I'm back again. I don't really know that I am doing any better than I
was when I left, but I will see. I wanted to discuss some concepts with
intelligent people (some of whom may already know about some of this
stuff). I will preface these that my knowledge of Quantum theory is
small, and if anyone can recommend a good (emphasis on good, not overly
simplified or popularized like Hawking's Books which read more like
quantum physics for dummies I want nitty-gritty details) book on
quantum theory, I would appreciate it.
Mike's Crazy Hypothesis 1:
I have heard hypothesized that neutrons are simply protons upon-which an
electron has collapsed. First, does this make sense by our current
understanding of quantum theory? If the hypothesis does make sense,
what if the hypothesis is backwards? What if Neutrons are the natural
state of matter and protons are neutrons that had part of them stripped
away (likely during the big-bang)? This could explain why electrons are
near mass-less and the incredibly strong force of attraction between
protons and electrons.
Mike's Crazy Hypothesis 2:
I am half-way through reading Richard Dawkin's book The God Delusion.
In it he says that proponents of a creator argue that the fundamental
force constants in the universe are so finely tuned so as to allow the
conditions that make life (as we know it) possible. and that if even
one of these, like the strong force, was slightly different, that life
would not be possible because if the strong force were higher, all
hydrogen in the universe would have fused into heavier stuff, and if it
were weaker, no heavier atoms essential to the formation of our planet
and the life on it could be created in the cores of massive stars. He
explains Multi-dimensional theory and it as a possible explanation that
would explain why a universe that has the right constants can exist
without a creator. Multi-dim theory aside, a thought occurred to me: If
the constants of our universe need to be at a specific range for matter
to exist in the forms that promote life, what if the constants like the
strong force are not constants? What if, over billions of years (or
even longer), the strong force slowly got weaker. Indeed, a higher
strong force would go a long way to explain the singularity that
resulted in the big bang, and the weakening of the strong force would go
a long way to explaining why the big bang occurred in the first place.
It might also go a long way to explain why Galaxies and solar-systems
don't seem to follow the same model of gravity. If the fundamental
constants of the universe are changing ever-so-slowly, Objects at a
great distance would appear to be affected differently than objects
closer together simply because of the time it took for the bodies to
form with relation to each other and the changing of the fundamental
forces. This may also explain the recent data suggesting that the
universe appears to be expanding at an ever increasing rate rather than
slowing down as one would expect.
I have more crazy hypotheses, but I am getting tired, so I think that I
will stop there for now.
___
http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
