Man on the Street dialogs about The Infinite Spongy Universe Model

MOS: What exactly did you say was responsible for the compression being applied to the overlap space, to momentarily contain the high density spot long enough for it to convert wave energy to mass?

It is a result of the force of energy density equalization. The interior of the individual parent waves are in the process of equalizing as their expansion takes place. When that expansion is interrupted by their convergence with each other, the equalization process is interrupted at that location. That is where the momentary high energy density spot forms. In that forming higher density overlap space, equalization also begins (within it) when the spot begins to expand. In that situation, the two environments that are equalizing with each other are the interior space of the parent waves, equalizing with the interior space of the newly emerging wave, which is beginning to expand itself.

Hence you have an initial compression between the parent waves applied to the high density spot at the point of intersection, due to the rate of expansion of the parent waves when they converge.

MOS: So the initial compression is from the force of expansion of the parent waves at the location that their expansion is interrupted by their convergence with each other?

QW: Yes.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

MOS: Explain how the foundational medium, which you say is composed of tiny spherical waves whose radius expands at the speed of light and gravity, but where there is a time delay built into every tiny sub-quantum event, can then serve to enable light and gravity wave fronts to travel at the invariant velocity c in spite of all of those individual time delays?

QW: The fact that you bring up a point that I didn't think through very well is exactly why it is good to talk the features of my model through with someone who is paying attention, lol.

The spacetime foam is something that I have been telling myself would represent a foundational level of sub-quantum action, and would work with the quantum action I have going on at the quantum level where particles are discussed. When you brought up spacetime foam, I was shooting from the hip when I described it with its various characteristics, and presented it as the action that governs the advance of light and gravity waves.

Now that you call me out on it, I would say I invoke the foundation medium as the reason that light and gravity aren't "instantaneous", but are limited to the invariant velocity of waves in the "vacuum" of space in any given observes locality. As you point out, if the tiny foundational waves expand at the speed of light, and are continually intersecting and overlapping in an action process that features a time delay with each interaction, I have to back track that right out of the model, lol.

I see the time delay in my model as an effect that reconciles physical events between two observers moving relative to each other, and it is consistent with the "hypothesis of the wave energy density of medium of space". I will have to work on how to word the foundational medium discussion so that it isn't inconsistent.

The mechanics of wave front advance that keeps light and gravity from being instantaneous was just rhetoric the way it was stated, more than a working part of my model. Sorry for the confusion on my part.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

MOS: There is a lot of talk here about time delay. Can you say the reason for including "time delay" in your model, and exactly what it means?

QW: Yes. That discussion brings us back to the talk about the foundational medium. The characteristics of it include that each tiny wave energy convergence produces a momentary high energy density spot at the foundational level. That represents a sub-quantum of energy, and each spherical wave that expands out form each spot at the foundational level is a sub-quantum wave. If we imagine that action in the absence of matter, it is a constant, uninterrupted, rhythmic foundational action that includes the time delay as wave energy converts to mass, and then back to spherically expanding wave energy, and that repeated "oscillation" action at all points in the foundational medium governs the maximum speed of light and gravity, which is invariant at c, when the time delay is included.

It makes the point that there are mechanics that govern the maximum speed of light and gravity, and they include a time delay in the foundational action process. With its presence, light and gravity waves have a maximum velocity, and advance through the foundational medium at c.

When we add matter to the discussion, the velocity of light and gravity are still invariant in any observers locality, and no variance is noted in the rate that their clock measures time. But when there are two observers in relative motion to each other, one would see that the measure of time passing is slower on the other one's clock, and that is the reason for the time delay talk. It means that no two observers in relative motion to each other will measure time to be passing at the same rate.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

MOS: Ok, I think you addressed my concern about how the foundational medium governs the maximum speed of light and gravity when the repeated time delay of foundational action is included. Why not get to the discussion of time itself in you model, since it differs from the consensus model?

QW: Yes, since I don't invoke general relativity and spacetime, I don't call time a dimension in the same way as it is a dimension of spacetime. I don't quantify time dilation in the same mathematical context of transformations between inertial frames, though the math is quite precise for that purpose. In the "hypothesis of the wave energy density of the medium of space", the length of time it takes a wave to traverse a given patch of space varies depending on the wave energy density of that patch of space, independent of any observer.

The change in velocity of light and gravity is proportional to the difference in wave energy density of the local medium of space relative to the wave action going on at the hypothetical, or as you say, fictional foundational level. An observer in the local space cannot detect the change in velocity on his clock because it continues to appear to tick at a constant rate, but in my model, he would acknowledge that he could be in motion relative to a hypothetical universal rest frame, that we define as the hypothetical foundational medium that governs the maximum speed of light and gravity.

That brings us to the discussion of time measurement using clocks. In my model, time passes at a constant rate in the foundational medium where there is no wave energy density fluctuation. There is no relative motion in the foundational medium, because we define it as being without the presence of particles and objects to interfere with the oscillating rhythm. But in any actual location in the medium of space, other than in that hypothetical foundational level, the rate that we measure time to be passing using clocks varies with the local wave energy density of the medium. Thus two identical clocks in different wave energy density environments will measure the passing of time at two different rates.

 

MOS: I see you are trying to talk about the foundational medium as being a level of action where ... well, where there is no action, lol, other than the constant oscillation of energy in sub-quantum increments, from the tiny sub-quantum wave energy, to sub-quantum high energy density spot, and back to sub-quantum wave energy, at all points across the universe, for talking purposes. I see the convenience of setting up such a unobservable and undetectable circumstance for comparison, when talking about the motion of particles and objects, and their associated wave energy, that then are hosted by the foundational medium. So I can go along with that as long as we acknowledge that there is no "absolute space", even if we can remove all matter and all sources of light and gravity, leaving only the foundational medium to sit there and oscillate in place, and then there is no distinguishable point in space from all other points.

QW: Correct, what I describe as the foundational medium, never existed on its own, given the three infinities of my model, in a universe full of matter and energy, that has always existed. It is only a hypothesis of what the foundational medium would be like if we were to remove all matter and outside effects; thought experiment material, for sure.

The intention is not to say there is "absolute space", because there isn't, but only to refer to a condition where a single observer, or object, could be said to be at rest, relative to a universal background. Otherwise, in the current medium of space, not the hypothetical foundational medium, the rest condition of a single object is defined as a location where wave energy action is the same in all directions, which is much like if there was no light or gravity wave action at all.

As you pointed out, one observer would experience that condition at that undetectable level of the foundational medium of space, which doesn't actually exist on its own, since there is no space that is completely separate from the influence of particles and objects, light, and gravity. It is just useful for discussing the presence of particles and objects within a universal energy background that accommodates the advance of light and gravity waves, and provides a hypothetical rest position for discussion purposes.

In any case, there is no need for reference to an absolute rest position or motion relative to the foundational medium, unless there is some academic or thought experiment involved. For example, in a model that features multiple Big Bang arenas like mine, it is conceivable to discuss observers in different Big Bang arenas, and in that case, the foundational medium could be considered conceptually as common ground, connecting the two environments.

 

MOS: Ok, you say you are not invoking absolute space, so good. Now as to your discussion of time, above. What is the root cause of the clocks measuring time to pass at different rates in different energy density environments?

QW: The root cause of the clocks measuring time to pass at different rates in different energy density environments is ... the difference in wave energy density, lol, but more specifically, a corresponding explanation is that particles function slower as the local energy density increases, and clocks are made of particles.

MOS: You say that the length of time it takes a wave to traverse a given patch of space varies depending on the wave energy density of that patch of space. What causes such a wave energy density difference, and does it work both ways, i.e., for both an increase and decrease in wave energy density.

QW: As mentioned, changes in density are caused by relative motion, gravity, and acceleration, and the corresponding increase in wave convergences in the affected space. Identical particles, with their inflowing and out flowing standing wave energy components, will function at the same rate in the same wave energy density environment, but if you change the density of that environment, the rate at which all particles in that space function will change in direct proportion.

MOS: So the variable clock rate boils down to the fact that the particles from which the clock is composed, function at a variable rate, governed by the local wave energy density.

QW: Yes. That relates to the variable rate of particle functioning, and to the fact that particles in my model are composed of wave energy in quantum increments, i.e. their presence is established by complex standing wave patterns. The waves flowing in and out of the pattern are influenced by the local wave energy density of the environment. Note that the wave energy density within the particle space environment is much higher than in the surrounding space environment, and the velocity of waves approaching the standing wave pattern is significantly reduced when they encounter the particle space. The local velocity of the waves is still invariant, i.e., at the speed of gravity, but slower relative to the local energy density difference between the surrounding space and the particle space.

 

MOS: I'm not clear on that. The velocity of waves, light and gravity, are invariant, and yet are slower or faster in a local space where the wave energy density changes? Here is a link to the Basics of light:
http://violet.pha.jhu.edu/~wpb/spectroscopy/basics.html
You should read it.

But you keep lumping light waves and gravity waves together, almost as if they were synonymous in your model.

QW: I have read that, and in my model, invariant means that, at the wave energy density that is present, the velocity of light (and gravity) will measure at nature's maximum velocity for wave energy in that medium.

Light waves (and gravitational waves) are the way the energy is transmitted through space. I have already explained that all particles and objects, in my model, absorb and emit gravitational waves at all times. The velocity of those waves is governed by the density of the medium, and the wave fronts advance with the assist of the rhythmic wave/spot/wave action attributed to the "foundational medium", which is there in the background at all levels of density, to govern the velocity of those waves.

Light (and gravity waves in my model) are slowed down in all kinds of mediums where the density is greater than that of empty space; air, water, glass, diamonds, all have a refractive index in regard to light, which is greater than empty space, and so light traverses them at a lower velocity. However, light and gravity aren't synonymous, because light has unique characteristics associated electric and magnetic fields, which are not characteristics of gravity. Light can be polarized linearly or circularly, and at different angles, etc., and is much more acrobatic that gravitational waves, lol.

Gravitational waves are universally absorbed by the standing wave patterns of particles and objects, but as you know, light can be reflected, refracted, partially absorbed and partially reflected, and even completely absorbed or completely reflected. With light it has to do with the amount of energy carried by the light waves, and the angle of incidence. X-rays plough through more matter because they are at the high energy end of the spectrum with shorter wave lengths.

So you nailed it with that question. We are going to get into some outrageous speculations and hypotheses in my model when talking about the differences and similarities between light waves, gravitational waves, and the particle mechanics of quantum action.

MOS: Ha. Do you expect anyone to buy that?

QW: Lol, I'm a solitary person because of my personal views on cosmology and philosophy. I am careful with whom I reveal my true beliefs, and am appreciative of friends and family who let me go on about it; and to the rules of the SciForums Alternative Theories sub-forum for allowing my threads.

 

MOS: Of course light waves and gravity waves are not synonymous, and I like the way you addressed that in your response, but what is still hanging out there in my mind is the way you lump them together in regard to waves traversing the medium of space, and in the discussion of standing wave patterns, and the spherically out flowing wave energy. How come you seem to lump light and gravitational waves together so much?

QW: Waves, light and gravity, share the characteristic that they carry energy through the medium of space.

Every event in the infinite past, present, and future, across the infinite universe, will feature the intersection of waves that are carrying energy through space. Big Bangs produce nature's maximum energy waves. Hot dense-state energy balls from them are nature's most compressed form of wave energy. Particles are composed of wave energy in quantum increments. All particles and objects absorb energy waves and emit energy waves. Gravity is caused by the directional inflow of wave energy from the gravitational wave energy out flow of surrounding particles and objects because particles and objects move in the direction of the net highest source of inflowing wave energy. All particles have wave-particle duality. Mass is the conversion of wave energy to matter, and matter is composed of high energy density spots at the convergence of waves, within particles, which are composed of standing wave patterns. The foundational medium that serves as the universal energy background consists of constant rhythmic oscillations of sub-quantum waves. The red shift is detected as the shift in the spectral lines of light waves from distant sources. The cosmic microwave energy background consists of low energy, low frequency wave energy that has a lengthy heritage of converging arena waves and hot dense big bangs, not to mention the wave function that is at the heart of quantum mechanics, etc., etc..

So I lump light and gravity together because of the characteristics they share. But also, there is another reason that typifies my promise of outrageous speculations ...

MOS: Do tell ...

QW: Well, it's Friday night. Maybe I'll start a series of posts about that in the morning ...

 

MOS: Tell me what you have that is so outrageous in regard to the reason you lump light and gravity together?

QW: This is going to be a long post, ending in what I call outrageous contemplation that I am engaging in.

It starts with wave-particle duality, and the nature of the photon as a wave-particle. It includes the view that photons are standing wave patterns that are initially emitted at the local speed of light. That view is followed up by the view that standing wave patterns move in the direction of the net highest inflowing wave energy density from the surrounding medium of space. Those statements combine to one conclusion, and that is that the photon gets all of its inflowing wave energy from the direction of motion.

Further, in my model, the photon has mass, based on the fact that there are converging waves within the particle space that cause momentary high energy density spots within that particle space. The hypothesis is that wave energy is converted to mass momentarily, due to the time delay experienced as the waves making up the standing wave pattern converge with each other, as well as with the directionally inflowing wave energy from the surrounding space; which in the case of the photon, is from the forward path.

I would refer you to my thread named, "Fleshing out wave particle duality", but I know you are familiar with it. Just a reminder that the presence of a particle, the standing wave pattern, displays both location and momentum, but an observer cannot determine both. Measure location, and the information about momentum is lost, and vice versa. It is mentionable that I conclude that neither momentum nor location measurements can be totally accurate, because of the way wave particles move through the medium of space; they move via a sequence of new spots and new waves out of those spots. The point is that at any instant, some of the energy of the photon is in the from high energy density spots that are said to have location, and some of the energy is in the form of expanding spherical waves that emerge from those spots, and they determine where the next set of spots will form. It is no wonder that the next set of spots for the photon will form in the forward direction.

When you measure location, the information is provided by the presence of the high density spots, and when you measure momentum, the product of energy and velocity, the information is provided by the expanding wave energy accompanying those spots. You never get a measuremtent that shows both the particle state and the wave state.

So far, the discussion of the wave-particle nature of the photon has been about the standing wave particle constantly refreshed from inflowing wave energy component, but the standing wave has two components. The other component is the spherically out flowing wave energy that is continually being emitted from the standing wave pattern as the photon speeds through the medium of space.

Keeping in mind that the photon particle is the standing wave pattern, and the inflowing wave energy component is the energy that is sustaining the photon's presence, the high density spots representing its particle state, there is still that spherically out flowing wave energy component to discuss. The outrageous bit in this post is the fact that in am in contemplation about the conclusion that the out flowing gravitational wave energy, and the light energy in its wave state, are the same energy waves.

 

I've been toying with this light and gravity connection since I had a similar idea, in its infancy stage (where it still is today :shrug: ), on some remote forum back in 2012 with a friend named Dale Hileman (maybe Dale will remember which forum that was; he got banned as I recall

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

). Here is a link that dates back to those days when I first considered the possible relationship and mentioned it here at SciForums on Muzulu's thread (looks like Muzulu got banned here sometime after that):

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/luminiferous-aether-exists.114230/page-54#post-3020135

I put it on the shelf while I worked on the wave-particle hypothesis, and complex standing wave patterns. A few days ago I got an email from Dale Hileman on a the topic of his beer tasting hobby, and since the effect was fresh on my mind, that reminded me I had named the effect after him.

Dale, if you are still active on the physics and cosmology circuit, stop in and acknowledge the rebirth of the DaleHileman Effect, lol.

 

MOS: You have talked a lot about the photon as a wave particle, and you acknowledge there are differences and similarities between photon wave energy and gravitational wave energy. Your description of the photon wave-particle as a standing wave pattern seems to cover observations like the two slit experiments where photons in their particle state, go through one or the other slit, but not both, and in their electromagnetic wave state, which you compare to spherically out flowing gravitational wave energy, the spherical wave front goes through both slits. That is consistent with the idea that the wave state is the spherical out flowing component of the complex standing wave pattern hypothesis.

1) But just mentioning electromagnetic nature of the photon's spherically out flowing wave energy component, and suggesting how it mechanically takes on all of the other unique characteristics of light, like being a transverse wave, and polarization is a complex matter. 2) Also, you acknowledged that some light is absorbed and some reflected by particles and objects depending on wavelength and angle, and so how does that reconcile with the gravitational waves that you seem to say are absorbed and reemitted by the standing wave patterns every time their wave fronts encounters them.

 

QW: Wait, I think I hear my mommy calling me, lol ... no, I'll have to address those questions for my own benefit because that is what my hobby is all about, personal opinion on the "how" in terms of mechanics.

Note that the photon in my model is always in both states because it always has some of its energy represented by the high energy density spots, which I call mass within the standing wave pattern, and the rest of its energy in the spherically expanding waves that emerge from each spot of mass within the pattern; the energy fluctuates between spots and waves as a result of the process of quantum action, as it does in all particles, and I describe quantum action in a mechanistic way, just like I did arena action.

The states are not "entangled" in superposition because they are individually always present; some spots and some waves inside the particle space at every instant. When we observe the photon, we see one or the other state, but not both. When we see the particle state we are detecting the mass, and when we see the wave state we are detecting the wave energy of light and its effects. It is not a decoherence from a superposition of states though, because the state that we observe or measure is determined by the mechanics of the means of observation/measurement.

The photon standing wave pattern, i.e., what I refer to as its particle space, acts like all standing wave particles in regard to the two components of standing waves. They are composed of directionally inflowing gravitational wave energy, and spherically out flowing gravitational wave energy, and it is that out flowing component, which I am contemplating is also electromagnetic wave energy (light waves), that need to be described with some further mechanics.

 

MOS: That brings us to your problem that the standing wave pattern absorbs most inflowing gravitational wave energy without seeming to be fussy in regard to wavelength, or angle of incidence, and yet those characteristics result in much of the light waves not being absorbed as gravitational wave energy in the same way as non-electromagnetic gravitational waves are.

QW: All of a particle's out flowing gravitational wave energy is conserved; it is necessary for the overall conservation of energy in the model. If some of those waves are treated by the particle space as light, and not gravity, by being deflected from the surface of particles and objects, then we would have to draw some conclusions from that.

One conclusion is that the light waves that do get absorbed by particles are fulfilling their role as gravitational waves at the point of absorption, and the reflected portion of the light waves goes on to be absorbed later.

It might stay in the background, traversing the medium of space, and having its wavelength altered and lengthened as the arena expands into the space surrounding it, until it again encounters particles and objects, and gets another chance to be absorbed gravitationally. What was once light that didn't pass the gravitational wave energy "test" of the encountered particles and objects, might reside in the expanding arena's space, and might pass that same test later.

It might also be deflected at one level of energy density, but become absorbed in vastly higher levels of energy density. For example sunlight that is reflected by the Earth, might go on to be absorbed gravitationally by stars in its future path; maybe even by our sun, thus fulfilling its ultimate role as gravitational wave energy.

The fact that some of the light energy, which I have said is the spherically out flowing gravitational wave energy of photons, gets deflected initially, does not defeat the hypothesis that it is emitted as the spherically out flowing wave energy component of the photon's standing wave pattern.

 

MOS: If I accept your outrageous light/gravity wave hypothesis in the first place, then I can accept your argument that gravitational wave energy (even that which is emitted by photons as light/gravity waves), is conserved. That applies in spite of the fact that much of that light/gravity wave radiation is initially reflected instead of being absorbed, given the subsequent circumstances that you suggest.

QW: I should point out that the spherical out flowing light/gravity wave from the single photon standing wave is of one frequency/wavelength. If starlight is the light source, there is a family of photons of many wavelengths making up the white light, some more readily absorbed than others. But I maintain that eventually all of that photon wave energy will be absorbed by matter, somewhere across the universe, thus completing the energy/mass/energy conservation cycle in my model. Until then it is conserved in the background wave energy (not to be confused with the CMB).

But in order to be seen or felt, the photon particle itself must strike our eye or a detector. Thus spherically expanding light/gravity waves are not seen as such, they are seen via the ways we detect light in its wave state, as in interference patterns after light passes through two slits.

 

QW: Don't let it be forgotten that I have said this light/gravity wave hypothesis is in the contemplation stages, and has been on the back burner for a few years, until recently. In its resurrected form, the hypothesis considers the photon particle is a light/gravity wave energy source, radiating light wave energy of a given frequency, in all directions, while at the same time, each photon's standing wave pattern represents a particle space that carries all of the photon energy emitted by an electron (or by some kind of decay that produces photons).

The photon's light/gravity wave energy out flow is equal to the directionally inflowing wave energy component of the standing wave pattern. The standing wave pattern "contains" the energy of the photon, which is continually refreshed by gravitational wave energy from the direction of motion, as the spherical out flowing light/gravity wave energy is emitted.

The photon therefore is said to contain energy in quantum increments, and a quantum, in that respect, in my model, is equal to the total energy of the photon's standing wave pattern divided by the number of high energy density spots within the particle space. The numerator is the sum of the energy contained in the standing wave pattern, and the denominator is the count of the high density spots from the freeze frame. I would say that if we were to approximate the relationship between the amount of energy in spots vs in waves within the particle space, it would be 1:1. That way it conveniently comes out that the high energy density spot equals a quantum, and each spherical wave emerging from a spot within the particle space equals a quantum of energy; convenient for talking purposes.

 

MOS: Yes, convenient, outrageous, but who's talking about it, ha?

QW: Lol, yes, it is a personal view; the kinds of things I talk to you about, but lacking in extraordinary evidence. The evidence available to everyone is insufficient to answer all questions about the "as yet unknowns". I use the well known evidence as givens in my model.

Each direction from the spherical source is a vector, and the light energy on a vector is supposed to be a transverse wave photon. This arrangement gets iffy fast unless there are more and more photons to fill the widening angles as the vectors spread out. Which there are, as time passes.

The consensus solution to the lack of blind spots at a distance as vectors separate, I think, is that there is a new set of photons emitted from an active light source every instant, and there will always be a new set of vectors lit up, filling blind spots. I could see that being one explanation for why the intensity diminishes as the line of sight increases.

However, the photon out flow, as a light/gravity source, is not backed up by a continual new set of photons, like the light from a star. It is a continual emission from the photon, but the photon is moving in one direction at the speed of light; not comparable to the essentially fixed starlight source.

Still, in my model, gravitational waves and light waves have an infinite reach, with the assist of the foundational medium, to advance the photon's out flowing wave front. It doesn't amplify the wave front, but it advances it while being faithful to the concept of the conservation of energy.

There is a point when old wave energy lengthens, and the energy presence eventually falls below the threshold of the foundational medium. At that point the tiny residual energy "fades and blends" into the "quantum foam"/foundational medium at the vanishing point. The energy isn't lost though, it is considered to be that energy that sustains the foundational medium in exchange for the assist that the foundational medium gives to light and gravity waves passing through it. There is a perpetual balance between the energy used for the assist vs. the energy that fades into the foundational medium.

 

QW: In my model, the hypothetical spherical light/gravity waves emitted from the photon particle, are emitted into, and traverse the foundational medium that is oscillating rhythmically between sub-quantum high energy density spots and sub-quantum spherical waves. It is a sub-quantum realm hosting the quantum realm where quantum action, involving "meaningful" quantum waves, plays out to sustain the presence of the photon standing wave particles.

At each increment of the light/gravity wave motion through the foundational medium, the spherical wave front is absorbed and reemitted as a new tiny spherical wave, advancing the wave front for a very tiny distance and also serving to equalize the energy density behind the wave front. As that takes place, where the advancing wave front is present, you have a place in the foundational medium that has more energy than the places that lie ahead, not yet being passed by the wave front. That creates a differential in the energy level existing in the foundational medium, and that facilitates the spherical advance of the wave front, causing each point on its wave front to propagate to the next incremental position via the foundational wave/spot/wave oscillation.

MOS: I appreciate you trying to explain all of that from your perspective, and I get the basic idea of how the foundational medium not only "hosts" the quantum realm and quantum action, but is the mechanism for wave advance. I keep remembering your description of the quantum foam and the waves within waves, right down to nature's seemingly most insignificant waves, but it seems to me that the foundational wave/spot/wave oscillation, if it exists, would be the quintessential action of the universe, underlying all of the other types of wave action that you listed a few posts ago.

 

QW: Well, if you keep remembering all of that, don't forget that in my model the oscillating wave/spot/wave in the sub-quantum foundational medium doesn't exist on its own in a perfect equilibrium and oscillation, and never did. The description I have given is a layered set of actions playing out on different scales in the universal medium of space. They are not separate, but all work simultaneously on vastly different size scales and on vastly different time scales.

Foundational action is tiny sub-quantum oscillating wave/spot/wave action that mechanically advances higher energy wave fronts that it hosts.

Quantum action is the process that sustains the presence of wave-particles in quantum increments and governs their motion. It is quantized by definition, and the quantum being defined by the energy in a typical high energy density spot formed as quantum waves converge, and in the new quantum wave that emerges from each spot, within the standing wave particle space. Standing waves have two components; the directional inflowing wave energy component, and the spherically out flowing wave energy component. Particles governed by quantum action move through the medium of space in the direction of the net highest inflowing wave energy density in the foundational medium.

Arena action is the big time. It is where Big Bang arenas occupy the landscape of the greater universe. It is a self perpetuating action that defeats entropy, and features the convergence of expanding "parent" Big Bang arenas, where their galactic material swirls into a gravitational rendezvous that results in the formation of a new Big Crunch at the center of gravity of the overlap space. The crunch reaches a compression/density limit called "critical capacity", and collapse/bangs into a new expanding arena.

All of that is going on at the same time, waves within waves, within waves, on vastly different scales.

 

MOS: That is a pretty good way to wrap up the waves within waves, within waves discussion of the action processes that work together to make the universe function, and to top off the "outrageous speculation" about the light/gravity connection that you are making in regard to the photon. BTW, does that light/gravity connection come into play in how you describe, and attempt to explain the single photon, two slit experiments, where an apparent wave type interference emerges on the screen after thousands of individual photons are fired, one at a time, at the slits?

QW: Yes; that is perceptive of you, and opens up the thread to another outrageous bit from my model. In our talks, I know I have mentioned that my wave-particle model of the photon explains how the particle can go through one or the other slit, but the wave goes through both slits, even when photons are sent through one at a time, and a minute apart. The light/gravity hypothesis certainly comes into play to cause the interference. Maybe I should try to expand on that discussion here, since the wave/gravity hypothesis is now introduced to the model.

I'm sure you remember the images I drew of the photon wave-particle in motion in several of my threads over the past couple of years, at least.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The photon in the image is moving left to right, and the high density spots are apparent to the right of the trailing light/gravity wave "balloon" emissions which in this case show twenty individual out flowing wave energy emissions from the photon over a duration of twenty quantum periods.

 

MOS: QW, you are not one to tilt at windmills. You don't push your model out into other sub-forums, and other people's threads. And yet, in this case you are taking on Quantum Mechanics. Let's see how well you can tie in your wave-particle photon with its light/gravity connection, to the single particle interference results.

QW: My approach challenges anything in the consensus thinking that isn't adequately explained mechanistically, in a way a layman can understand. If the mechanisms and action processes of my model seem to apply in those cases, I add that to my model. Big Bang Theory, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, have all provided me with cases that fill my threads.

The two slit experiments with single photons or single electrons (or even buckyballs), spaced out over time, that manage to produce those unexplained, but clear wave interference results, which intensify as the number of single particles increases, is clearly in the "as yet" unexplained category, but fits consistently with the mechanics that I invoke. This particular example falls in the area of the "weirdness" of Quantum Mechanics. The popular media brings up what I think are questionable conclusions that the observed effect hints at exploitable tools for possibilities like quantum teleportation and time travel. Too far fetched for me to get excited about.

Just read the final chapters of Dance of the Photons, by Zeilinger, to see the motivation for grants and funding that flow to those projects. I just think relying on quantum weirdness without understanding it, might lead to wasted time and money.

I don't employ weird explanations about quantum entanglement, wave functions, photons taking every possible path, etc. My model has simple, quantum level mechanistic explanations that address things like the quantum nature of particles and gravity, which a layman can grasp if they want to.

That wave-particle image I just posted is an example of that, and does a good job of displaying the out flowing light/gravitational wave energy component of the photon's standing wave particle. It is clearly broadened and flattened on the leading spherical wave front, spreading it out so that it goes through both slits. Quite logical, I think. The tiny photon particle with its internal high energy density spots and waves, clumped in the image at the leading edge of light/gravity "balloon", can only go through one or the other slits, not both.