這個小工具發生錯誤

2012年12月27日 星期四

How come scientist do not see a simple concept that tie in the concept of Higg's Boson, the theories of relativties and the 4 universal forces discovered.

The title here sound so grand but yet it seem so simple to me all these years.  How come all the scientist and mathematician make so much fuss about the universal theory of forces.

Of course when I say something like this, I could be attacked by all sides for being a layman with no real knowledge of theoretical physic, actually no formal mathmetical and education in the field of physic in depth. 

Before I surrender myself,  I want to get responds from reader about what area of error, in my interpretation of the universe and the nuclear phenomenon I know so far. I do not see why physicists take a long way around to explain something so simple and fundamental known by common people and has accepted as facts or accepted as a  limitation of knowledge.

So let me start with my humble little story of my observation to buy more time for contribution to my blog from my friends on the internet.  

When I was still in elementary school of about grade 3, in the early 1960's. One of my aunt had told me about atoms the elementary unit in chemical composition of the world.  AT that age, I did not know much about chemistry and physic, the 4 essential forces we known today, but more about the cold war, the atomic bomb test and hydrogen bomb tests.  There were weekly or monthly news about these preparation of nuclear war, experience by people of my generation in the 1950's 1960's and 1970's..


Of course when people talked about electrons spinning around a small nuclear like a planet circle around the sun, I know that is not possible for scientist to know how the electrons spin.  This concept of uncertainty principle (Heisenberg's)seems so easy. . If an atom is an elementary material smallest particales we can observe, and if an electron is constantly moving particle, how can anybody measure its spin and tell us how the electron move.
When one try to test the position of an electron with another electron bounded partical, the original electron has moved aways already.  At that time we knew that structure of atom were mostly empty space as we have method of bombarding solid material and tried to divert the movement of moving electrons with controllable and variable magnetism.   The greatest discovery we heard about in those years was the discovery of nuclear spin, the spin of proton, neutron etc.   

When we talked about there are protons, neutron and electron in an atom, naturally there are other finer material that make up these particles.  Naturally we can project the development of discovery would be to look for material described as small, smaller than what we can see, fine and even finer than all the instrument we can measure,  and so on, not we run out of means to measure these particles.   So later on we heard  about there are matters known as quarks, and higgs boson in the 1970s to the 2000's.  

When I was told about gravity in grade 3, then I realize that when people and things (matters) attracted and stuck to the ground is not a simple naturally acceptable facts of life. This up set me when I realize that what we think as most natural event are not necessary base on reasonable explanation, but build on assumptions of what we experience everyday.   (Later when I was in high school, secondary school, I heard about the Newton's law of universal gravity, then I realize that the gravitational force between a ball and an apple, and the force between magnets are different.  Magnetic force is the same as electrical magnetic force of motors and generators,  can not be compared with the gravitational force between the sun and its planet. There are different observable forces originated from different scientist and governed by different law of motion..

When I was in upper higher school and college, I wonder why have to agree with Albert Einstein about the imperfection of the Newtons's gravitational law, the relativity of space-time quantum told us throw away the common sense that we build our of wave theory on.   Why can't we accept the existence a fine universal medium, those ultra-fine particles called "aether" that permeate space we know as the universe in which the planets and stars travel in. 

The fact shows that scientist at the time could not measure the aether, can only means that they are working of a concept of size in a scale we could not measure, but the idea of aether should not be thrown out of consideration.  The concept of aether seem to give us a tool to explant the strange phenomenons we observed in quantum mechanic.  Why can not we explain that individual mass, seems to exist in quantized digital units, such as atomic mass, can be described as a kind of wave function, especially when can not count and a measure atom particles except by means of statistically measurement. 

Particles can be described as a square wave, or a pulse wave function of energy carried by the medium aether, then it would not be difficult to explain the wave phenomena of particles in tight area, such as the interference pattern of light going through a two split opening.  .     Wave travelling in the same medium, in synchronized wave pattern do produce interference pattern, even though individual water molecule are each form a particle of water.

There come the Higg's theory, that gravitation exist when matter interact with these so called Higgs boson to slow down the movement, what we try to explain known as inertia of matter today.



In college when people talk about the effect of Eistein's theories of special relativity and general relativity, how they affect the space-time continuum that draw my interest more.

Let us think about how we intepret time and many other scientific concept in our daily life.  Aren't we all rely on our daily logic and understanding, in spite all the mathematical work scientist try to explain behind them.  That is to say we have some concept of what the universe would be and try to fit in with the math to support it.  The question is how much we know about the real universe, and how we can observe.

These are my leading questions today, and I would try to give you more later.  My next idea would be related to an observation of what I imagine in typhoon (Hurricane) near the sea.

When I was grade 5 about 11 years old, I live in boarding school in Hong Kong.  Every year in the sub-tropical british colony of Hong Kong, there were a few typhone attack every year.  Whey you are in school during a typhoon attack there was nothing much you can do, classes were off, and all the student have to stay in dometry not allowed to go outside of the building, raining all day long.  Some time you can only stay in bed, because the floors were wet by seeping rain water through the windows forcing in by the power of the wind.  One do not want to keep ones feet wet all day long, so the only thing to do is to stay away from the floor and sit on ones ow bed.  Fortunately or not my bed is next to the window, I can see from a distant the hauling wind was wipping up wave at the sea side near the school.  I was watching waves all day long.  I noticed those waves crashing on the sea shore look not much different from the rolls of waves on the beach when the sea is clam and children can play there.  The one difference is when you look carefully enough you can see those rolls of weave were actually sweep over the piers where boats could tie along side.  If you compare the heigh of the waves with the lamp post and a little concrete house room built on the pier you can tell the waves were actually taller than the lamp post, taller than the house, estimated to be about 10 feet above the pier. If you look even more closely, you see smaller waves were actually riding on top of the bigger waves. When the wave disintergrated on the beach shore the crest of the wave come closer together and rise to a new height.  When the wave hit the solid concret pier you can see the reflecting waves.  What an amazing phenomina I later learnt in college.  That was the observational experence in 1963.

What was new in the years of 1960's was that mass is accepted as a form of energy that happen to be enwrapped in kind wave of  package.  The break through in scientific concept had lead to the fantacy of those follwing decade years that mass can be break up into a group of structured waves and transmit through space and solid to be re-group and reorganized into mass again, just like sound waves can be break up into digital data signals and reconstructed into sound in a distance over thousands of miles around the earth without lost of its sound quality,  This is obvious a reality  just like talking over long distant phone call  we do not have to yell and ask repetitive who the other conversation parties is by recognise the other parties voice character.

In secondary school (high school),  I get to know that mass and engery are related y one short equation
E=MC2
(energy is equal to mass times the square of the speed of light). This equation was written this way, because MC2 is the same as the Newtonian equation Energy = change of momentum over time (differentiation of mass x velocity over time unit)
i.e. E=mv2.
It is easy to understand the equation by comparing the change of mass to the sum of all energy radiated from a radioactive substance.


If mass is energy, and the mass equation can be break up into wave equation form, and the wave energy is in geometric proportion to the mass unit, would it not be supprising to think that energy is a distribution of energy carried by the even smaller mass (smaller than the basic atomic particles we know of) through out space. When big lump of mass has been broken up into much smaller mass, just like sound shock wave have broken into vibration of air particles, like huge giantic water wave crest crashed on shore and broken into splashing and rebouncing backward water waves of many pitches, frequencies.

If mass can be a form a energized wave form, then it would not be difficult to imagine that what we recognized in Newtonian physics as matter, distance, and time can be represented by mathmatical wave functions.

Those many waves functions can be difficult to interpretate and proof accurate in a universe infinitely smaller than ours. 

What seem to be appearant is that mass can be a impluse or square wave in mathmetic, group together either as a wave form in a field of much smaller wave package in a sea of mediun like what call as Higgs boson today.   Just like wave in a sea of water, mass is a lump of wave energe in the sea of Higgs boson.

When a depth charge, an explosive device use in marine war,  explode in the depth of ocean, the explosion abrupptly created a massive force, created a space (occupied by high temperature highly energetic vibrating gas) in the center of a body of water, pushing all the water around it away from the center of the explosion in all direction, and then collapsed into almost massless vacume,  The wave and the energy it gernate and transmited by the water mediun radiate in all directions.  This 3 dimension radiation of energy and movement  of water is in proportion to the surface of a sphere of expanded of wate. Wouldn't the energy carried by the water be just like the equation E= m*c2, the energy is in proportion to the surface of a sphere expended at the speed of like.




If mass can represented by the wave function of energy carried by the expanding medium particles, take for grant the Higg's boson, what about the definition of distance, length, and time.

When mass and distance (the 3 dimensional space concept) can be varied, so does what we call time (a relative time). What we call the space time continuum is different from the Newtonian concept.      

Before the invention of supersonic plane, people thought that the speed of planes can not exceed the speed of sound.      However, as we know it today, the speed of sound can be broken.  The speed of sound was treated as constant in a given medium, and wouldn't that look like the speed of light would lool like it is a constant in a sea of medium of particles in much small geometrical proportion size like a sea of the so called Higgs Boson that extend to the vast space around and beyond our gallarcy (Milkway).  In a space that large of particles so small how would the scientist device a measurment for the difference in the speed of light when an object is traveling in one direction compare to the speed of light in the other direction.

in Todays theory, given the speed of light is accepted as a constant. What we know as distance, (the space in its 3 D concept) is measured by the time that take for light to travel.  If the the speed of light is not constant in the galaxy wide medium that has different reactional density, (just like the speed of light, electrical magnetic wave, and sound wave, varies in medium of different character) space(distance) and time would various in different part of space [see note ( I )]. 

It is known the electro-magnetic wave would travel more slowly in more conductive medium like metal (a conductor) than in semi-conductor and non-conductor like vacum and air.   It would not be suprising to see that the time and space would look like slow down and shrinked in a speedy satellite where the assumed Higg Boson would be compacted not just in the direction of traveling mass. 

Then question would raise about the other 3 known forces of the universe.

The most difficult concept to deal with in modern physic is the gravitation force.  This do not seem to be a problem in the Higg's Boson concept.  Mass is simply those matter that react with the Higg's Boson.  Those massless particle are not reactive with the Higg;s Boson.  Photon look massless, not attaracted by gravity and spinding mass, but its digital packaged behave like a mass, but also react in statistical wave function, as if one photo react to another distant photon in the medium as in water wave pass through a double slit experiment.
Also light do get bent by heavy object like the sun, when the medium is more dense, i.e. in area near the sun.
If you accept the existence of a medium in space and inner space between atoms, it is not difficult to understand the theory of quantum machanic that electronic and jump from one state to another as in the tunneling effect.


How about the magnetic force, the force exert by electirc charges. It is known that light is a kind of electro magnetic wave, just like radio wave in difference frequency. In fact it is said radio wave is use to measure or rather guess how the light reach us from the beginning of the universe (the big Bang theory. The universe is expanding is such a speed and for such a long time, the original high frequency light has dispersed or slowed down to ratio wave that reach us today.)
I leave the electro-magnetic force and the other two forces, those I do not know enough for you ponder about; little about, (as I am not a physics, scientist) be explained by what we know in common intellegence.

How come scientist do not look at things in our common sense? Basically we do not know how the universe was constructed. What we know are our observation, those God let us know.

Let us look as what scientist tell us. They describe the universe is made of different kinds of atoms. Atoms formed molecules of many different structures. Internally atoms are made of atomic particles such as protons and neutrons make up the nucleus of the atom, and the negatived electrons occupied most of the non-nuclea space of the atom. Further the atomic particles are made of quarks and other non-mass particles, such as those listed in the table herewith.

Let us look at what common sense tell us.
( I )Let us look at the basic. We can not measure the substance call light, not until light has reacted to some media we can observe.
( I a ) Light can travel in different speed in different media, just radio wave travel in different speed in different conductor or semi-conductor. Also because light wave propugate in different speed in water and glass, we can bend light by shaping the the media. Why then some scientist keep saying light travel in constant speed ?
( I b )Wouldn't it be simple to explain that light travel in a media we can not quite able to measure its mas like water and glass. In the old model of a light carrying medium called it aether (ether), thinking that the measurement light traveling in one direction within ether, can be measured and compared to light travelling in another direction perpendicular to the direction of other measurment. However this model was abondonded as the model seems too commplicated and the phenomena of light can be easily explained by Eistein's theory of relativity, in the space time continuum.
I would not abandon the aether model so quickly, but to improve it and expand the model a bit more. The medium can be like air, aether in the absolute-space is the medium that carry light wave and interaction between particles. The 3 dimensional space, as we know it (is a relative-space), can be compressed and elongated against the absolute space (perhaps except in a sub-atomic scale). Light in a medium-space travels more slow in dense aether, it also seems to travel a bit more slower in a less dense aether medium. The property of aether can react with light, particles and mass-less particles like the so called Higgs boson in the Higgs field too. Because light travel in a wave form can not be detected until it react with some kind of particles, and hence defused light can be detected as if it is a unit/digital energy, a minimal packaged energy like a small mass almost massless property, like phenomenon. Yet light is a wave energy that propagate in aether, it behaves with wave characteristic through out space we know, and it behave like the probability wave of distributing particles. This is the similar phenomenon of electron behave as it electron can exist everywhere in space (we know) as described by quantum physics, described by basic concept of probability.

Then how do we explain gravity in the aester model "?"

Gravity like all kind of forces, can be described as contraction of the space, the relative-space we know, in comparison to the absolute-space that fill by aether. If we can accept the concept of the Eistien's timespace continuum, it would not be so difficult to believe that we are living, rather to say traveling in a universe of contracting space (the relative space). It take a little more to explain how aether behave in the absolute-space in relation to the relative space and how the property of gravity react with mass.
How do we explain the strong force between sub-atomic particles, the weak force that related to the radiation of particles, and the electro-magnetic force.
How do we define the size and interaction between aether from a variable relative-space as we see it.

I leave these to be explained next time, when I have more time, and when I have learnt more about how to write in html.

沒有留言:

張貼留言