The Energy Discussion

[Tom]

Anyone that knows me knows that I am just a mechanic. You also know I think in very strange ways.
Lately my mind has been occupied with the concept of Energy. I have some concepts, queries & observations to make that I feel might be worthy of some discussion. It will be interesting to see where this leads if it leads anywhere.

Energy & Electricity
Energy and electricity are not the same thing. Electricity has energy in it but energy does not always mean electricity. From what I understand, Electricity is the displacement of electrons thru a conductor. Energy is movement.
Energy exists sub-atomically and is not a particle. Everything everywhere consists of energy. Even an atom is comprised of massive amounts of energy (atomic bomb).

Questions/Thoughts
1. Is Planck Units the smallest known measurement of Energy?
In physics, Planck energy, denoted by E P, is the unit of energy in the system of natural units known as Planck units. where c is the speed of light in a vacuum, ћ is the reduced Planck's constant, and G is the gravitational constant. ~ Wiki
I know that energy is measured in Joules but how much energy is in one joule?

2. At Absolute Zero (the cessation of all movement at the atomic level) does energy still exist?
True Absolute Zero is commonly referred to as Singularity. It only exists as a theory. Our current science can get really close to True Absolute Zero but have yet to attain it.

3. Theoretical AZ would be no movement at all. If atomically all movement is stopped, does that include stopping the Universe's vibration cycle as well? If I recall correctly this concept was explored in an episode of Star Trek? Could changing or stopping the Universal Frequency of the Universe move that particle out of reality and into another dimension?

4. I have read that thoughts, feelings, will & desire have a frequency to them. In my mind, frequency being movement and movement being energy it makes me think that Thoughts are composed of energy. Being composed of Energy, wouldn't thoughts be measurable and mutable? Broken down to pure Energy, might thoughts be considered a Force?
What we call our Soul might be broken down to Energy as a packet? Since that Energy is within the boundaries of our Universe those packets vibrate at the Universal Frequency as well. Energy cannot be created or destroyed according to our current levels of understanding. Given that the Universe is entirely composed of Energy in one form or another and the baseline frequency locks the energy to this plane, when we die, wouldn't our packets of 'Soul Energy' release back to the aether? This indicates that 'We' are 'One' with the Universe.

5. On a different note ~ Quantumly, a personality might be transported/manipulated by technology. In Quantum technology, observing changes it? I think they call this phenomena 'Spooky'. Actual science has been documented proving it can be done. I don't know the details but I ponder a possibility...
If Soul Energy exists (I believe it does), might technology one day be developed that allows it to be 'Observed and Manipulated' before it renders back into the Universe?
This is not a new idea, Soul displacement travel has been done many times in Science Fiction. What I am implying is real science and actually doing it. Granted, the source body would have to die.
In actual experiments of Quantum Teleporting I believe they require a source destination for the information being sent. That would inhibit trying to use that technology to explore the Universe. The development of Quantum Computers might actually make limited 'Soul Transference' a reality.

Now, You are probably thinking I am on some serious drugs. I'm not but I do think differently than most people I know. Just for a moment, give it some thought...Then reply with your own ideas.

Energy is fascinating. In Tron they drink it like water, In fantasy wizards throw it like balls and in science it powers the Universe. If there is going to be a new break-thru in technology in the new future I believe it will be in the manipulation of energy in some way or another. The physical properties that govern our macroscopic world prohibits us from ever exploring the Universe. Distance, Time & Physics are huge obstacles in our way. Perhaps Energy and Quantum Science will be the 'Ship' that opens the door to exploration.

 

[Tom]

Law of Vibration - Everything in the Universe moves, vibrates and travels in circular patterns, the same principles of vibration in the physical world apply to our thoughts, feelings, desires and wills in the Etheric world. Each sound, thing, and even thought has its own vibrational frequency, unique unto itself.

12 Immutable Universal Laws - Laws of the Universe

In 1942 the famous scientist Dr. Nikola Tesla said,
"If you want to find the secrets of the Universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration."

Purple Energy Plates

 

[Tom]

Energy may be the source of probability dimensions. Follow me as I try to explain this complex thought.

You have a point.
.
I don't recall if the point is one dimensional or zero dimensional but there is a theory of Zero Point Energy.
Feel free to look it up.
Now, this point-
.
tiny as it might be, is also locked to relativity. If you were at a certain scale close enough to this point it might look like a sphere. I'm talking extremely tiny.
Now take this point (Lets say it is a point of energy), the smallest base unit of energy.
If you place an imaginary line thru the center of such a point and bisect it. You now have something radiating from it at what now becomes two ends, Lets say a top and bottom. Now, you bisect the point 90 degrees from the last point and what you get is a plus sign.
+
You continue to bisect the point at angles until you have a star pattern.
Now since this is a point, You turn the reference to the side 90 degrees and do the same thing.
Now, you have a 3 dimensional star.
If you continue to turn the reference and bisect soon you have a dot.
A sphere that has no more room for more bisections.
But if you move the reference of relativity to a larger point of reference you now are back to a point with things poking out in all directions. Since all lines are at right angles to the center the farther you look away from the center the more room there is for more bisections. So instead of the point only being able to be bisected 36,000 times there is now room to bisect the bisections. Again, each one equally bisecting the arcs. As your view moves larger, more macroscopic even more bisections are possible. Soon you are bisecting at the pico-second of an arc. As your view expands so does the ability to bisect. These lines could be said to extend to infinities. Lets not get stuck on infinity because infinity is difficult to comprehend.
In this fuzzy creation, at the center, is still the point.

I think that Energy in its smallest manifestation is a point. The fuzzy bisecting lines we just imagined are the essence of the point radiating outward.
The same inference can be done with gravity. If gravity were a point.
So what do we have. We have a fuzzy point that exists in such a relativity that it fills even the empty pace between atomic components.
You place such a point beside another such point. Then add another and another and keep adding points along a trajectory and soon you have a line -
_
But, the Universe is not a flat 2 dimensional place. You need to do the same thing with the line as you did with the point. Now you have two lines of points that look like
+ again. Adding more lines in all directions and soon all the places you can reference is filled with points.
We can't reference these points because they are at such a scale that any observing method is distorted by its own composition of points. There is no area of pristine emptiness needed to isolate the detection. Imagine trying to use your camera to take a picture but it is so sensitive that the exposure not only sees the lens but the air between the lens and the detector. Not to mention the surface of the detector itself.
A computer, given the correct physics and relativity data might be able to simulate such a sight. I don't know.

At the scale I am referring to the Higgs Field is huge. The Higgs Boson consists of a cluster of these points. Between these bosons are even more points, one right next to the other on all possible sides. These points of energy are living and dying relatively instantly. It 'looks' like they are percolating. They have bonding actions that stabilize into particles and that bond and stabilize into matter.
All matter everywhere, from quarks to galactic super-clusters are composed of these points of energy.

In string theory, the string vibrates from the percolation of the lifespan of the points that comprise the string.

Taking this consideration we can apply the point scenario to probability.
You have Time as a point.
For every point there are emanations of probable outcomes and improbable outcomes for each one. Around the time point are other time points that are based on that angle of probability. Time becomes non-linear and becomes a cluster which fills all possible angles from every possible point. Our minds can't handle the overload so we only acknowledge specific paths of those points. That path zig-zags at different probability angles within the time dimension. The pathways we acknowledge are of such minute deviation time seems to flow in a line to us.
The relativity scale we can comprehend is in the macro. We think our decisions are what propagates our timeline but the propagation occurs far below and far faster than we can acknowledge.
Example: You comb your hair one way and your day unfolds a certain way.
At the relativity scale I refer to, You might not have any hair, you might have hair but in one probability there is an extra atom in one of those hairs. This is even a macro scenario. Perhaps the energy percolation in between the leptons inside the atoms of one of those hair is slightly different. This opens an infinity of probabilities that implies an infinity of dimensions.

I know if you are still reading you are laughing but stay with me.
This point reality (? name needed) is true within the Universe's macro scale as well. Here is where the depiction in science is faulty in my opinion.
In describing the gravity of mass in the space-time fabric it gets shown as a blanket type thing with boxes drawn on it. You have stars and planets depicted as sitting in these gravity pockets that interact with other masses near them. They show Black Holes as deep funnels in this representation. I always find these graphics misleading. Like our point of energy, our point of time and now the point of gravity, the fabric should be shown to affect space-time at all possible angles from the point. According to the popular gravity well graphic - only one bisection is shown where in what I understand about gravity. It exerts itself in all directions.
Okay, you say "But the planets are circling the Sun in a disk shape" The disk shape of the debris that resulted in our Solar System is from the accretion process that formed the system. The gravity of our star is the same above it as it is on the side but there is no mass above or below it that can be influenced by it. If mass were to become available at those angles we would see the same type of pattern we see only as a single disk right now.
The Black Hole shows up as an accretion disk because the matter falling into it is in a disk. The gravity is the same in all angles but the debris is only present at certain angles. Gravity is not one sided. It is a point.

So, you are reading this and thinking "What does this have to do with science fiction?"

Orientation
Any point no matter its relative size can be approached at any angle.
Reference
Any point approached gets assigned a top and bottom according to how it is referenced

If you approach a galaxy from afar and as you get closer you see it as standing on its edge. When you reach that galaxy you orientate your view to a familiar point of view that allows you to make sense of what you see.
You assign it a top and bottom. Left and right. We do this when we reference our Sun everyday.
Our maps are drawn to establish our planet as a top and bottom with north, south east and west.
In reality, most of us are seeing the Sun to the side yet we think it is above us. We think north is the top of our planet because we have been trained to see it that way. In science fiction, all these references decrease the plausibility of the story. Imagine if you came to Earth and it was from above the solar plane. You would see the plane rotating in one direction. From below the Solar plane you would see it rotating the opposite direction. If you came to it from the edge it might appear to be rotating upward or downward depending on your orientation.
Energy, time and gravity points are like this view. At all possible angles.

Okay, sorry. My brain just locked up. Perhaps I will be able to add more later.
I ask, for discussion purposes, What are your thoughts?
Does this make sense?
Is it pure fantasy?
Is it possibly true?
Can anything or has anything I mention been or currently being tested?

 

[Edgar J Hoover]

Now, just to balls up this entire thread, i present to you...

Negative Temperatures

What Does Negative Temperature Mean?

 

[Tom]

Proof is in the pudding.

Questions: What is negative temperature? Can you really make a system that has a temperature below absolute zero? Can you even give any useful meaning to the expression "negative absolute temperature"?
Answer: Absolutely.
Under certain conditions, a closed system can be described by a negative temperature

This article is trying to assert a fact using an assumption.

Our intuitive notion is that two systems in thermal contact should exchange no heat

Fundamentals of air conditioning

So temperature increases with increasing energy, from zero, asymptotically approaching positive infinity as the energy increases.

At absolute zero, there is no temperature, no movement. Movement is energy.

Notice that with this definition, E is zero when half of the spins are up and half are down. It is negative when the majority are down and positive when the majority are up.

The article argues that negative temperature is determined by atomic forces spins. At true absolute temperature, even the atoms, quarks and leptons are frozen still. Movement is energy, even at quantum scales. If it is moving it has heat. Absolute zero is no movement at all.

If you place something with heat against something at absolute zero the heat will transfer causing movement in the substance that was previously at absolute zero thus causing it not to be at absolute zero anymore.

There cannot be negative movement. Once something, anything ceases to move it has stopped. Absolute zero is the cessation of all movement, ALL MOVEMENT. Not only does that include elementary particles it includes the photon impacts, percolation of the vacuum energy and gravitational pull. It may even include time progression.

 

[Edgar J Hoover]

You need to read the links i posted.

Once you get below energy levels, ie wavelengths, short than a planck length, or longer than the diameter of the universe, temperature becomes meaningless and quantum effects kick in.

Your argument only holds in classical physics in non euclidean space.

 

[Tom]

 

[Edgar J Hoover]

I am getting a grasp on you, you can make on nominally intelligent (well, non-stupid) post, then you have to resort to pictures as you suffer brain overload. This is the second thread you posted an idiot picture to a reasonable reply.

amirite?

 

[Tom]

yup

 

[Edgar J Hoover]

Anyone that knows me knows that I am just a mechanic.

A Mechanic? of do you mean a Fitter?

Mechanic, Technician and Engineer are highly misused words these days.

My father was an Engineer. He used to draw (from scratch), hand build, and test prototype Diesel engines, and later, Gas Turbines.

People who mend televisions and computers are not Engineers.
Girls who paint fingernails are not Technicians
and blokes who change suspensions springs and exhaust pipes are not Mechanics......

 

[Randal R.]

I am sorry, Tom, I have not read many of your statements..as I been reading so much..I need a break,so now I am speaking and typing, so I do not think or read. humor

Came across soemthing interesting, and by george,I think it is right.


GRAVITY Einstein vs Tesla source: Tesla vs. Einstein: The Ether & the Birth of the New Physics | New Dawn : The World's Most Unusual Magazine
Gravity
Concerning the curvature of space (Einstein) versus the idea of a force field (Tesla), I discussed this point with Edwin Gora, Professor Emeritus, from Providence College. Gora, whose teachers include Werner Heisenberg and Arnold Sommerfeld, agreed that the two concepts might actually be different viable ways of describing the same thing. Both Tesla and Einstein are trying to describe the fundamental structure of space and its relationship to the constancy of lightspeed and gravity.

In an obscure paper I discovered on the web published by M. Shapkin but supposedly written by Tesla, Shapkin/Tesla states that the reason why light only travels at one speed, 186,000 mph, is because the ether, its medium of transfer, slows down photonic energy to that rate the same way air slows down sound to its constant speed.18 According to this view, the ether is a specific medium that restricts the speed of light to exactly the speed that it is. This is a very exciting theory because it suggests that the energy which manifests itself as light ultimately exists in a tachyonic realm, that is, in a realm that exceeds the speed of light.

Another aspect of this ether theory which derives from Tesla and numerous other modern writers such as Price and Gibson, Ed Hatch, Vencislav Bujic, Ron Heath, Warren York and David Wilcox outlined in detail in my book Transcending the Speed of Light, is that matter is constantly absorbing ether all the time.

If we look at the structure of matter, we see that it is comprised of atoms, which is, essentially, electrons orbiting protons and neutrons. But neutrons are, by definition, protons sandwiched to electrons. So the fundamental structure of matter is just two particles, electrons and protons and a glue that binds these atoms into molecules, which are photons. These particles spin. What keeps them spinning? Ether theory suggests that elementary particles are absorbing ether all the time to maintain their spin. And when they do this, they emanate the absorbed energy as electromagnetic fields. That is the link between gravity and electromagnetism.

Take the Earth, for instance. Classical physics sees the force of gravity as some type of almost magical attractive force between stars and planets. Ether theory has a totally different view. The reason we fall back to the Earth when we jump up is not this mystical force of gravity, but rather it is because the Earth is constantly absorbing a tremendous amount of ether to keep all of its elementary particles spinning. We are just in the way of this influx. This view explains what gravity is, and also explains Tesla’s seemingly odd statement that the sun is absorbing more energy than it is radiating. The more you think about it, the more this seemingly nutty idea makes perfect sense. The sun requires a gargantuan amount of etheric energy to keep its integrity.






This was great stuff to read I thought.and you know what, I think Tesla may be correct..
Part of the reason, is I have downloaded bluprints (no printer) for Free Energy generator (Be home Built)
KESHE KFssi plasma based energy...draws the energy from the ether, like the sun.

Regards,
Randal R.

 

[Tom]

If we look at the structure of matter, we see that it is comprised of atoms, which is, essentially, electrons orbiting protons and neutrons. But neutrons are, by definition, protons sandwiched to electrons. So the fundamental structure of matter is just two particles, electrons and protons and a glue that binds these atoms into molecules, which are photons. These particles spin. What keeps them spinning? Ether theory suggests that elementary particles are absorbing ether all the time to maintain their spin. And when they do this, they emanate the absorbed energy as electromagnetic fields. That is the link between gravity and electromagnetism.

Wow. That is so far off reality it delves into fantasy.

Around the turn of the century in the early 1900s this was thought to be true.

There is no such thing as aether.

Matter is comprised of more than a dozen elements that keeps expanding everytime there is a particle acceleration experiment.

Not only are there upspin and downspin particles like muons and leptons there are exotics.

This picture is old.

This picture is more recent but is still kinda old

On point for this discussion; Every particle in the atomic make-up of matter has energy.

To scale, the components of every atom is similar to the scale of a solar system. The distance by relative size puts the electrons out near the kuiper belt. That void between the electrons and the nucleus contains forces. Forces that are currently unexplored. Are the forces particles, waves or both, Perhaps neither? Something different, unimagined.

Zero-point energy refers to random quantum fluctuations of the electromagnetic (and other) force fields that are present everywhere in the vacuum; in other words, an 'empty' vacuum is actually a seething cauldron of energy.

They go on to imply that ZPE is present even at Absolute Zero.
That implication does one of two things.
1. Supposes that our idea of Absolute Zero is not True Absolute Zero (Cessation of all movement)
2. Supposes that there is more than one level/one type of Energy.

Of the two, I am going with the first one first. Even at 1,000 years of scientific discovery and comprehension our species have barely started to understand a Universe that is more than 14 Billion years old.

Could there be multiple forms of energy present....yes, I believe there could be. Just because we haven't discovered them yet doesn't make them impossible.

Space, on our observable scale is nearly a vacuum. ZPE implies that all of space, everywhere is a perculating culdron of energy that erupts into matter and annihilates that matter instantly. When a particle does form, it collects other particles until it becomes matter. Then that brand new atom collects other atoms and eventually you have interstellar dust. That dust collects and forms clouds, proto stars and eventually other megastructures like stars, planets and such.

Is something similar happening within the scale of the atomic system? Between the nucleus and outer electron orbits?

How small is an individual essence of energy? Does that have a structure with interior components like an atom? What forces hold That together? Does energy combine at its fundamental essence or is it like marbles in a bag?