Pages

Thursday, March 22, 2018

Colliders and the illusion of speed (done)

I putting off reading comments because while I know some will be helpful, I think there may be some mean ones also.
I'm also applying for low percentage work out of town although I don't see why I should be worse than anyone else for these jobs which are certainly meant for someone smarter than me.  They ask for publications in the legal field, I wonder if my romance-porn series about a female attorney who fucks too much would qualify? 


Book 1 in the series

Book 2

Book 3 is probably going to come out around the same time (4/11?) as the 8th book (currently 45 pages) in the Algorithm series.

And yes, I'd love to tell you about the jobs, but for the fact that even applying is a waste of my time, although it wouldn't be for you.


Why isn't speed important?
In a collider particles are accelerated to the speed of light what is missing.
Part of what is missing in neutral current in the sense this can cover not just neutrinos, but also space, but more important is that quantum instances do not involve speed so that the interactions are still interactions; but they are sums of different results which are not impacts.

1) The AuT definition of a photon is different from a SM definition of a photon.  This is certainly the case because AuT explains wave particle duality in terms of a photon existing as a complete ct1 to ct2 transition state with its own carrier arms capable of being filled.  Alternatively, in SM the photon and the wave are two parts of the same thing so that a single filled out wave ct2-ct3 information arm set comprised of thousands of photons is what is being considered.
Even so, the amount of information in each of these waves is far less than a single information arm, far less than an electron.  How do you make this transition?  One way is the same as with the electron, you add the probability cloud which is assumed to be made up of the transitioning lesser states, other ct3 states that are present.
Actual Higgs collider results:
A) So lets talk about a higgs boson, having mass, changing to 2 ct1 photons which individually must be nearly invisible and from an informational standpoint would be far less than a HB.  There are many ways to address this.  So what are we looking at around 125 GeV?  This in AuT would be a mass of some intermediate ct3-ct4 transition state that is capable of repetition given the forces applied.
B) Another transition is one that yields charged particles which are consistent, an electron and a positron, what might be two sides of a single carrier arm, the positive and negative side, or a single carrier arm that is either in the compression mode (positive?) or decompression mode (negative?).  This raises the very real and important question of what gives different compression state transitions their positive or negative aspects.  While it is not an active feature, since it exists in quantum instances, it appears active over a history and for this reason the compression mode/decompression mode is a good candidate.
Again in this "experiment" what we appear to be doing is colliding two protons and creating all kinds of transitional states as the two ct3-ct4 states are broken into their component parts through the introduction of massive numbers of intermediary states, mainly ct1-ct2-c3 interactions seen as velocity and discussed in the prior post as primarily ct3 free plus cloud vrs ct3 bundled with lesser clouds of lower states.  Muons are a part of this.
There are three clear peaks, one of which is at 125GeV which is interesting because what are the other two?  None are considered "Higgs" in AuT but they are considered a standard size transitional state.  In a perfect world there would be one one for each possible information arm shown, but some of the arms, 1 and 15 would be the proton itself and the electron so the intermediate group would be something else.  It also appears likely that what is being looked at is not this type of information arm at all, but instead they are looking at ct2-ct3 transitions that have little to do with what are remaining solid ct3-ct4 information arm units that are not part of the experiment.
The question to ask is "where are the very large remnants (if any) of the proton collision in this test.
Is the Higgs "the last piece?"  Aren't there a number of unknown features and missing theoretical particles in SM?  Is there a list of the large range of phenomna the standard model predicts with veryhigh accuracy?
REally lots of questions:
1) Dark matter is a theoretical construct right? Dark energy/anti-gravity is observed as the "force" pushing the universe apart, but dark matter is something that scientists want to see so they are looking for it, right? 
2) The Higgs particle and these intermediary particles are part of a pretty big pond (?) of particles making up a proton (lots of gluons). Where are the very large remnants (if any) of the proton collision in this test? how are those filtered out? Are only high energy bits of the test ejected into the cameras? 
AS to the photons, are these subject to wave particle duality? That is, are these individual photons or waves made up of photons (assuming definitionally a photon is one dimensional and a wave 2)? 
For that matter, has anyone looked at the dimensional characteristics of these results, of the different fundamental particles? 
3) Is the Higgs really "the last piece?" Aren't there a number of unknown features and missing theoretical particles in SM? 
4) Is there a list of the "large range of phenomena" the standard model "predicts with very high accuracy?" 
There is apparently no knowledge of what this HB concept decays into.
Electron and anti-electron colliders being considered.
Neutral Currents: (1973)
Mechanism-should be applied to electroweak theory which is flawed from an AuT perspective.
leftover massless spin zero particle which is part of the theory.
The whole idea of any theory is you make it, then you look for what you need to prove it.
AuT focuses on fundamental mathematical concepts and clear observations.  That is the reason that time and dimension are so clearly portrayed in AuT while they are almost side concepts in the Standard Model.  It is sort of weird how they are used in SM. For example, rather than look at the problem with pi, they just stick it in there and say, sin, cos, dimension what have you.  At the same time, they don't hesitate to say that adding additional dimensions of movement give rise to mass while they deny that the different dimensional states exist side by side because people are so prejudiced by their perspective.  This is why Time in AuT is shared information over quantum states via information bundles (electron bundles) while Time in the SM is change/a dimension even though it clearly only exists between ct2 and ct5.  
Anyway, you heard it first here from the porn writer physicist.




No comments:

Post a Comment