SciContest! Why can't matter be made of photons?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vkothii said:
Don't know if this will do it. There's a video of single electrons traveling across a superfluid helium chamber, in groups of up to four at a time.
Very interesting article; thanks for sharing it. But I don't see how that might indicate that a photon-only universe is impossible :)
 
And God said, ''Let there be light.''

The Bible was scientifically correct, long before the discovery of antimatter itself.
 
Reiku said:
This entire thread was bogus to begin with.
I don't think so :) There was some good stuff here that lots of folks didn't know. For example I bet about half of us didn't know that Einstein's unification theory was a photon-only universe theory :)
 
A theory that only considers gravity and electromagnetism also requires that you ignore nuclear binding forces and the decay of neutrons.
 
Not so. It can be traced back to a super force, where all the forces constituted a single primal force.
 
Vkothii said:
A theory that only considers gravity and electromagnetism also requires that you ignore nuclear binding forces and the decay of neutrons.
All of the forces can be accounted for. This is just one way that is no more speculative than the others.
 
Reiku said:
It can be traced back to a super force, where all the forces constituted a single primal force.
I think that's SU(5) unification you're referring to...?
A classical theory that explains quantum excitations/fluctuations and probability amplitudes, where mass comes from and how GR and SR alone do it; explain the weak bosons and particle physics even. No luck so far.
 
I just read this thread from start to here and noticed one huge thing missing. It wasn't mentioned that if the theory of relativity is real, a photon-only universe can not be real.

A photon-only universe requires flat space-time because relativity phenomena develops naturally due to the constant speed of light in flat space-time. This must have been a huge problem for Einstein; he could not complete his photon-only universe theory because it would have trashed his theory of relativity.
Can you provide a source for your claim Einstein wanted a photon only universe? You used to say it was Maxwell.

Nothing I've read of Einstein said he thought only photons should exist.
 
Hi AlphaNumeric; I assumed the theory originated with Maxwell because Einstein called it the Maxwell theory. I don't know what else an "electromagnetic field theory of matter" could be if it were not a photon-only theory. :) If you read the whole paper you will see that Einstein was talking about his own unification theory which derived; according to him; from a theory of Maxwell's.

Edit: I should have said hypothesis of Maxwell's.

Einstein: (Einstein07.html)
Thus it happened that the goal of erecting a pure electromagnetic
field theory of matter remained unattained for the time being,
although in principle no objection could be raised against the
possibility of reaching such a goal. The thing which deterred
one in any further attempt in this direction was the lack of any
systematic method leading to the solution. What appears certain
to me, however, is that, in the foundations of any consistent
field theory, there shall not be, in addition to the concept
of field, any concept concerning particles. The whole theory must
be based solely on partial differential equations and their
singularity-free solutions.
 
I think that's SU(5) unification you're referring to...?
A classical theory that explains quantum excitations/fluctuations and probability amplitudes, where mass comes from and how GR and SR alone do it; explain the weak bosons and particle physics even. No luck so far.

The theory is backed up by quite strong evidence. The fact that we have observed the electroforce being unified with the manetoforce, as electromagnetism, is considered a strong evidence that all the forces at sufficiently high enough temperatures will bind together.
 
Hi AlphaNumeric; I assumed the theory originated with Maxwell because Einstein called it the Maxwell theory. I don't know what else an "electromagnetic field theory of matter" could be if it were not a photon-only theory. :) If you read the whole paper you will see that Einstein was talking about his own unification theory which derived; according to him; from a theory of Maxwell's.

Edit: I should have said hypothesis of Maxwell's.

Einstein: (Einstein07.html)

I can trace the theory to Newton, who lived before Maxwell.
 
All of the forces can be accounted for. This is just one way that is no more speculative than the others.
And you continue to spam your idea.. :rolleyes:

As I've already explained to you, your theory is nothing by a formula for masses. We've already got that, much more general than just your formula. And it also explains and models all dynamical phenomena, which your idea cannot.

Start a new thread about it and shut up spamming it here.
I think that's SU(5) unification you're referring to...?
A classical theory that explains quantum excitations/fluctuations and probability amplitudes, where mass comes from and how GR and SR alone do it; explain the weak bosons and particle physics even. No luck so far.
SU(5) GUTs are quantum mechanical. GUTs have nothing to do with gravity, they are putting the SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) gauge group of the standard model into a single group which breaks down in just the right way to give you the SM group (actually, it's up to a factor of the centre of the group). And SU(5) is experimentally exluded. SO(10) is where research is currently focused.
If you read the whole paper you will see that Einstein was talking about his own unification theory which derived; according to him; from a theory of Maxwell's.
You do realise this was before the discovery of the other two nuclear forces and perhaps even before the development of quantum mechanics? Einstein didn't have even 1% of the amount of information we have on the universe now.
The theory is backed up by quite strong evidence. The fact that we have observed the electroforce being unified with the manetoforce, as electromagnetism, is considered a strong evidence that all the forces at sufficiently high enough temperatures will bind together.
The electric and magnetic forces are unified at ALL energies, so they don't provide any kind of unification support. The electroweak model does, because below 90GeV it's not unified but above 90GeV it unifies. The strong force isn't unified with the electroweak force at any level of energy we'll be creating soon.
 
Hi Reiku; yes I have the reference you posted in this thread I think. It is a common theory; it is just now that we have here in one place the resources necessary to complete it. However I'm afraid all of the resources have been seduced by the simplistic beauty of QM theory.
 
Einstein ignored the strong force, in his later years, and still put all his attention onto that of gravity itself, Alphanumeric.
 
AlphaNumeric said:
Start a new thread about it and shut up spamming it here.
Well; I thought about that; but then I realized that it would quickly become a Vern is an Idiot thread and get sent to the dungeon. It would be a waste of time.

I'm using my ideas as reference because that is what I have. There are many others that I don't have quick links to.
 
Einstein ignored the strong force, in his later years, and still put all his attention onto that of gravity itself, Alphanumeric.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_force#History

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein

Let's play "Spot the dates".
Well; I thought about that; but then I realized that it would quickly become a Vern is an Idiot thread and get sent to the dungeon. It would be a waste of time.
So you aren't willing to put your idea to any kind of peer review for fear of it exposing your ignorance so instead you spam it everywhere else, hoping that they'll be discussed and not cesspooled due to the validity of the threads you put them in. :rolleyes: How honest of you.....
 
AlphaNumeric; I respect your opinion; I'll try to do better.
 
Last edited:
I know Einstein neglected one of the forces for gravity. I obviously made a mistake it was the strong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top