gravitons

Tom,

If the mass of light is smaller than the substance that generated it and this is true for all such quantum "masses", wouldn't this imply that whatever generated the graviton would have to be larger than the graviton? I suppose the real question is which is larger the substance or the source? Is the Universe a system built from the top down or the bottom up? I know that in the Meta Model there is not top or bottom, but doesn't the very existance of measureable events require that such questions being asked? Does the existance of time require that as some point it must have begun, or is this a phycological error resulting from our own mortality? Is it possible in the Meta Modal that at some point in the past and/or perhaps in the future that the Universe was homogenious at all scales? Does this violate MM's primary principle of both quantum and Macro infinity, and if so, why?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />If the mass of light is smaller than the substance that generated it and this is true for all such quantum "masses", wouldn't this imply that whatever generated the graviton would have to be larger than the graviton?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">First, in MM, light is a pure wave and has no mass. Gravitons are probably made from smaller constituents, not from the breakup of larger ones, especially because their speeds are so high.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Does the existance of time require that as some point it must have begun, or is this a phycological error resulting from our own mortality?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Every integer is finite, yet the total of all integers is infinite. Every time interval is finite, yet the total of all time intervals is infinite. The parallelism of these two statements illustrates that time does not require a beginning.

But I don't think we're ready to reopen that debate again just yet!

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Is it possible in the Meta Modal that at some point in the past and/or perhaps in the future that the Universe was homogenious at all scales?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">In MM, the universe is infinite in space, time, and scale, so it cannot be evolving as a whole. But evolution is always possible in some small corner of the universe (such as ours) over some limited time. -|Tom|-

basic questions for MM

9)why do gravitons move at all?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by EBTX</i>
<br />why do gravitons move at all?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">There is no such thing as "non-motion", which would require an absolute space and a meaning for absolute rest. Moreover, if the universe was ever in a state of absolute rest, nothing could ever change, so motion could never commence. -|Tom|-

EBTX

if i may Tom

i agree with Tom, this is another example of why the universe must be infinite( it has ROOM)because in a finite universe the end result would be a solid.

because if the universe were finite the gravitions would collide enough(saturation,density would increase finitely) in time to the extent that eventually there would be no movement and their density would create a solid.

of course the argument could be put forward that the collision between gravitions would create momentum, however the energy produced would back up to the point of it's source and would "still" it's energy for infinity as well and energy would be no more!!

and of course this has not happened!

Gee, that's the most circular logic I've ever seen, cangrats! ;o)