Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Plasticity, part 2

  We are at a lower limit when we reach Planck time and the Planck length.  What if there is Planck dynamics of space?  It is my contention the disconnect between the physics of the large and the physics of the small is of our conception of space.  There is no difference in space itself.  There is a difference in masses.  The result then is a difference in the interactions of the differing masses with space.  We then need to figure out space.
  There is a common misconception if the velocity of light.  Everybody throws around the equation, E = mc2
mistakenly thinking that "c"  is a fixed quantity universally.  When in fact "c" is a mathematical representation of a number: 3, 2½, or π.  The speed of light in space is one value.  The speed of light in a single mode fiber optic cable is slower.  To a layman or an engineer the difference is negligible.  Now this idea is consistent because of a concept called "local unity".  It's what allows Newtonian or classical physics to not be upended by Einstein's theories.  How much of the volume of space represents our "local unity" is unknown.  Based on our current assumptions and observations it's not local, but universal.  But there are problems.  We've got a missing mass problem.  We've got the associated expansion problem.  Things just don't add up.  What's a poor bloke to do?  The speed of light is not 299,792,458 m/s everywhere.
  The folks running the Large Hadron Collider have been trying to track down the Higgs Boson among other particle esoterica.  Supposedly, they succeeded, but there are those who are having second thoughts now.  Regardless, what if we use Max Planck's last name one more time?  What if Planck's constant is in fact a clue to the dynamic interaction of mass and space?  In the beginning was "quark soup".  Space was the "stock".  The really elementary particles coalesced. Simmer and stir occasionally.  With plasticity, expansion is not a problem.

To be continued...

Sunday, November 9, 2014


  Imagine space as silly putty, but foamy.  It's density is so low it stands at the edge of reason.  The smallest particle deforms this foam.  We may not be able to detect the particle directly, but the deformity represents the "field" of the particle.  Sound familiar?  The interaction of the particle with space is it's field.  This hearkens back to the "aether".  Our problem is wrapping our heads around such a low density.  The "density" of our brains is part of the problem.
  This plasticity exhibits fluidity.  Again the problem is density.  Classically we think of water or air.  What of a non newtonian fluid?  Instead of a spoon used in a children's experiment, what about particles of ever increasing mass and density interacting with the space?  What is viscosity?

To be continued...

Thanks to Josh Peck and his book Quantum Creation for getting me to think about this stuff, again.
This journey started back in the early '80s with Nigel Calder's Einstein's Universe and a boat load of subsequent books and articles too numerous to mention.