SRT: The Essence.

[Cerveny]

I always try to describe the phenomena by some real model, some real relations, some real causality. I hate any singularities in the real world. For very basic understanding of creation of complementary pair you can imagine followed analogy:

crystal=vacuum=physical space
particle=vacancy
antiparticle=interstitial element
photon= the manifestation of crystal waving

def.gif

If you warm up the real crystal, the number of similar defects rising. It is the same case with the space.

There can be some places in the structure/space/crystal (bends) that are under higher stress or tension. Elements in this place are less fixed thus, in case of strong waving, are shifted from regular positions.

I claim the gravitational behavior of particles and antiparticles differ. I believe it is the main problem of quantizing of gravitation. Presented (very simple) model can uncover the nature, the source of attracting/repulsing force between two particles

[Arising_uk]

Definitely have trouble understanding you two but I've always loved your imagery Cerverny. As such why can we not understand your model as 'reality/universe' being a kind of cellular automata instead of a 'crystal'.

[Cerveny]

I put off the cellular automata due to its unclear beginning. I prefer the growing crystal model of space (space grows from the uncaused "future" - time is permanently “created”, as a new sediments of Universe) to avoid obscure "expansion" of the space :)

[Arising_uk]

I put off the cellular automata due to its unclear beginning. I prefer the growing crystal model of space (space grows from the uncaused "future" - time is permanently “created”, as a new sediments of Universe) to avoid obscure "expansion" of the space

This could also be described as the initialization process of a 4-d cellular automata or the process of its computations?

[Cerveny]

I put off the cellular automata due to its unclear beginning. I prefer the growing crystal model of space (space grows from the uncaused "future" - time is permanently “created”, as a new sediments of Universe) to avoid obscure "expansion" of the space :)

This could also be described as the initialization process of a 4-d cellular automata or the process of its computations?

I am afraid the structure/space defects can be much more complicated (even combination of them) :(

bergerslarge.gif

The growing of "Universe" surface with a screw dislocations with Burgers vector parallel to the time axis can be conceived as particle with the spin motion… for example :)

Fig1A_ResearchPage.jpg

[socratus]

I put off the cellular automata due to its unclear beginning. I prefer the growing crystal model of space (space grows from the uncaused "future" - time is permanently “created”, as a new sediments of Universe) to avoid obscure "expansion" of the space

This could also be described as the initialization process of a 4-d cellular automata or the process of its computations?

I am afraid the structure/space defects can be much more complicated (even combination of them)

bergerslarge.gif

The growing of "Universe" surface with a screw dislocations with Burgers vector parallel to the time axis can be conceived as particle with the spin motion… for example

Fig1A_ResearchPage.jpg

[socratus]

Another Photoshop of the spin motion
Name of this photoshop is:
Fun Spin (motion illusion)

[Cerveny]

It is not any "Photoshop" creation it is the real process of crystal growing:
http://pubs.acs.org/page/jpclcd/jin-video.html
The surface of the Universe (the time of "NOW") is certainly scarred by similar space structure defects (elementary particles) and its growing to the future (space "expansion") brings some spin effect... m*c^2 is some kind of kinetic energy of such motion. We need new physical space model - empty Einstein's space is out of date :(

[socratus]

It is not any "Photoshop" creation it is the real process of crystal growing:
http://pubs.acs.org/page/jpclcd/jin-video.html
The surface of the Universe (the time of "NOW") is certainly scarred
by similar space structure defects (elementary particles) and its growing
to the future (space "expansion") brings some spin effect... m*c^2 is some
kind of kinetic energy of such motion.
We need new physical space model - empty Einstein's space is out of date

We discuss a nanowire and nanotube formation mechanism in which
axial screw dislocations provide self-perpetuating steps to enable
one-dimensional (1D) crystal growth, unlike previously understood
vapor-liquid-solid (VLS) or analogous metal-catalyzed growth.
We initially found this mechanism in hierarchical pine tree PbS
nanowires with helically rotating branches. We further applied it to
ZnO, demonstrating that screw dislocations can drive the spontaneous
formation of nanotubes, and used classical crystal growth theory
to confirm that their anisotropic 1D growth is driven by dislocations.
Dislocation-driven growth should be general tomanymaterials
grownin vapor or solution and is underappreciated. It will create a new
dimension in the rational synthesis of nanomaterials. The resulting
complex hierarchical nanostructures can be useful for solar energy
conversion, and our understanding will allow large-scale synthesis
of 1D nanomaterials for practical applications.
http://pubs.acs.org/page/jpclcd/jin-video.html

Did they discuss the structure of Universe?
#
In the beginning was Classical Crystal !!! Hm?
What is physical parameters of your ‘crystal=vacuum=physical space’
===.

[socratus]

And about Planck’s spin.

Many years M. Planck was attracted with the
absolutely black body problem.
If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls
in area of absolutely black body ( Kirchhoff’s Vacuum
radiation /Max Laue / ) and does not radiate back,
then “ terminal dead “ comes. In order to save the
quantum of light from death Planck decided that
it is possible that quantum of light will radiate this
quantum of light back with quantum unit h=Et.
Physicists say, that Planck’s unit is one: h=1.
Having this unit h=1 photon flies with speed c=1.
This unit doesn’t come from formulas or equations.
Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling.
Sorry. Sorry.
I must write: Planck introduced this unit intuitively.
I must write: Planck introduced unit h phenomenologically
So, where does the Planck’s constant ( h) come from?
#
It is important to realize that in physics today, we have
no knowledge of what energy is. We do not have a picture
that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. ”
(Feynman. 1987)

So, where does the quantum of energy - spin come from?
============ . .
S.

[Cerveny]

Did they discuss the structure of Universe?
#
In the beginning was Classical Crystal !!! Hm?
What is physical parameters of your ‘crystal=vacuum=physical space’
===.

Of course they did not. It is only an example how the screw dislocation can affect the growing of crystal (create spinning object). It is all the inspiration for a new space physics solution only.

In the beginning was only another (odd caused) phase - the "future". Created/condensed and growing "crystal" (physical space) has several elastic properties: permeability, permittivity, gravitational susceptibility... It can include space some kinds of structural defects - elementary particles... Every kind of physical field is related to some kind of elastic stress or tensions. Sorry, I am not able to find out better universe model however I have a solid :) physicist awareness :(

[Cerveny]

And about Planck’s spin.

Many years M. Planck was attracted with the
absolutely black body problem.
If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls
in area of absolutely black body ( Kirchhoff’s Vacuum
radiation /Max Laue / ) and does not radiate back,
then “ terminal dead “ comes. In order to save the
quantum of light from death Planck decided that
it is possible that quantum of light will radiate this
quantum of light back with quantum unit h=Et.
Physicists say, that Planck’s unit is one: h=1.
Having this unit h=1 photon flies with speed c=1.
This unit doesn’t come from formulas or equations.
Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling.
Sorry. Sorry.
I must write: Planck introduced this unit intuitively.
I must write: Planck introduced unit h phenomenologically
So, where does the Planck’s constant ( h) come from?
#
It is important to realize that in physics today, we have
no knowledge of what energy is. We do not have a picture
that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. ”
(Feynman. 1987)

So, where does the quantum of energy - spin come from?
============ . .
S.

As for Planck: Its solution only confirms the vacuum is not able to transport endlessly fine energy and has a discrete structure - it is grained.
As for energy: It is only the difference between the basic and displaced status - for very simple example: you need some effort to shift particular element from a stabile regular structure into interstitial position. And the other hand if the interstitial returned into regular position some waving of structure (noise/sound/photon/phonon/energy/ability to do something else) is generated.

Magnetic field keeps some analogy to angular moment. Magnetism/electricity ~ Inertia/gravitation by the similar way as electron ~ proton. In case you deal with gravitation and inertia by the similar way as Dirac dealt with electricity and magnetism we should get a proton /antiproton pairs (Dirac got electron/positron pairs). Unless theory of gravitation is not able to "invent" proton/antiproton it is rather the toothless theory....

GTR invented only obscure singularities and obscure expansion. No one is able to describe the difference between less and more expanded (empty) space :(

[converge]

No, Special Relativity is the combination of regular,
old-school Newtonian relativity (all speeds are relative)
with the "special" exception of light.
The math of special relativity is about explaining
how things with mass act in relation to massless light,
and how space and time are relative to speed
based around the constancy of the speed of light.

1
Special Relativity is the combination of regular,
old-school Newtonian relativity (all speeds are relative)
with the "special" exception of light.
/ converge /
#
Doesn’t it mean that (all speeds are relative) including
the "special" speed of quantum of light?
S.

No, that's why it's "special". If it was relative just like everything else, then it wouldn't be "special", and there'd be no need for all the time dilation, length contraction, and other crazy stuff. The whole reason all of the weirdness happens is because the speed of light is not relative. It's always c. Normal things, like a bus, move relative to you. If you're chasing a bus, and you run faster and faster to catch up with it, the bus appears to move slower and slower relative to you, until eventually you're moving faster than the bus, at which point the bus appears to be moving towards you, and eventually you catch up with the bus and jump onto the back. Light doesn't work that way. Unlike the bus, light doesn't appear to change its movement relative to you at all. If you're chasing a beam of light, as you run faster and faster, it continues to appear to move exactly at c relative to you. No matter how fast you run, you can never catch up to it, you can never even make it seem to be moving more slowly away from you. It's sort of like a bus that keeps speeding up as you run faster and faster or slowing down as you run slower and slower. (It's not exactly like that, but that's the general idea.) Light is always moving at c relative to you no matter how fast you run.

2
The math of special relativity is about explaining
how things with mass act in relation to massless light,
/ converge /
#
The math of special relativity is about explaining
how massless (?) quantum of light can have mass.
===..
P.S.
A New Limit on Photon Mass.
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/625-2.html

Quantum Physics treats light as if it had zero mass, and we assume it actually does have zero mass. Things like the article you linked are saying "We're pretty sure it's zero, but if it isn't, it has to be really really small, no bigger than this number." Most of the equations treat it as a mass of zero, because if it does have mass it's so negligible that it doesn't seem to have any mass-related effects.

3
and how space and time are relative to speed based
around the constancy of the speed of light.
/ converge /
#
Doesn’t it mean that space and time are relative
to Minkowski minus 4D spacetime?
P.S.
Herman Minkowski said about his spacetime continuum:
“ Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself,
are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
and only a kind of union of the two will
preserve an independent reality.”

So, ‘ space by itself, and time by itself ‘
( it means Newtonian space and time) are shadows.
And ‘only a kind of union of the two’ is reality?
What does union of spacetime mean?
Why only this union of spacetims is real factor in Universe?
Nobody knows what this minus 4D timespace really is,
=========================...

I should have said "distance and duration" rather than "space and time". I guess you could say space-time itself or Minkowski space-time are static things, but the distance between two points or the amount of time between two events are relative to the speed of the observer.

Another problem.

"There is in particular one problem whose exhaustive
solution could provide considerable elucidation.
What becomes of the energy of a photon after complete emission?"
/ Max Planck. Nobel Lecture, June 2, 1920 /

This question still waits for its answer.
===============. .
The Philosophy of Physics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_physics
#
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
etc . . .

Do we have Philosophy of Physics ?
S.
========.

I believe this question has been answered. Planck was asking this long before we had things like lasers. After the photon is emitted its energy is conserved as momentum, but since the photon has zero (or close to it) mass, the momentum is a function of its frequency. A high energy photon has a high frequency (x-rays and gamma rays), while a low energy photon has a low frequency (radio waves). If an electron jumps down an energy level it will emit a photon conserving that energy as momentum based on frequency.

[socratus]

In the beginning was only another (odd caused) phase - the "future".(

Before you was born, your "future" was in your mother’s thoughts.
Before universe was created, its "future" was in God’s mind.

[Cerveny]

In the beginning was only another (odd caused) phase - the "future".(

Before you was born, your "future" was in your mother’s thoughts.
Before universe was created, its "future" was in God’s mind.

I do not have serious problem with the God :) I tend to relate the "future" to the Platonic world – the world of Ideas :)