Quantized redshift anomaly

The real issue is defining ZPE as something real or not real. It can be done both ways and that seems to be the case on this thread. The not real stuff is found in the math models. The models are very old and work well within accepted limits but most of this thread is way beyond those limits so the models are of no use. The electronic mysteries of the charge we call the electron are real and there is little doubt that is not well understood. All the effects being kicked around are caused by electronic events.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />The real issue is defining ZPE as something real or not real. It can be done both ways and that seems to be the case on this thread. The not real stuff is found in the math models. The models are very old and work well within accepted limits but most of this thread is way beyond those limits so the models are of no use. The electronic mysteries of the charge we call the electron are real and there is little doubt that is not well understood. All the effects being kicked around are caused by electronic events.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The existence of the ZPE is an immediate consequence of classical electromagnetism: the small sources (atoms, Hertz oscillators at an other scale) emit a field large close to the source, weak at a large distance. The absorption of a classical source is its cancellation by addition of an opposite field; the generation of a field opposite to the field emitted by an Hertz oscillator (historical discussion) requires so many other oscillators that it appears impossible to absorb the field emitted by a source...
Consequently, there is a residual field which plays the role of a thermodynamical bath in equilibrium with the sources, in particular with the electron on a Bohr trajectory. Its mean value was found by Nernst in 1916.

Why do this field is often named "quantum" while Nernst's work is older of 10 years than quantum mechanics ? the pleasure of mystery probably.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
(JMB)
quote:

But the key question is: Does the zero-point energy REALLY exist?

---

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I have to admit that I had a great misunderstanding of the ZPE up till now which was cleared up for me in correspondance with Hal Puthoff. The ZPE is a physical field pertaining to electromagnetics. I was thinking of the ZPE, and trying to explain it, in terms of the INSIDE. The ZPE is not the INSIDE, it is the outside of the INSIDE.

What I have been trying to explain is INSIDE the ZPE. As to what that might be, let's explain ZPE first.

You know ZPE exists when it creates an anomaly[]. Lamb's shift did just that, a surprize shift of the electron's position from what theory predicted. But it also exists in the equations, even after the other side, number of photons (n), goes to zero, hf/2 remains behind. This is how the ZPE came about.

Like the skin of an apple, the ZPE is like the skin of the Universe, but going inward. Hal, who wrote the paper showing how the ZPE sustains electron fields in 1987, likes to explain the ZPE in terms of a microphone, a speaker and amplifier system. If the mike is held too close to the speaker, and the gain is high, positive feedback will produce an amplified squeal - the amplifier amplifies itself and feeds it back yet again. Hal also talks of half photons, or "partons" which is related to Dirac's Sea and his negatives particles. What we regard as a photon, is only half of it. In this manner electromagnetic fields resonate with their counterparts in the ZPE field.

Resonance is, of course, required by complementary systems. It is like there is an inside and an outside to space. And the ZPE is the distinction between them, the surface of Dirac's Sea. In electromagnetics that is.


The ZPE can be approached as being one of many different ways of looking at this ubigitious metafield. In this way we can say that the ZPE is how electromagnetics interacts with the INSIDE.

And it leaves open those other manifestations such as Laszlo's PSI field. Laszlo cites the work of Guriaev which produced DNA footprints on the ZPE. His colleque Poponin calls it phantom DNA.

I don't think any of this is to be found in Maxwell's "corrected" equations, especially the contemporary version. Maxwell did believe in the Aether, and he did have a place in his equations for an interaction which he called displacement currents. But when the Aether was deemed incorrect (?) his displacement currents were discarded.

Thomas Kuhn writes in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: " Space in contempory physics, is not the inert and homogenous substratum employed in both Newton's and Maxwell's theories; some of its new properties are not unlike those once attibuted to the ether; we may someday come to know what a displacement current is..."

Maxwell's equations need to be revisited by the mathematicians in light of the new properties recently discovered by science.

The significant point is that there is "something" INSIDE space. If we assume a "something" instead of a "nothing" that matter comes from, then our cosmological picture is quite different from the conventional view.

Instead of matter coming from nowhere, and eventually being sucked back into nowhere, let us assume that it comes from something. The assumption that matter comes from "something" does not need an expansion because that something is all over the place to start with.

Ironic, it all seemed so "deep" this ZPE thing. So strange, so unusual, and so welcome. And it turns out the ZPE is only the surface of something else deeper still - the INSIDE.

And just for the record, INSIDE is a general philosophical term, and thus does not have a particular definition, especially a scientific definition. Strictly speaking any scientific definition (distinction) would not be, by definition, INSIDE. What we can define is the interface, and in the case of electromagnetics that is the ZPE.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The existence of the ZPE is an immediate consequence of classical electromagnetism: the small sources (atoms, Hertz oscillators at an other scale) emit a field large close to the source, weak at a large distance. The absorption of a classical source is its cancellation by addition of an opposite field; the generation of a field opposite to the field emitted by an Hertz oscillator (historical discussion) requires so many other oscillators that it appears impossible to absorb the field emitted by a source...
Consequently, there is a residual field which plays the role of a thermodynamical bath in equilibrium with the sources, in particular with the electron on a Bohr trajectory. Its mean value was found by Nernst in 1916.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

A classical field? So how would you explain non-locality classicaly"

What we really are talking about is Unity and Diversity. What do we assume to begin with? If we begin with diversity, then we will have to explain Unity at some point. Is this what they mean by "singularity? But if we begin with Unity as the first assumption, then all we have to do is explain the diversity. How does a whole become parts? What happens when one slices a pie into bits?

This is not a new question. At this level of the physical ontology, the matters become archetypal. Basic and simple and ubigitious. Eastern thought had something to say about this question. In the Tao te Ching, the very first line of Chapter One reads, "The Tao that is explicated is not the Tao." The reasonig is that to do so would be to make something out of the Tao, and when it becomes something it no longer can be everything.

But this does not stop Lao Tzu, for in Chapter 42 it is spoken of like so
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"In the beginning was the Tao;
The Tao begot One
One begot two
Two begot Three
Three begot the Ten Thousand Things,
The Ten Thousand things embrace Yin and express Yang. Harmony is achieved by combining these forces. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

First there was INSIDE
Then a distinction was made
hence the One.
The One is distinct from the other, and that makes two.
The one and the other had a relationship to start with,
that is the Threeness.
These principles make up stuff.
Stuff tends to follow this primary principle achieving harmony by working together. (see positive and negative charges)

It is much easier to explain how Unity makes stuff,
then it is to explain how stuff makes Unity. Especially when the Unity is at the "prove it " stage.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
(JMB)
quote:

But the key question is: Does the zero-point energy REALLY exist?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I have to admit that I had a great misunderstanding of the ZPE up till now which was cleared up for me in correspondance with Hal Puthoff. The ZPE is a physical field pertaining to electromagnetics. I was thinking of the ZPE, and trying to explain it, in terms of the INSIDE. The ZPE is not the INSIDE, it is the outside of the INSIDE.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

INSIDE and OUTSIDE seem dark to me, unless they mean linear and nonlinear.

I hope to be more clear about the ZPE, to show that there is nothing mysterious with it.
First, let me remind the theory of the electromagnetic modes:

I consider Maxwell's equations in the vacuum, supposing that they are linear, that is that there are no very high frequencies able to generate electron pairs. With, eventually linear conditions at limits, any linear combination of solutions is a solution, so that the solutions build an infinite dimentional vector space. A mode is a ray of this space, that is a set of all solutions which differ only by a real factor, the amplitude.
It is implicitely assumed that we consider a set of orthogonal modes, that is a set of modes whose energies are independant.

The following computation, founded on thermodynamics, shows that the amplitude deduced from Planck's law is never zero:

Planck's law shows that inside a blackbody at temperature T, the energy in a monochromatic mode is h(nu)/(exp(h(nu)/kT)-1) within an additive constant. Supposing that the temperature is large, the exponent may be developped up to the second order, giving kT-h(nu)/2. Thermodynamics says that it must be kT, so that the additive constant is h(nu)/2. Thus at 0 K, the energy is h(nu)/2. It is Nernst's result (1916).

The interpretation of this zero point energy is simple: As it is impossible to cancel exactly the field emitted by the sources by opposite fields, it remains a residual field which is in equilibrium with the matter, making a thermodynamical bath.

THE FIELDS IN A MODE DEPEND ONLY ON THE FACTOR AMPLITUDE.
Therefore, the ZPF is the value of the field in equilibrium with matter at 0 K, subtracting it from the field at an other temperature to get an "ordinary" amplitude is meaningless. If you do not use the real, exact field to compute interferences at low levels of energy, you will make errors.

At high frequencies (gamma rays), the linearity disappears, the theory fails so that it is an other, complicated problem.

Faraday, who was an experimenter working around 1850, writes, <blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> "When a current suddenly ceases, it can INDUCE a current IN THE SAME WIRE which is stronger than the original current. Thus, by conservation of force, there must be some force present, AN OPERATIVE, other than electric force. This force is probably the MAGNETIC FORCE."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> (from www.keelynet.com/zpe/chaos.htm )

This is, today, basic electricity, the principle is used as an ignition system in our automobiles. The spark plug is hooked to a coil, and when the points close, a current flow from the battery through the coil produces a magnetic field. When the points open, the current flow stops, and the magnetic field collaspes cutting the many turns secondary winding,thereby inducing a new current flow. Well, it wants to flow, but the spark plug "gap" is in the way. So voltage builds up fast until finally it is enough to jump the gap of the spark plug. Bang.

If we look at the Sun, a typical star, we see around it a corona. The corona is much hotter than the photosphere or surface of the sun. Photographs of that corona show "loops" of plasma flow extending hundreds of thousands of miles outward.

Plasma is different from ordinary electric current flow in that electricity, or electron current flows is constrined by conductors. But in a plasma both protons and electrons are involved in a relationship whereas each one is distinct from the other. They flow together but as separate entities. Plasma does not require a conductor like a copper wire, it flows through space, and thus is free to assume its own shape, and the sahpe that it assumes is that of a spirial, a result of the difference between ions and electrons.

The solar flares are huge plasma current flows, and when the loop snaps, the current flow is interrupted,the magnetic field collaspes,
a new current flow is induced outward. This is not at all different from a radio transmitting antenna, but in the antenna what "spews out" are fields. What is spewing out from the sun (a star) is protons and electrons.

The current flow is so great that when the matter reaches earth, it can induce current flows in high voltage transmission lines high enough to trip circuit breakers. We see these current flows directly when we see the Northern lights.


The standard theory makes the assumption that the formation of the stars and the galaxies are the result of gravitational forces. This should be no surprise, but what is surprising is that it appears that the literature considers gravity only! The literature I am talking about is a book compiled by Scientific American. The Cosmos. As I look through the pages, again and again what is being explained is being explained in terms of gravity. So far I have not found any mention of electromagnetics.

Yet, we observe (Oort) that matter is streaming outward from a galaxies center. As much as one solar mass per years Asimov says. If gravity alone were the operational force, then this would not occur, the apple would fall to the ground.

At the same time we observe huge jets of current flows. I read in The Book of the Cosmos --
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
"In addition, studies of SS 433 show it to be a close binary system consisting of a normal star and a neutron star. Mass transfer between the two has resulted in a pair of jets that shoot outward in opposite directions tracing a corkscrew pattern that is visible in the to extensions of W50. These factors led astronomers to view the two objects as part of an integrated system rather than just a line-of-sight anomaly (M.V.Magee)" pp103<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The keyword here is corkscrew. A corkscrew pattern is very much like a spirial. A spirial is characteristic of plasma current flow. The key word here is "current flow"

If electromagnetics were considered, then it would not at all be unresonable to assume that the corkscrew pattern is a result of spirialing plasma current flow. The binary star system, estimated to be about 50% of the total population, may be a resonant electromagnetic circuit. Not like a vacuum cleaner, rather like an antenna...

It is difficult to say one way or the other because the initial assumption made in the literature is the standard interpretation of cosmology in terms of gravity alone. And yet over and over gravity has failed to account for the observations. So much so that they talk about faster than light expansion through an energy that vanishes when it is done, and then to keep it all going, after it just happened to slow back down, an invisible dark matter of some sort.
They see galaxies colliding when they ought to be bifurcating.

They write, <blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"Historically, astronomers have focused on observations, now the field has evolved into experimental science. Today's astronomical experimenters sit neither at lab benches nor at telescopes but at computer terminals. They scrutinize cosmic simulations in which tens of thousands of points, representing stars, gas andd dark matter, interact gravitationally over a galaxy's lifetime..." (V. Rubin) pp96<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hmmm, since today's astronomers aren't at the telescopes anymore, maybe they could let us look for electromagnetic interactions over a galaxy's lifetime.