![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: basis, radiation, unruh |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
FrediFizzx wrote: wrote in message oups.com... | In more detail, the question is whether the cosmological horizon could | continuously emit FDU radiation which is redshifted into 3K photons | and partly, after a longer process that includes annihilation and more, | into baryons. In simple words, one could rephrase the question as: | "Are we - humans - made of FDU radiation remainders?" | The model would be a mixture of big bang model and quasi steady | state model; it would still allow for expansion and density reduction | of the universe, but it would include continuous matter and | radiation creation at the horizon. | | Since this model is in (slight) contrast with the standard model, | there must be something wrong with it. What would the arguments | against it be? This concept is very similar to what John Polasek's describes in his "Dual Space" book. He is a regular poster here and he would probably sent you a copy of his book if you ask him. However, he discounts the BB model. Un-necessarily, IMHO. Via his dual space concept, he does reach the idea of maximum force being related to Newton's G and the concept of contiunous mass-energy creation. Much like what you have done. Even though John has not done it strictly mathematically, I believe that it might be possible to show that GR is emergent from this model using what you have done already that GR can be shown to be derived from and consistent with max force. Well, these are not arguments against the idea of horizons as source of matter... I want to show what is wrong about it and what is not. Regards Christoph P.S. I will read whatever I receive per mail :-) |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message
oups.com... | | FrediFizzx wrote: | wrote in message | oups.com... | | In more detail, the question is whether the cosmological horizon | could | | continuously emit FDU radiation which is redshifted into 3K photons | | and partly, after a longer process that includes annihilation and | more, | | into baryons. In simple words, one could rephrase the question as: | | "Are we - humans - made of FDU radiation remainders?" | | The model would be a mixture of big bang model and quasi steady | | state model; it would still allow for expansion and density | reduction | | of the universe, but it would include continuous matter and | | radiation creation at the horizon. | | | | Since this model is in (slight) contrast with the standard model, | | there must be something wrong with it. What would the arguments | | against it be? | | This concept is very similar to what John Polasek's describes in his | "Dual Space" book. He is a regular poster here and he would probably | sent you a copy of his book if you ask him. However, he discounts | the | BB model. Un-necessarily, IMHO. Via his dual space concept, he does | reach the idea of maximum force being related to Newton's G and the | concept of contiunous mass-energy creation. Much like what you have | done. Even though John has not done it strictly mathematically, I | believe that it might be possible to show that GR is emergent from | this | model using what you have done already that GR can be shown to be | derived from and consistent with max force. | | Well, these are not arguments against the idea of horizons as source | of matter... I want to show what is wrong about it and what is not. | | Regards | | Christoph Yes, I know. I saw that you also posted this in s.p.research on May 14th with no one commenting about it. I am hoping that some of the physicists that frequent here (or spr) would have some comment about it as I am highly interested in seeing a good discussion about this topic as I think it could be very important. But as you can see from my first reply, I am slightly prejudiced in favor of constant mass-energy creation into our "Universe" from possibly a "multi-verse" or whatever might be "outside" of our event horizon. ;-) Perhaps if you could post some of the math for the Unruh radiation aspect, someone might respond? FrediFizzx http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/qu...uum_charge.pdf or postscript http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/qu...cuum_charge.ps |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| EP and Unruh - effect (Layman) | we_pretty@yahoo.com | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 48 | September 9th 05 04:41 PM |
| What is the 'Unruh Effect'? | the softrat | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 13 | August 22nd 05 11:19 PM |
| Unruh radiation and Feynmans graphs | exponent137 | Physics - General Discussion | 0 | August 1st 05 12:50 PM |
| Is Unruh radiation the basis for it all? | chri_schiller@yahoo.com | Physics - General Discussion | 4 | May 23rd 05 03:18 AM |
| Are we made of Fulling-Davies-Unruh radiation? | chri_schiller@yahoo.com | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 0 | May 14th 05 12:12 PM |