Re: Descriptive Set Theory
Hi Tom, Le 06-oct.-05, à 19:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : I've been looking a little into what there is on-line about descriptive set theory, a relatively new field. It seems that with the questions about cardinality and descriptions on this list, that descriptive set theory (Polish spaces being an important element) would be useful, if not essential. A search of this list doesn't turn up any references to it. Does anyone have enough knowledge of it to give a brief note on how it ties in with this list's discussion? Descriptive set theory can be used in the foundations of analysis. The idea consists in using some nice subsets of the reals so as to avoid conceptual difficulties and keeping powerful tools in analysis. Actually I have used descriptive set theory in my first attempts to tackle the measure problem pertaining on the first person observer moments (where Kripke models fails). Some people have used it also in computational learning theory. I have worked hard to eliminate the use of descriptive set theory if only because to use them in comp you need some stronger from of Church thesis (but this makes them fruitful in some non-comp approach). Now, honestly, from I can judge about the knowledge of logic in this list, descriptive theory (which quantifies on both the natural numbers and the reals) is far too technical a subject so that it can be use easily. I'm a bit busy to say much more, but perhaps you have a good intuition because if you describe directly the set of infinite path (histories) on which the 1-measure pertains, you cannot escape the analytical hierarchy, the hyperarithmetic sets, etc. But then I am happy of having find a way to single out the logic of comp-certainty without addressing the need to classify mathematically those infinite path. To sum up, the use of descriptive set theory seems to me premature, although unavoidable for future work on the measure and probability questions on OMs. If you are interested, a good book on the subject is the Oxford Logic Guides 11: Recursive Aspects of Descriptive Set Theory by Richard Mansfield and Galen Weitkamp, 1985. Prerequisites: the whole of Rogers' book (ref in my thesis). For my thesis you need to understand about the half of Rogers book (the easiest part I would say). But, you know, with comp, we can expect that the whole of mathematical logic can be of some use soon or later. Mathematical Logic is the philosophical logic of the Platonists! (But please don't repeat this to a mathematical logician!). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
RE: Neutrino shield idea
Right on Russell! Has anyone ever measured the spin of a neutrino? Let's get back to basics? Let's consider the following which I assume you fellows believe are true: * Neutrino travel at the speed of light. * Only photons travel at the speed of light. (Except my tronnies that usually go faster than the speed of light.) * Neutrinos easily pass through matter although occasionally some are stopped, gamma rays (the closest things to neutrinos according to the Ross Model) pass through matter although some are stopped. Gamma ray energies are in the range of 1 mev, neutrino energies are in the range of 300 mev. * Our sun produces a lot of neutrinos. Neutrino flux decreases as inverse square of distance as does gravity. * No other theory provides a good explanation of the force of gravity. (I don't call mass curving space as a good explanation.) * Does anyone have a good explanation why the electromagnetic chart should stop at about 4 or 5 mev? -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 5:39 PM To: Stephen Paul King Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 09:02:17PM -0400, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Russell, I hope you meant to write that photons are bosons with spin1. Otherwise Yes, you are right. Mea culpa! Put it down to the couple of decades since I studied this stuff... we would have a hard time explaining Maxwell's Field equations. ;-) About the differences between neutrinos and photons, we could also point out that photons have a null extension in the time direction and neutrinos, having a small but non-zero mass have an extension in the time direction - I am thinking here in terms of how we would embed our particles in a Minkowski or equivalent space-time diagrams. Indeed - I thought about raising this difference also. Neutrinos are now accepted as having nonzero mass, although that wasn't the case when I was studying physics. Also, this guy would probably come back with photons having nonzero rest mass! After all, he reckons Einstein goofed, and that relativity is a load of old cobblers, so having nonzero restmass particles traveling at the speed of light wouldn't be a problem for him! Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: Russell Standish [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 6:12 PM Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea Neutrinos are fermions with spin 1/2. Photons are bosons with spin 0. This is about as chalk and cheese as you can get. The difference is not energy. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
RE: Neutrino shield idea
I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
RE: Neutrino shield idea
Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon. I believe people are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a tardyon is. Tardyons are not in my dictionary. -Original Message- From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino is a tardyon. Hal Ruhl At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote: I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything
Actually the simplest potential model of our universe I know of is mine [was I first with this idea?] which I have posted on before. It is just a discrete point space where the points are confined to regions arranged on a face centered cubic grid and particles are just dances of these points. It is like 3D cellular automaton where each point independently polls its 12 nearest neighbors and then updates its position in its region based on the outcome and a Huge Look Up Table. The face centered cubic arrangement of regions where the 12 nearest neighbors are arranged so that there are six inline triples and the central or 13th region is the middle region in each triple seems to have low level oscillations that support the types and family size of known particles. This is considered the low energy arrangement of regions and does not prevent higher energy arrangements and thus higher energy dances particles Large objects are just huge coordinated dances. Dances can move through the grid but the points can not. Hal Ruhl
RE: Neutrino shield idea
Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxon At 06:06 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote: Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon. I believe people are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a tardyon is. Tardyons are not in my dictionary. -Original Message- From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino is a tardyon. Hal Ruhl At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote: I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
Re: Neutrino shield idea
There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified their properties (which are completely different from photons). - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:49 PM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
Re: Neutrino shield idea
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote: * Only photons travel at the speed of light. (Except my tronnies that usually go faster than the speed of light.) Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 pgpoI2FMUm9xR.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Neutrino shield idea
To the best of my knowledge and belief, my theory successfully predicts all known experimental knowledge of physics, chemistry and optics and does so better and simpler than any other theory. I am working on a list of predictions of new things that can be proved experimentally. -Original Message- From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea John Ross: Thanks for the response. Yes my theory involves a lot of math. Have you read my patent application? For example, I have a quantitative description of Coulomb forces acting inside photons. These integrated forces represent the photon's energy. Do these equations allow you to predict quantitative results of experiments that have already been done, or are you just using math to describe new phenomena (like 'Coulomb forces acting inside photons') that have no current experimental correlate? For your theory to be taken seriously, you have to be able to reproduce successful predictions made by earlier theories (ideally, all the successful predictions made by the standard model of quantum physics, and by general relativity in the domain of gravity), and also make predictions about new phenomena which can be tested experimentally. Somehow I lost your pushing gravity thought and your reference to Feynman. Could you re-send me the e-mail that included those thoughts. There's an archived copy at http://www.mail-archive.com/everything-list%40eskimo.com/msg08025.html --the message includes a link to a wikipedia article which has a list of critisisms of push gravity, as well as that long quote by Feynman I provided. Anyway, as Russell Standish said to you earlier in the message at http://www.mail-archive.com/everything-list%40eskimo.com/msg08016.html , this list is not really for discussing alternative physics theories, the theory of everything title refers not to a unified theory of physics but to the idea that all possible universes (or all possible conscious experiences, maybe) exist, and some hope to derive an explanation for why we see the laws of physics that we do from this sort of assumption. See Max Tegmark's multiverse page at http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/multiverse.html for more background. You might want to try submitting your ideas to the independent research subforum of physicsforums.com, located at http://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=146 , there are a lot of knowledgeable people there. Jesse
RE: Neutrino shield idea
Name one. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified their properties (which are completely different from photons). - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:49 PM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
Re: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything
Why is this the simplest? It looks horrendously complicated to me. On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 06:07:26PM -0400, Hal Ruhl wrote: Actually the simplest potential model of our universe I know of is mine [was I first with this idea?] which I have posted on before. It is just a discrete point space where the points are confined to regions arranged on a face centered cubic grid and particles are just dances of these points. It is like 3D cellular automaton where each point independently polls its 12 nearest neighbors and then updates its position in its region based on the outcome and a Huge Look Up Table. The face centered cubic arrangement of regions where the 12 nearest neighbors are arranged so that there are six inline triples and the central or 13th region is the middle region in each triple seems to have low level oscillations that support the types and family size of known particles. This is considered the low energy arrangement of regions and does not prevent higher energy arrangements and thus higher energy dances particles Large objects are just huge coordinated dances. Dances can move through the grid but the points can not. Hal Ruhl -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 pgpcxJ8paV6r2.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Neutrino shield idea
I say a neutrino does not have a rest mass. It is a photon, like a very high energy gamma ray photon. I have seen photos of a neutrino collision in a neutrino trap. From the look of all the resulting ionization tracks, it must have had a lot more energy than 40 ev. I say the energy of neutrinos is in the range of 300 mev! -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:00 PM To: John Ross Cc: 'Hal Ruhl'; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea According to special relativity, anything with a positive rest mass travels slower than the speed of light. Neutrinos have been measured with a positive rest mass, of around 40ev for the electron neutrino IIRC, and higher values for the muon and tauon neutrinos. I have never heard of either tardyon or luxon before either, but have heard of tachyon, or faster than light particle. Clearly tardyon is therefore slower than light, and luxon is at light speed. Luxons therefore have zero rest mass, and tachyons have imaginary (ie proportional to sqrt(-1)) rest mass. Cheers On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 03:06:55PM -0700, John Ross wrote: Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon. I believe people are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a tardyon is. Tardyons are not in my dictionary. -Original Message- From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino is a tardyon. Hal Ruhl At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote: I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
Re: Neutrino shield idea
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7050/full/436467a.html -Original Message- From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:34:26 -0700 Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Name one. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified their properties (which are completely different from photons).
RE: Neutrino shield idea
I say any massless particle that has a charge supporting a Coulomb force must travel at the speed of light or faster because the Coulomb force travels at the speed of light and a charged massless particle will be repelled by its own Coulomb force. -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:04 PM To: John Ross Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote: * Only photons travel at the speed of light. (Except my tronnies that usually go faster than the speed of light.) Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything
Because there is only one particle (and its anti-particle) and one force from which the entire universe is built. How could there be anything simpler? -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:06 PM To: Hal Ruhl Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Why is this the simplest? It looks horrendously complicated to me. On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 06:07:26PM -0400, Hal Ruhl wrote: Actually the simplest potential model of our universe I know of is mine [was I first with this idea?] which I have posted on before. It is just a discrete point space where the points are confined to regions arranged on a face centered cubic grid and particles are just dances of these points. It is like 3D cellular automaton where each point independently polls its 12 nearest neighbors and then updates its position in its region based on the outcome and a Huge Look Up Table. The face centered cubic arrangement of regions where the 12 nearest neighbors are arranged so that there are six inline triples and the central or 13th region is the middle region in each triple seems to have low level oscillations that support the types and family size of known particles. This is considered the low energy arrangement of regions and does not prevent higher energy arrangements and thus higher energy dances particles Large objects are just huge coordinated dances. Dances can move through the grid but the points can not. Hal Ruhl -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
Re: Neutrino shield idea
Dear John, There is replicated evidence that neutrinos have a non-zero mass. It is very small, but it is not zero. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino Onward! Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:49 PM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
Re: Neutrino shield idea
I'm sure you saw something else :-) - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Russell Standish' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'Hal Ruhl' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 01:40 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea I say a neutrino does not have a rest mass. It is a photon, like a very high energy gamma ray photon. I have seen photos of a neutrino collision in a neutrino trap. From the look of all the resulting ionization tracks, it must have had a lot more energy than 40 ev. I say the energy of neutrinos is in the range of 300 mev! -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:00 PM To: John Ross Cc: 'Hal Ruhl'; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea According to special relativity, anything with a positive rest mass travels slower than the speed of light. Neutrinos have been measured with a positive rest mass, of around 40ev for the electron neutrino IIRC, and higher values for the muon and tauon neutrinos. I have never heard of either tardyon or luxon before either, but have heard of tachyon, or faster than light particle. Clearly tardyon is therefore slower than light, and luxon is at light speed. Luxons therefore have zero rest mass, and tachyons have imaginary (ie proportional to sqrt(-1)) rest mass. Cheers On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 03:06:55PM -0700, John Ross wrote: Where is the proof that a neutrino is not a photon. I believe people are only guessing that a neutrino is a tardyon, whatever in the hell a tardyon is. Tardyons are not in my dictionary. -Original Message- From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 2:50 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea As I understand it a photon is a luxon as is a gluon and a neutrino is a tardyon. Hal Ruhl At 04:49 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote: I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
Re: Neutrino shield idea
Faster than light effects lead to violations of causality. There are very stringent experimental constraints against such effects. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Russell Standish' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 01:43 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea I say any massless particle that has a charge supporting a Coulomb force must travel at the speed of light or faster because the Coulomb force travels at the speed of light and a charged massless particle will be repelled by its own Coulomb force. -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:04 PM To: John Ross Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote: * Only photons travel at the speed of light. (Except my tronnies that usually go faster than the speed of light.) Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
Re: Neutrino shield idea
Dear John, This theory, as far as I have researched it, has problem with Eotvos experiements that consider particles that are sensitive to the weak force, such as radioactive elements. Not all particles interact with neutrinos, e.g. are sensituve to the weak force, and thus there should be a detectable difference in gravity between particles depending on this. This theory simply goes nowhere. Onward, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Jesse Mazer' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 7:19 PM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the response. Your reference quotes Professor Feynman in part as follows: So that is the end of that theory. 'Well,' you say, 'it was a good one, and I got rid of the mathematics for a while. Maybe I could invent a better one.' Maybe you can, because nobody knows the ultimate. But up to today, from the time of Newton, no one has invented another theoretical description of the mathematical machinery behind this law which does not either say the same thing over again, or make the mathematics harder, or predict some wrong phenomena. So there is no model of the theory of gravity today, other than the mathematical form. I say I have done what Professor Feynman said at that time had not been done, namely invent a theoretical description of the mathematical of Newton's law of gravity. The example that Feynman rebuts is just the opposite of mine. There the sun blocks particles flying through the universe. In my theory the sun is the source of the particles. We know that there are truly 150,000,000 neutrinos from the sun passing through every square centimeter of the earth's surface every second. We also know that neutrino flux decrease by the inverse square of distance. I have shown how Coulomb forces from these neutrinos apply a force on the charges in the earth pushing earth toward the source of the neutrinos!
Tegmark's prediction of neutrino masses
Since we are discussing neutrinos, I thought it is fun to mention antropic constraints on neutrino masses derived by Tegmark, see here: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0304536 Anthropic predictions for neutrino masses Authors: Max Tegmark (MIT), Alexander Vilenkin (Tufts), Levon Pogosian (Tufts) Categories: astro-ph Comments: Revised to match accepted PRD version. Added references, discussion of very heavy neutrinos, analytic growth factor fit. 9 pages, 4 figs. Color figs and links at this http URL Journal-ref: Phys.Rev. D71 (2005) 103523 It is argued that small values of the neutrino masses may be due to anthropic selection effects. If this is the case, then the combined mass of the three neutrino species is expected to be ~1eV, neutrinos causing a non-negligible suppression of galaxy formation. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0404497 Anthropic predictions for vacuum energy and neutrino masses Authors: Levon Pogosian, Alexander Vilenkin, Max Tegmark Categories: astro-ph gr-qc hep-th Comments: 9 pages, 4 figures Journal-ref: JCAP 0407 (2004) 005 It is argued that the observed vacuum energy density and the small values of the neutrino masses could be due to anthropic selection effects. Until now, these two quantities have been treated separately from each other and, in particular, anthropic predictions for the vacuum energy were made under the assumption of zero neutrino masses. Here we consider two cases. In the first, we calculate predictions for the vacuum energy for a fixed (generally non-zero) value of the neutrino mass. In the second we allow both quantities to vary from one part of the universe to another. We find that the anthropic predictions for the vacuum energy density are in a better agreement with observations when one allows for non-zero neutrino masses. We also find that the individual distributions for the vacuum energy and the neutrino masses are reasonably robust and do not change drastically when one adds the other variable. - Defeat Spammers by launching DDoS attacks on Spam-Websites: http://www.hillscapital.com/antispam/
RE: Neutrino shield idea
John Ross wrote: To the best of my knowledge and belief, my theory successfully predicts all known experimental knowledge of physics, chemistry and optics and does so better and simpler than any other theory. I am working on a list of predictions of new things that can be proved experimentally. Does your theory in its current form reproduce all these predictions quantitatively, or just in terms of word-pictures? Have you made a detailed study of general relativity and the standard model of quantum physics to see if you understand all the main predictions made by these theories? Can you quantitatively reproduce GR's prediction of the precession of the perihelion of Mercury's orbit, for example (see http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node98.html ) or the extremely accurate prediction of the electron and muon magnetic moment anomaly by quantum electrodynamics (see http://latticeqcd.blogspot.com/2005/06/most-accurate-theory-we-have.html )? Can you predict more basic things like the interference pattern seen on the screen in the double-slit experiment, and how this pattern changes when you measure which slit the particle travels through? Jesse
RE: Neutrino shield idea
Here is what the relevant part of your reference said:
The KamLAND (Kamioka Liquid-scintillator Anti-Neutrino Detector)
apparatus was purpose-built to catch a glimpse of these elusive
particles (see Fig. 5 on page 502). The detector is situated in the
centre of the largest Japanese island, Honshu, in a mine one kilometre
below the summit of Mt Ikenoyama, to reduce the effects of cos-mic rays
formed from particles other than antineutrinos. Antineutrinos are
occasionally captured by protons in KamLAND's 1-kilotonne,
13-metre-diameter scintillation detector (pictured above) in a process
known as inverse -decay. This produces a neutron, which combines with a
proton to form a deuteron and produces a characteristic -ray
('scintillation light') with an energy of 2.2 MeV. The light that this
reaction produces is detected as an electrical signal by an array of
photomultiplier devices surrounding the detector.
What happened (according to the Ross Model) was the neutrino (probably a
relatively low energy neutrino)was captured by an electron which turned
the electron into a very high energy electron that combined with a
hydrogen nuclei (a proton) to become a neutron which in turn combined
with another proton to become a deuteron which produced the
characteristic -ray with energy of 2.2 Mev. The author is right this
is reverse beta decay in which an electron (a beta particle) and a
neutrino are emitted from an atomic nuclei. The best way an electron
can get inside a nuclei is by riding on a proton as part of a neutron.
See FIG. 9 and text at page 29 of my patent application for my proposed
model of a deuteron.
In any case this report certainly does not convince me that neutrinos
are not photons.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7050/full/436467a.html
-Original Message-
From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:34:26 -0700
Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea
Name one.
-Original Message-
From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM
To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea
There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified
their properties (which are completely different from photons).
RE: Neutrino shield idea
I don't believe it. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:45 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea Dear John, There is replicated evidence that neutrinos have a non-zero mass. It is very small, but it is not zero. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino Onward! Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:49 PM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea I think the beta decay model is wrong where it predicts neutrinos are basically different from photons. I understand neutrinos travel at the speed of light. Only photons travel at the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 4:30 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea This means that beta decay proves your model wrong. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 12:35 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea Thanks for the paper relating to detection of low energy neutrinos. However, according to my model, neutrinos are very, very high energy photons (off everybody's chart, except mine). Therefore, if my model is correct, then low energy neutrinos would merely be the photons we are familiar with and would be very easy to detect. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 12:54 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Neutrino shield idea Howdy! I friend of mine has worked on a related idea that might help this inverstigation. Please see: http://davidwoolsey.com/physics/ideas/neutrinoscope/index.html Kindest regards, Stephen - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM Subject: RE: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Yes. But building a neutrino shield would be difficult.
RE: Neutrino shield idea
Have you ever heard of the Big Bang and the period just after where the universe expanded much faster than the speed of light. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:49 PM To: John Ross; 'Russell Standish' Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea Faster than light effects lead to violations of causality. There are very stringent experimental constraints against such effects. - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Russell Standish' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'Stephen Paul King' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 01:43 AM Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea I say any massless particle that has a charge supporting a Coulomb force must travel at the speed of light or faster because the Coulomb force travels at the speed of light and a charged massless particle will be repelled by its own Coulomb force. -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:04 PM To: John Ross Cc: 'Stephen Paul King'; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:11:04AM -0700, John Ross wrote: * Only photons travel at the speed of light. (Except my tronnies that usually go faster than the speed of light.) Who says? Any massless particle will travel at the speed of light. -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. -- -- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 -- --
Re: Neutrino shield idea
Take a look at arXiv:hep-ex/0412060. It is an experimental resolution of the Solar Neutrino problem, which I think would be required reading for your interests. On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 04:34:26PM -0700, John Ross wrote: Name one. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:27 PM To: John Ross; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrino shield idea There are a lot of experiments that have detected neutrinos and verified their properties (which are completely different from photons). -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 pgpAUqdxoLntJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything
But look at your assumptions. * 3 dimensions * a discrete lattice structure: what sets the unit cell size * face centre cubic - why this layout, and not one of the other possible crystalline types * what are these higher energy dances? It seems if you add energy to a FCC crystal, you just melt the crystal. Where do these additional states come from? Cheers On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 04:46:19PM -0700, John Ross wrote: Because there is only one particle (and its anti-particle) and one force from which the entire universe is built. How could there be anything simpler? -Original Message- From: Russell Standish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:06 PM To: Hal Ruhl Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything Why is this the simplest? It looks horrendously complicated to me. On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 06:07:26PM -0400, Hal Ruhl wrote: Actually the simplest potential model of our universe I know of is mine [was I first with this idea?] which I have posted on before. It is just a discrete point space where the points are confined to regions arranged on a face centered cubic grid and particles are just dances of these points. It is like 3D cellular automaton where each point independently polls its 12 nearest neighbors and then updates its position in its region based on the outcome and a Huge Look Up Table. The face centered cubic arrangement of regions where the 12 nearest neighbors are arranged so that there are six inline triples and the central or 13th region is the middle region in each triple seems to have low level oscillations that support the types and family size of known particles. This is considered the low energy arrangement of regions and does not prevent higher energy arrangements and thus higher energy dances particles Large objects are just huge coordinated dances. Dances can move through the grid but the points can not. Hal Ruhl -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics 0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type application/pgp-signature. Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics0425 253119 () UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australiahttp://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 pgpvaDNl68qMX.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Neutrino shield idea
I have not dealt with Mercury's orbit. My theory can explain the double slit results just as well as any other theory, better than most. I have not tried to calculate the muon magnetic moment. My theory does however predict that a muon is nothing more than a high energy electron that has obtain its energy by capturing the entron of a high energy photon. -Original Message- From: Jesse Mazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Neutrino shield idea John Ross wrote: To the best of my knowledge and belief, my theory successfully predicts all known experimental knowledge of physics, chemistry and optics and does so better and simpler than any other theory. I am working on a list of predictions of new things that can be proved experimentally. Does your theory in its current form reproduce all these predictions quantitatively, or just in terms of word-pictures? Have you made a detailed study of general relativity and the standard model of quantum physics to see if you understand all the main predictions made by these theories? Can you quantitatively reproduce GR's prediction of the precession of the perihelion of Mercury's orbit, for example (see http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node98.html ) or the extremely accurate prediction of the electron and muon magnetic moment anomaly by quantum electrodynamics (see http://latticeqcd.blogspot.com/2005/06/most-accurate-theory-we-have.html )? Can you predict more basic things like the interference pattern seen on the screen in the double-slit experiment, and how this pattern changes when you measure which slit the particle travels through? Jesse
RE: Tegmark's prediction of neutrino masses
It's just my opinion. -Original Message- From: Stephen Paul King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 5:32 PM To: everything-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tegmark's prediction of neutrino masses Exactly how did you come to merit being the judge of what is weird? - Original Message - From: John Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Saibal Mitra' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'everything' everything-list@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 8:20 PM Subject: RE: Tegmark's prediction of neutrino masses This sounds too weird for me. -Original Message- From: Saibal Mitra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:54 PM To: everything Subject: Tegmark's prediction of neutrino masses
Re: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of Everything
Hi Russell: I forgot to mention that for the asynchronously updated regions [no entanglement with other regions] each individual region update is a new state of that universe so computing new states is very easy. The fact that it takes many updates to produce a large scale change in the grid is transparent to an observer. Hal Ruhl At 06:06 PM 10/10/2005, you wrote: Why is this the simplest? It looks horrendously complicated to me.
