

The only way to explain quantum physics is if particle micro cosmos is in its own time that is much faster.

The particle micro cosmos time is much faster  so it mean that speed of light is moving much faster.

Just as the people on the planet Gargantua they will see the planets in the night sky spinn around the planet

as if the planets seem to be as clouds around the solar system. 

They will see the universe end, if time is slow enough on the planet.

So for them all these planets will be as a spheric shells around its sun. 

That is what we see in particle physics.

We live in a much slower time compared to particle micro cosmos.

So speed of light will be much much faster in micro cosmos,  from our perspective.

That is why we see particles as quantum fields.

We can take a picture of the quantum world and we will see particles.

But we do not see the "bullits" of the gun.

We only see the effect of the "bullit".

 

Particles  live in a time that move much faster than ours.

 

Einstein was right

Everything is   space/time.

 

Regards from Sweden

---------------------------------------------------------

[MigL]

Your entire premise is wrong.
You cannot measure anything in your frame of reference/gravitational potential level that indicates gravitational time dilation.
It is only comparison to higher or lower potential that evidences GTD.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, jlivingstonsg said:

The only way to explain quantum physics is if particle micro cosmos is in its own time that is much faster.

I studied quantum physics and this was not required.

Do you have evidence to support your claim?

[jlivingstonsg]

------------------------------------------

Its possible to explain quantum physics,  if particles live in a microcosmic world where time is much faster than ours.

From the view of these particles, 

the universe is frosen in time and they can travel around in this frosen in time universe.

From our view of much slower time,  it is like these particles is everywhere when we do not detect them.

Just like these quantum fields.

But we can take a picture any time of a particle, just like we take a picture of a bullit from a rifle.

We see the particle,  just as we see the bullit.

But when not using detector (or camera),  we only see the effect of these particles (and bullets from the rifle).

 

Regards from Sweden

---------------------------------------------------------

[swansont]

9 minutes ago, jlivingstonsg said:

------------------------------------------

Its possible to explain quantum physics,  if particles live in a microcosmic world where time is much faster than ours.

From the view of these particles, 

the universe is frosen in time and they can travel around in this frosen in time universe.

From our view of much slower time,  it is like these particles is everywhere when we do not detect them.

Just like these quantum fields.

But we can take a picture any time of a particle, just like we take a picture of a bullit from a rifle.

We see the particle,  just as we see the bullit.

But when not using detector (or camera),  we only see the effect of these particles (and bullets from the rifle).

 

Regards from Sweden

---------------------------------------------------------

Repeating an absurd claim is not evidence.

[Ghideon]

4 hours ago, jlivingstonsg said:

The only way to explain quantum physics is if particle micro cosmos is in its own time that is much faster.

The description is vague but debunking the idea seems rather trivial? For instance Fermi gas and free electron model makes predictions about macroscopic objects. How does for instance electric conductivity work in your model?

[jlivingstonsg]

1 hour ago, Ghideon said:

The description is vague but debunking the idea seems rather trivial? For instance Fermi gas and free electron model makes predictions about macroscopic objects. How does for instance electric conductivity work in your model?

Can you explain in more detail what the problem is,  in these models ?

 

MagI

---

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Repeating an absurd claim is not evidence.

Whell I imagin that the big bang created gravitational  pulses so intence that these,

what we call quantum fields, for every particle, is a gravitational pulse. 

One gravitational pulse for every quantum field.

And because of the much higher speed of time in these pulses, there is only one particle for every quantum field.

Time in these space/time pulses is much faster than our time.

These pulses is vibrating and expanding out and is creating the universe we live in.

Everything else is then built up by these vibrating space/time pulses and what we see as planets or living creatures are actually standing waves of these space/time pulses.

The accelerating expanding universe is causing what we see as planet movements and evolution on earth.

As these vibrating pulses expand in the universe, the frequency is getting higher and causing finer and finer evolution details in the universe.

 

 

MagI

----------

[swansont]

24 minutes ago, jlivingstonsg said:

Whell I imagin that the big bang created gravitational  pulses so intence that these,

what we call quantum fields, for every particle, is a gravitational pulse. 

One gravitational pulse for every quantum field.

And because of the much higher speed of time in these pulses, there is only one particle for every quantum field.

Time in these space/time pulses is much faster than our time.

These pulses is vibrating and expanding out and is creating the universe we live in.

Everything else is then built up by these vibrating space/time pulses and what we see as planets or living creatures are actually standing waves of these space/time pulses.

The accelerating expanding universe is causing what we see as planet movements and evolution on earth.

As these vibrating pulses expand in the universe, the frequency is getting higher and causing finer and finer evolution details in the universe.

 

And what does this have to do with electrons allegedly traveling faster than c in atoms?

Where is your mathematical model? What testable predictions do you make? How is the idea falsifiable?

[jlivingstonsg]

10 minutes ago, swansont said:

And what does this have to do with electrons allegedly traveling faster than c in atoms?

Where is your mathematical model? What testable predictions do you make? How is the idea falsifiable?

These vibrating gravitational pulses also create standing waves as these nucleus, atoms and electon clouds, we can detect.

 

MagI

---------------

 

[joigus]

59 minutes ago, jlivingstonsg said:

Whell I imagin that the big bang created gravitational  pulses so intence that these,

what we call quantum fields, for every particle, is a gravitational pulse. 

The scattering properties of gravitational waves are completely different to those of every other quantum field --they actually don't scatter, but go through like the distorsion of space-time they are. How do you "code" the properties of massive fields into a gravitational wave? Nothing you say makes sense in the context of known physics.

You haven't even mentioned temperature, and simple considerations of how temperature affects the average value of speed of elementary particles simply rule out almost everything you're saying. And so on, and so on.

As @Ghideon has said, it doesn't take much to know for sure that you can't be right. In fact, you're so badly wrong, it's actually a daunting task to list all the mistakes. Why don't you ask some questions instead?

[jlivingstonsg]

9 minutes ago, joigus said:

The scattering properties of gravitational waves are completely different to those of every other quantum field --they actually don't scatter, but go through like the distorsion of space-time they are. How do you "code" the properties of massive fields into a gravitational wave? Nothing you say makes sense in the context of known physics.

You haven't even mentioned temperature, and simple considerations of how temperature affects the average value of speed of elementary particles simply rule out almost everything you're saying. And so on, and so on.

As @Ghideon has said, it doesn't take much to know for sure that you can't be right. In fact, you're so badly wrong, it's actually a daunting task to list all the mistakes. Why don't you ask some questions instead?

I am not talking about gravitational waves.

I am discussing if it is possible for a gravitational wave to be created so intence from the big bang,

that it its time in its wave peak stop or go infinitely fast, compared to normal space.

That is why the universe can expand faster than the speed of light.

The universe is built up by gravitational pulses(quantum fields) where time go infinitely fast.

These pulses(quantum fields) see everything else as a frosen universe, expanding in slow, slow mothion.

You are the scientist who know if this is possible to use, to build up our universal structure.

I am just trying to imagin if this could be the source of these quantum fields.

So what now.

I am asking you scientists.

Could this be a possible explanation to these quantum field,  that they are space/time pulses?

So I start with a questions?

Is it possible for the big bang to create a gravitational pulse that,  in its peak, time stop or go infinitely fast?

Would it frose in its pulse form, if its internal peak time stop, compared to the normal universe, but still expand out as a spheric shell

with a radius speed of normal lightspeed?

Would these pulses be able to vibrate in different internal wavelengths,  as they expand out and create the universe,

to be able to be seen as these quantum fields?

With that I ask, would the standing wave on these  expanding space/time  sphearic shells be able to have an internal standing wave,

as a ballon can have a standing wave, that have a evolution of vibrations,  as it is inflated?

 

Lets start with these questions......

 

 

Regards MagI

-------------------------------

[Ghideon]

1 hour ago, jlivingstonsg said:

Can you explain in more detail what the problem is,  in these models ?

Yes, if you provide a more detailed description of your idea.

But some quick notations:

10 hours ago, jlivingstonsg said:

Time is moving much faster in particle physics.

The free electron model predict for instance DC electrical conductivity σ for Ohm's law and the model includes time. Your statement above is not compatible with how conductivity in metals works. 

 

[joigus]

39 minutes ago, jlivingstonsg said:

Could this be a possible explanation to these quantum field,  that they are space/time pulses?

[...]

No. Space-time pulses have no charge. Gravitational waves are transverse, massive quantum fields are not.

Gravitational waves have different number of components (tensor) than spinor and boson quantum fields.

Gravitational waves do not have spin. I'm not sure that even makes sense.

Space-time pulses (gravitational waves) do not scatter off matter. Rather, they are like blips of space-time stretching going through matter.

Nothing moves faster than light.

Expansion speed can exceed the speed of light because it's not the speed of anything moving from one place to another; it's rather the rate of space itself stretching.

I don't know what you mean by "time going infinitely fast".

I find it very difficult to understand what you mean, especially when you say it all in words.

You can say sentences full of meaningful terms like, for example "time catches up with space" or "energy is cooling down" and yet, don't mean anything because all the terms are used improperly. That's what's happening here.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, jlivingstonsg said:

These vibrating gravitational pulses also create standing waves as these nucleus, atoms and electon clouds, we can detect.

 

MagI

---------------

 

And yet I still see no evidence being presented.

This does not fulfill the requirements of speculations. 

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/86720-guidelines-for-participating-in-speculations-discussions/

1. Speculations must be backed up by evidence or some sort of proof. If your speculation is untestable, or you don't give us evidence (or a prediction that is testable), your thread will be moved to the Trash Can.

Last chance!

[jlivingstonsg]

On 9/8/2022 at 12:47 AM, joigus said:

No. Space-time pulses have no charge. Gravitational waves are transverse, massive quantum fields are not.

Gravitational waves have different number of components (tensor) than spinor and boson quantum fields.

Gravitational waves do not have spin. I'm not sure that even makes sense.

Space-time pulses (gravitational waves) do not scatter off matter. Rather, they are like blips of space-time stretching going through matter.

Nothing moves faster than light.

Expansion speed can exceed the speed of light because it's not the speed of anything moving from one place to another; it's rather the rate of space itself stretching.

I don't know what you mean by "time going infinitely fast".

I find it very difficult to understand what you mean, especially when you say it all in words.

You can say sentences full of meaningful terms like, for example "time catches up with space" or "energy is cooling down" and yet, don't mean anything because all the terms are used improperly. That's what's happening here.

I just try to imagin everything as space/time.

What if charge is a space/time.   I do not talk about gravitational waves.  I ask if Big Bang could create gravitational pulses(GP).

Could the Big Bang have created gravitational pulses(GP)?

Could these pulses be something else than transverse?

Could a GP have different number of components and spin? 

 I imagin a GP as a distortion in space/time that make the time stop so that the GP is stuck in its space/time fluctuation but continue to expand as a pulse out in space with the speed of light. 

And these are the quantum fields that create standing waves and we see these standing waves of GP as planets and living creatures that evolve because these GP expand out in space and these GP frequencys get higher and that is why we see a evolution in life and technology.

My only question is ...

Could the Big Bang have created Gravitational Pulses so intence that time stop in them.

 

Regards  MagI

----------------------------

[Ghideon]

2 hours ago, jlivingstonsg said:

My only question is ...

My only question is why you mix questions with completely invalid claims? 

Such as this one:

On 9/7/2022 at 3:51 PM, jlivingstonsg said:

The only way to explain quantum physics is if particle micro cosmos is in its own time that is much faster.

It limits the possibility of a fruitful discussion when (possibly interesting) questions are diluted with stuff that lacks evidence and has no connection to mainstream theories.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, jlivingstonsg said:

I just try to imagin everything as space/time.

What if charge is a space/time.

!

Moderator Note

Physics is more than this, though. You need to have a mathematical model, and then have experimental evidence or the ability to get it (i.e. you make testable predictions). Our speculations rules require this.

What you have offered is an Animal House "our whole solar system could be like one tiny atom in the fingernail of some other giant being" WAG, whether or not mind-altering chemicals are involved.

It's not anywhere close to being enough.