- Thank you received: 0
Quantized redshift anomaly
19 years 9 months ago #12314
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> (North writes)
...as well in your reference to language and its restrictions. this is nonsense. language evolves, grows with time , and slowly defines better what we are trying to get across. think about it from Sanskrit to now you are trying to tell me language does not change, we create new words, phrases etc. to express thoughts. If your argument was true then the dictionary would be a stagnant book of definitions -- it is not. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
North, why don't you believe me? I am not saying anything new, a lot of research has been done with our language, and a lot of conclusions have been formed. I have looked at these conclusions in a deep way, and there is a message to be heard.
I used to think that knowledge meant words. For a long time but one day I was sucked in by the promise of a superior knowledge, I thought it would be the knowledge of something. I wanted that. But the book they gave me was titled "Be Here Now." I found out that words are not the thing.There is a BIG story about words. There is a whole lot more going on than just what words can say. But even before we get to that, Zen says, "Do not mistake the pointing finger for the moon." Words are all we got to talk with, but that doesn't mean what words say is real. And especially ALL that is real. Once freed of this self-imposed constraint, once we throw out the old, we can use words like the tools that they are. Play with them, knowing that it is all bull****.
Here is a "story" of words that I have found. Took me thirty years to find these, and a lot of reading words. I mean, we are floating dead in the water, and the only tools given us, our oars, we use to hit eachother over the head, instead of working with them...
Words and Language
WILLIAM JAMES
"Out of what is in itselt an indistinguishable, swarming continuum, devoid of distinction (sunyata), or emphasis, our senses make for us, by attending to this motion and ignoring that, a world full of contrasts, of sharp accents, of abrupt changes, of picturesque light and shade. Helmholtz says that we notice only those sensations which are signs to us of things. But what are things? Nothing, as we shall abundantly see, but special groups of sensible qualities, which happen practically or aesthetically to interest us, to which we therefore give substantive names, and which we exalt to this exclusive status of independence and dignity."
ALDOUS HUXLEY
"Every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the linguistic tradition into which he has been born - the beneficiary inasmuch as language gives access to the accumulated records of other people's experience, the victim in so far as it confirms him in the belief that reduced awareness is the only awareness and as it bedevils his sense of reality, so that he is all too apt to take his concepts for data, his words for actual things." [TDOP Huxley 23]
DAVID BOHM
"Indeed, to some extent it has always been necessary and proper for man, in his thinking, to divide things up, if we tried to deal with the whole of reality at once, we would be swamped. However when this mode of thought is applied more broadly to man's notion of himself and the whole world in which he lives, (i.e. in his world-view) then man ceases to regard the resultant divisions as merely useful or convenient and begins to see and experience himself and this world as actually constituted of separately existing fragments. What is needed is a relativistic theory, to give up altogether the notion that the world is constituted of basic objects or building blocks. Rather one has to view the world in terms of universal flux of events and processes."
KEN WILBER
Bergson was also aware of the spurios reality of "things" because, - as he himself pointed out - thought creates things by slicing up reality into small bits that it can easily grasp. Thus when you are think-ing you are thing-ing. Thought does not report things, it distorts reality to create things, and, as Bergson noted, "In so doing it allows what is the very essence of the real to escape." Thus to the extent we actually imagine a world of discrete and separate things, conceptions have become perceptions, and we have in this manner populated our universe with nothing but ghosts. Therefore the Madhyamika declares that Reality, besides being void of conceptual elaboration, is likewise Void of separate things.The doctrine of mutual interpenetration and mutual identification of the Dharmadhatu represents man's highest attempt to put into words that non-dual experience of Reality which itself remains wordless, ineffable, unspeakable, that nameless nothingness. The Dharmadhatu is not entirely foreign to Western thought, for something very similar to it is seen emerging in modern Systems Theory, in Gestalt psychology, and in the organismic philosophy of Whitehead. As a matter of fact, Western science as a whole is moving very rapidly towards a Dharmadhatu view of the cosmos, as biophysicist Ludwig von Bertalanffy states: "We may state as a characteristic of modern sciece that the scheme of isolable units acting in one-way-causality has proved to be insufficient. Hence the appearence, in all fields of science, of notions like wholeness, holistic, organismic, gestalt, etc, which signify that in the last resort, we must think in terms of systems of elements in mutual interaction."
ALAN WATTS
THE JOYOUS COSMOLOGY
"The principle is that all dualities and opposites are not disjoined but polar. They do not confront eachother from afar, they expoliate from a common center. Ordinary thinking conceals polarity and relativity because it employs terms and terminals, the poles, neglecting what lies inbetween them. The difference of front to back, to be or not to be, hides their unity and mutuality."
D.T. SUZUKI
"According to the philosophy of Zen, we are too much a slave to the conventional way of thinking. which is dualistic through and through. No "interpenetration" is allowed, there takes place no fusing of opposites in our everyday logic. What belongs to God is not of this world, and what is of this world is incompatible with the divine. Black is not white, and white is not black. Tiger is tiger, and cat is cat, and they will never be one. Water flows, a mountain towers. This is the way things or ideas go in this universe of the senses and syllogisms. Zen, however, upsets this scheme of thought and substitutes a new one in which there exists no logic, no dualistic arrangement of ideas. We believe in dualism chiefly because of our traditional training. Whether ideas really correspond to facts is another matter requiring a special investigation. Ordinarily we do not inquire into the matter, we just accept what is instilled into our minds; for to accept is more convenient and practical, and life is to a certain extent, though not in reality, made thereby easier. We are in nature conservatives, not because we are lazy, but because we like repose and peace, even superficially. But the time comes when traditional logic holds true no more, for we begin to feel contradictions and splits and consequently spiritual anguish. We lose trustful repose which we experienced when we blindly followed the traditional ways of thinking. Eckhart says that we are all seeking repose whether consciously or not just as the stone cannot cease moving until it touches the earth. Evidently the repose we seemed to enjoy before we were awakened to the contradictions involved in our logic was not the real one, the stone has kept moving down toward the ground. Where then is the ground of non-dualism on which the soul can be really and truthfully tranquil and blessed? To quote Echart again, "Simple people conceive that we are to see God as if He stood on that side and we on this. It is not so; God and I are one in the act of my perceiving Him." In this absolute oneness of things Zen establishes the foundations of its philosophy. The idea of absolute oneness is not the exclusive possesion of Zen. There are other religious and philosophies that preach the same doctrine. If Zen, like other monisms or theisms, merely laid down this principle and did not have anythng specifically to be known as Zen, it would have long ceased to exist as such. But there is in Zen something unique which makes up its life and justifies its claim to be the most precious heritage of Eastern culture. The following "Mondo" or dialogue (literally questioning and answering) will give us a glimsp into the ways of Zen, A monk asked Joshu, one of the greatest masters in China, "What is the ultimate word of Truth?" Instead of giving him any specific answer he made a simple response saying, "Yes." The monk who naturally failed to see any sense in this kind of response asked for a second time, and to this the Master roared back. "I am not deaf!" See how irrelevantly (shall I say) the all-important problem of absolute oneness or of the ultimate reason is treated here! But this is characteristic of Zen, this is where Zen transcends logic and overrides the tyranny and misrepresentation of ideas. As I have said before, Zen mistrusts the intellect, does not rely upon traditional and dualistic methods of reasoning, and handles problems after its own original manners....To understand all this, it is necessary that we should acquire a "third eye", as they say, and learn to look at things from a new point of view."
Zen
I-hsüan
A Sermon
Reverend Sirs, time is precious. Don't make the mistake of following others in desperately studying meditation or the Path, learning words or phrases, seeking after the Buddha or patriarchs or good friends. Followers of the Path, you have only one father and one mother. What else do you want? Look into yourselves . An ancient sage said that Yajna-datta thought he had lost his head [and sought after it], but when his seeking mind was stopped he realized that he had never lost it.
From Sources of Chinese Tradition (de Bary, Chan and Watson, ed. and trans.), pp. 360--363
Typed 31 March 1995
CRS
Ken Wilber
HOW BIG IS OUR UMBRELLA?
And when we pause from all this research, and put theory temporarily to rest, and when we relax into the primordial ground of our own intrinsic awareness, what will we find therein? When the joy of the robin sings on a clear morning dawn, where is our consciousness then? When the sunlight beams from the glory of a snow-capped mountain, where is consciousness then? In the place that time forgot, in this eternal moment without date or duration, in the secret cave of the heart where time touches eternity and space cries out for infinity, when the raindrop pulses on the temple roof, and announces the beauty of the divine with every single beat, when the moonlight reflects in a simple dewdrop to remind us who and what we are, and when in the entire universe there is nothing but the sound of a lonely waterfall somewhere in the mists, gently calling your name-where is consciousness then?
GOETHE
"My friend, all theory is gray, and the Golden tree of life is green."
...as well in your reference to language and its restrictions. this is nonsense. language evolves, grows with time , and slowly defines better what we are trying to get across. think about it from Sanskrit to now you are trying to tell me language does not change, we create new words, phrases etc. to express thoughts. If your argument was true then the dictionary would be a stagnant book of definitions -- it is not. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
North, why don't you believe me? I am not saying anything new, a lot of research has been done with our language, and a lot of conclusions have been formed. I have looked at these conclusions in a deep way, and there is a message to be heard.
I used to think that knowledge meant words. For a long time but one day I was sucked in by the promise of a superior knowledge, I thought it would be the knowledge of something. I wanted that. But the book they gave me was titled "Be Here Now." I found out that words are not the thing.There is a BIG story about words. There is a whole lot more going on than just what words can say. But even before we get to that, Zen says, "Do not mistake the pointing finger for the moon." Words are all we got to talk with, but that doesn't mean what words say is real. And especially ALL that is real. Once freed of this self-imposed constraint, once we throw out the old, we can use words like the tools that they are. Play with them, knowing that it is all bull****.
Here is a "story" of words that I have found. Took me thirty years to find these, and a lot of reading words. I mean, we are floating dead in the water, and the only tools given us, our oars, we use to hit eachother over the head, instead of working with them...
Words and Language
WILLIAM JAMES
"Out of what is in itselt an indistinguishable, swarming continuum, devoid of distinction (sunyata), or emphasis, our senses make for us, by attending to this motion and ignoring that, a world full of contrasts, of sharp accents, of abrupt changes, of picturesque light and shade. Helmholtz says that we notice only those sensations which are signs to us of things. But what are things? Nothing, as we shall abundantly see, but special groups of sensible qualities, which happen practically or aesthetically to interest us, to which we therefore give substantive names, and which we exalt to this exclusive status of independence and dignity."
ALDOUS HUXLEY
"Every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the linguistic tradition into which he has been born - the beneficiary inasmuch as language gives access to the accumulated records of other people's experience, the victim in so far as it confirms him in the belief that reduced awareness is the only awareness and as it bedevils his sense of reality, so that he is all too apt to take his concepts for data, his words for actual things." [TDOP Huxley 23]
DAVID BOHM
"Indeed, to some extent it has always been necessary and proper for man, in his thinking, to divide things up, if we tried to deal with the whole of reality at once, we would be swamped. However when this mode of thought is applied more broadly to man's notion of himself and the whole world in which he lives, (i.e. in his world-view) then man ceases to regard the resultant divisions as merely useful or convenient and begins to see and experience himself and this world as actually constituted of separately existing fragments. What is needed is a relativistic theory, to give up altogether the notion that the world is constituted of basic objects or building blocks. Rather one has to view the world in terms of universal flux of events and processes."
KEN WILBER
Bergson was also aware of the spurios reality of "things" because, - as he himself pointed out - thought creates things by slicing up reality into small bits that it can easily grasp. Thus when you are think-ing you are thing-ing. Thought does not report things, it distorts reality to create things, and, as Bergson noted, "In so doing it allows what is the very essence of the real to escape." Thus to the extent we actually imagine a world of discrete and separate things, conceptions have become perceptions, and we have in this manner populated our universe with nothing but ghosts. Therefore the Madhyamika declares that Reality, besides being void of conceptual elaboration, is likewise Void of separate things.The doctrine of mutual interpenetration and mutual identification of the Dharmadhatu represents man's highest attempt to put into words that non-dual experience of Reality which itself remains wordless, ineffable, unspeakable, that nameless nothingness. The Dharmadhatu is not entirely foreign to Western thought, for something very similar to it is seen emerging in modern Systems Theory, in Gestalt psychology, and in the organismic philosophy of Whitehead. As a matter of fact, Western science as a whole is moving very rapidly towards a Dharmadhatu view of the cosmos, as biophysicist Ludwig von Bertalanffy states: "We may state as a characteristic of modern sciece that the scheme of isolable units acting in one-way-causality has proved to be insufficient. Hence the appearence, in all fields of science, of notions like wholeness, holistic, organismic, gestalt, etc, which signify that in the last resort, we must think in terms of systems of elements in mutual interaction."
ALAN WATTS
THE JOYOUS COSMOLOGY
"The principle is that all dualities and opposites are not disjoined but polar. They do not confront eachother from afar, they expoliate from a common center. Ordinary thinking conceals polarity and relativity because it employs terms and terminals, the poles, neglecting what lies inbetween them. The difference of front to back, to be or not to be, hides their unity and mutuality."
D.T. SUZUKI
"According to the philosophy of Zen, we are too much a slave to the conventional way of thinking. which is dualistic through and through. No "interpenetration" is allowed, there takes place no fusing of opposites in our everyday logic. What belongs to God is not of this world, and what is of this world is incompatible with the divine. Black is not white, and white is not black. Tiger is tiger, and cat is cat, and they will never be one. Water flows, a mountain towers. This is the way things or ideas go in this universe of the senses and syllogisms. Zen, however, upsets this scheme of thought and substitutes a new one in which there exists no logic, no dualistic arrangement of ideas. We believe in dualism chiefly because of our traditional training. Whether ideas really correspond to facts is another matter requiring a special investigation. Ordinarily we do not inquire into the matter, we just accept what is instilled into our minds; for to accept is more convenient and practical, and life is to a certain extent, though not in reality, made thereby easier. We are in nature conservatives, not because we are lazy, but because we like repose and peace, even superficially. But the time comes when traditional logic holds true no more, for we begin to feel contradictions and splits and consequently spiritual anguish. We lose trustful repose which we experienced when we blindly followed the traditional ways of thinking. Eckhart says that we are all seeking repose whether consciously or not just as the stone cannot cease moving until it touches the earth. Evidently the repose we seemed to enjoy before we were awakened to the contradictions involved in our logic was not the real one, the stone has kept moving down toward the ground. Where then is the ground of non-dualism on which the soul can be really and truthfully tranquil and blessed? To quote Echart again, "Simple people conceive that we are to see God as if He stood on that side and we on this. It is not so; God and I are one in the act of my perceiving Him." In this absolute oneness of things Zen establishes the foundations of its philosophy. The idea of absolute oneness is not the exclusive possesion of Zen. There are other religious and philosophies that preach the same doctrine. If Zen, like other monisms or theisms, merely laid down this principle and did not have anythng specifically to be known as Zen, it would have long ceased to exist as such. But there is in Zen something unique which makes up its life and justifies its claim to be the most precious heritage of Eastern culture. The following "Mondo" or dialogue (literally questioning and answering) will give us a glimsp into the ways of Zen, A monk asked Joshu, one of the greatest masters in China, "What is the ultimate word of Truth?" Instead of giving him any specific answer he made a simple response saying, "Yes." The monk who naturally failed to see any sense in this kind of response asked for a second time, and to this the Master roared back. "I am not deaf!" See how irrelevantly (shall I say) the all-important problem of absolute oneness or of the ultimate reason is treated here! But this is characteristic of Zen, this is where Zen transcends logic and overrides the tyranny and misrepresentation of ideas. As I have said before, Zen mistrusts the intellect, does not rely upon traditional and dualistic methods of reasoning, and handles problems after its own original manners....To understand all this, it is necessary that we should acquire a "third eye", as they say, and learn to look at things from a new point of view."
Zen
I-hsüan
A Sermon
Reverend Sirs, time is precious. Don't make the mistake of following others in desperately studying meditation or the Path, learning words or phrases, seeking after the Buddha or patriarchs or good friends. Followers of the Path, you have only one father and one mother. What else do you want? Look into yourselves . An ancient sage said that Yajna-datta thought he had lost his head [and sought after it], but when his seeking mind was stopped he realized that he had never lost it.
From Sources of Chinese Tradition (de Bary, Chan and Watson, ed. and trans.), pp. 360--363
Typed 31 March 1995
CRS
Ken Wilber
HOW BIG IS OUR UMBRELLA?
And when we pause from all this research, and put theory temporarily to rest, and when we relax into the primordial ground of our own intrinsic awareness, what will we find therein? When the joy of the robin sings on a clear morning dawn, where is our consciousness then? When the sunlight beams from the glory of a snow-capped mountain, where is consciousness then? In the place that time forgot, in this eternal moment without date or duration, in the secret cave of the heart where time touches eternity and space cries out for infinity, when the raindrop pulses on the temple roof, and announces the beauty of the divine with every single beat, when the moonlight reflects in a simple dewdrop to remind us who and what we are, and when in the entire universe there is nothing but the sound of a lonely waterfall somewhere in the mists, gently calling your name-where is consciousness then?
GOETHE
"My friend, all theory is gray, and the Golden tree of life is green."
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 9 months ago #12561
by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> (from Tommy) PS. Peter Gariaev at the Russiah Academy of Sciences, has this notion of "phantom DNA", He uses a laser to detect the holographic Light fields of a DNA particle, and translates this to RF. It shows up on a screen as a pattern. When they remove the sample, and recalibrate the chamber, they are able to see a clear pattern from the DNA. They attibute this to the ZPE. Don't know yet, if this is true. But if it is...
(from North)
obviously this is not zero point energy. for a point to have no energy the pattern would not show, strictly speaking.
i would think that strictly speaking, Zero means Zero(if not define further your concept of Zero) you should know better.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<hr noshade size="1">
That's reasonable conclusion, but not in this case. This concept of the ZPE has gone far beyond mere speculation. NASA writes:
www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/ipspaper.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"Zero Point Energy (ZPE) is the term used to describe the random electromagnetic oscillations that are left in a vacuum after all other energy has been removed (ref 13). This can be explained in terms of quantum theory, where there exists energy even in the absolute lowest state of a harmonic oscillator. The lowest state of an electromagnetic oscillation is equal to one-half the Planck constant times the frequency. If all the energy for all the possible frequencies is summed up, the result is an enormous energy density, ranging from 1036 to 1070 Joules/m3. In simplistic terms there is enough energy in a cubic centimeter of the empty vacuum to boil away Earth's oceans. First predicted in 1948, ZPE has been linked to a number of experimental observations. Examples include the Casimir effect (ref 14), Van der Waal forces (ref 15), the Lamb-Retherford Shift (ref 10, p. 427), explanations of the Planck blackbody radiation spectrum (ref 16), the stability of the ground state of the hydrogen atom from radiative collapse (ref 17), and the effect of cavities to inhibit or enhance the spontaneous emission from excited atoms (ref 18).
Regarding the inertia and gravity theories mentioned earlier, they take the perspective that all matter is fundamentally constructed of electrically charged particles and that these particles are constantly interacting with this ZPE background. From this perspective the property of inertia, the resistance to change of a particle's velocity, is described as a high- frequency electromagnetic drag against the Zero Point Fluctuations. Gravity, the attraction between masses, is described as Van der Waals forces between oscillating dipoles, where these dipoles are the charged particles that have been set into oscillation by the ZPE background."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It all started for me with this philosophical question, the answer was quite a surprise. My synchronistic experiences over the years led me to wonder how synchronicity could possibly happen. I assumed right away that it wasn't magic, and I came up with the idea of an INSIDE of space. Since our ordinary physical space dictates that synchronicity is impossible, it there something else going on? I found in the literature many instances of unexplained events, especially one about how an atom can do an atom forever. Atoms are not inert bits of matter, they are Electro Magnetic fields, and fields by definition are doing something. I couldn't accept the textbook explanation that atoms move forever because they can't do anything else. I found other anomalies like virtual particles that pop up and then return to where they came from before Heisenberg uncertanty noticed, I couldn't accept that either, like where did they come from in the first place? Then there are the infinities that are "renormalized" out of the equations, what if the infinities are supposed to be found there? And then one day, it came to me...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
In a message dated 5/31/99 4:39:07 PM, Thommandel writes to the quantum-mind list.
<< ...Which reminds me of a question: Does an electron radiate energy while in its "orbit?" I understand that it does at least enough to create magnetism. I also understand that the electron does not decay and fall into the nucleus because it is locked in its orbit, it can't fall. But that doesn't explain where all this energy is coming from to keep it in orbit whether or not it can fall in the first place. I think that all subatomic particles are fed energy continuously from the INSIDE of space.
tom >>
[Hal Puthoff ]
This is explained in my paper: H. E. Puthoff, "The Ground state of hydrogen as a zero-point-fluctuation-determined state," Phys. Rev. D vol 35, p. 3266, 1987. It is as you say: absorption of energy from the vacuum fluctuations just balances radiation due to acceleration in the orbit. The balance exists (and is stable) only for the Bohr-orbit ground state.
[tom] << So what you are saying is that all radiated energy from atomic particles is balanced by an energy input from the vacuum!? How come this wasn't touted as a great discovery of quantum physics? tom >>
[Hal Puthoff]
Among a certain group of physicists (those interested in the physics of vcuum fluctuations) it is touted. I have provided over 500 reprints. A nice "tout" was presented in the 9 Jul 1987 issue of New Scientist, p. 26, in an article titled "Why atoms don't collapse."
[tom]<< Have you read Laslo's work on the infinite zero point quantum vacuum field? tom>>
[Hal Puthoff]
He has interviewed me at length, arranged for me to address the Gorbachev World Forum on the issue of a new paradigm in physics, and I do have his books. Attached is a recent summary of the "zero-point-energy" www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm work, that covers much more than just the atom collapse issue. It is a paper presented at a NASA conference on "Breakthrough Propulsion Physics."
Best regards,
Hal
Subj: RE: The DIAMONDS children play with...
Date: 6/5/99 1:04:34 AM Central Daylight Time
From: jfirmage@uswebcks.com (Joe Firmage)
To: Thommandel@AOL.COM
I agree that this is a seminal piece of work. The true nature of "energy in Space" (more to the point, the very *definition* of "Space" and "energy") will soon be demonstrated to represent the greatest paradigm shift in physics since Galileo, with similarly staggering philosophical implications.
In the process, the presumed limits of humanity's reach across the Cosmos -- and by unequivocal implication, those of extraterrestrial life -- that have been in place for 90 years will be swept away.
This group will find particularly interesting the first installment in the ISSO's Internet public science education series, to be presented in July 1999. This kickoff for the series will compare and contrast a small, select number of complementary physics models that I believe are the harbingers of the sweeping scientific revolutions we're about to witness. Dr. Puthoff's analysis is one those that will be featured.
Joe Firmage
Subj: repy to Diamonds
Date: 6/6/99 4:03:29 PM Central Daylight Time
From: drboylan@jps.net (Richard J. Boylan, Ph.D.)
Joe,
Indeed. And none too soon! Conventional science has had the
unfortunate effect of making certain scientists feel that they are the
center of the universe, knowing all, and in a position to control
every process.
The new, cosmic consciousness-centered scientific paradigm will
offer a more humbling yet simultaneously more exciting persperctive.
And, in the bargain, we will acknowledge our Distant Cousins, who
have actually been around to assist us for many aeons.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Richard Boylan<hr noshade size="1">
<hr noshade size="1">
www.calphysics.org/articles/merc2000b.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Swimming in the Zero-Point Sea
An oscillating pendulum, like the one in a grandfather clock but without recovery mechanism, will eventually come to rest. But a microscopic pendulum governed by quantum laws can never come to a complete stop. The famous Heisenberg uncertainty relation forbids removing all the energy from such an oscillator. In fact, there is a well defined minimum average energy, hf/2, where h is Planck’s constant and f is the oscillation frequency.
Propagating electromagnetic fields—such as radio waves, visible light, x rays, gamma rays—behave like oscillators. All of them may be considered waves moving at the speed of light. A specific manner of field oscillation with a characteristic frequency, direction, and polarization state of a propagating field is called a propagating mode (there are also stationary modes). Each mode is like an oscillator and has the same minimum average energy as the quantum pendulum, hf/2. If you sum up all the modes, you get the electromagnetic zero-point field. It is called the zero-point field because it corresponds to the equilibrium radiation left as the temperature goes to absolute zero (T=0). It is the lowest energy state, but, in fact, the zero-point field contains a vast amount of energy. All the light we see and radio waves we pick up are like tiny ripples atop the vast electromagnetic zero-point radiation field. You could say that we spend our lives surfing on top of a zero-point sea, experiencing the waves on the surface while oblivious to the vast depths below. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Corraboration
www.calphysics.org/articles/wesson.pdf
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">In recent years, it has been suggested that the electromagnetic zero-point field (zpf) is not merely an artefact of quantum mechanics, but a real entity with major implications for gravity, astrophysics and technology. This view is shared by a number of researchers, including Boyer (1980), McCrea (1986), Putho® (1987) and Rueda and Haisch (1998a). The present work is a report on research into the zpf during the last decade, with recommendations about where investigations should be directed in the future. The theoretical basis for believing in a real zpf is simple. A onedimensional harmonic oscillator has states which can be raised or lowered in units n of ¹h! where ¹h is Planck's constant divided by 2¼ and ! is the frequency. In terms of the momentum operator ^p and the position operator ^q, the hamiltonian (energy) of the system is ^H = (^p2 +!2^q2)=2. The excited
states have energy En = (n+ 1=2) ¹h!, a relation which is known to lead to acceptable results in quantum-mechanical calculations for n ¸ 0. However, if the kinetic energy of the system (or alternatively the temperature) goes to zero, there remains a zero-point energy of ¹h!=2. This, summed over frequencies, represents a zero-point ¯eld with a large energy density.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
kjmaclean.com/ZeroPointEnergy.html#_Toc493648629
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Everything for Nothing
By Dr Hal Puthoff
Classical physics tells us that if we think of an atom as a miniature solar system with electronic planets orbiting a nuclear sun, then it should not exist. The circling electrons SHOULD RADIATE AWAY their energy like microscopic radio antennas and spiral into the nucleus. To resolve this problem, physicists had to introduce a set of mathematical rules, called quantum mechanics, to describe what happens. Quantum theory endows matter and energy with both wave and particle-like characteristics. It also restrains electrons to particular orbits, or energy levels, so they cannot radiate energy unless they jump from one orbit to another.
Measuring the spectral lines of atoms verifies that quantum theory is correct. Atoms appear to emit or absorb packets of light, or photons, with a wavelength that exactly coincides with the difference between its energy levels as predicted by quantum theory. As a result, the majority of physicists are content simply to use quantum rules that describe so accurately what happens in their experiments.
Nevertheless, when we repeat the question: "But why doesn't the electron radiate away its energy?", the answer is: "Well, in quantum theory it JUST DOESN'T". It is at this point that not only the layman but also some physicists begin to feel that someone is not playing fair. Indeed, much of modern physics is based on theories couched in a form that works but they do not answer the fundamental questions of what gravity is, why the Universe is the way it is, or how it got started anyway. Surprisingly, there may be answers to these seemingly unanswerable questions. Perhaps even more surprising, the answers seem to be emerging from empty space, the vacuum, the void.
In fact, according to quantum theory, the vacuum, the space between particles of matter as well as between the stars, is not empty, it is filled with vast amounts of fluctuating energy.
To understand this extraordinary idea, we will have to take a detour into the phenomenon of "fluctuations" with which quantum theory abounds. Fluctuations arise as one of the most fundamental concepts to come out of the mathematics of quantum theory. This is the uncertainty principle enunciated by Werner Heisenberg in 1927, which says that it is impossible to know everything about a system because of what would seem to be inherent fluctuations in the very fabric of nature itself. Indeed, quantum mechanics is a statistical theory that deals with probabilities and it has some profound consequences for our understanding of reality. For instance, we cannot know the position and the momentum of an electron at the same time. If we know its momentum, or energy, accurately, then we can determine its position only probabilistically.
This "fuzziness" of positions described in terms of probability waves gives a measure of the size and shape over which an electronic orbit fluctuates in an atom. It also means that the energy of a particle or system is "fuzzy" and thus there is a slight probability of it changing, or fluctuating, to another value. In fact, a system can actually, by fluctuation, "tunnel" through an energy barrier because there is a small but finite probability of the system existing on the other side of the barrier. I shall discuss later a possible cause for such fluctuation phenomena.
The basic fuzziness of quantum theory means that there are fundamental phenomena which classical physics does not predict. For example, according to classical physics, any simple oscillator, such as a pendulum, when set in motion, comes to rest because of fiction. But quantum theory predicts that such an oscillator would not completely come to rest, but instead, would continue to jiggle randomly about its resting point with a small amount of residual energy, the so-called zero-point energy.
The adjective zero-point denotes that such motion exists even at a temperature of absolute zero where no thermal agitation effects remain. Although we cannot observe the zero-point energy on, say, the pendulum of a grandfather clock because it is so minute, it is nonetheless real. In many physical systems this has important consequences. One example is the presence of a certain amount of "noise" in a microwave receiver that can NEVER be removed, no matter how perfect the technology.
This zero-point energy is the result of the unpredictable random fluctuations of the vacuum energy, as predicted by the uncertainty principle, which is zero in classical theory. In fact, these fluctuations can be intense enough TO CAUSE PARTICLES TO FORM from the vacuum SPONTANEOUSLY, provided they disappear again before violating the uncertainty principle. This temporary formation of "virtual" particles is somewhat akin to the spray that forms near a turbulent waterfall.
Of all the zero-point fluctuation phenomena, the zero-point fluctuations of electromagnetic energy are the most easy to detect. Electromagnetic waves have standing, or travelling modes, that are a bit like the various modes of waves going along a rope that is shaken. Each set of waves has its own characteristic set of nodes and crests. It turns out that even though the zero-point energy in any particular mode of an electromagnetic field is minute (equivalent to half a photon's worth), there are nearly an infinite number of possible modes of propagation, that is frequencies and directions. The zero-point energy ADDED UP OVER ALL POSSIBLE MODES, therefore, is QUITE ENORMOUS. As hard as it is to believe, it is greater than the energy density in the atomic nucleus. And this in all of the so-called "empty" space around us.
Because the zero-point energy of the electromagnetic fields is so large, you might expect to see its effects easily, but this is not the case because its density is very uniform. Just as a vase standing in a true void is not likely to fall over spontaneously, so a vase bombarded UNIFORMLY on all sides by packets of zero-point energy would not do likewise because of the BALANCED CONDITIONS of the uniform bombardment. The only evidence of such a barrage of energy might be minute jiggling of the vase. Such a mechanism is thought to be involved in the quantum JIGGLE of zero-point motions.
There are situations, however, where the uniformity of the electromagnetic zero-point energy is slightly disturbed and this leads to effects you can ACTUALLY MEASURE. One situation is when the zero-point energy perturbs slightly the spectra of lines from transitions between quantum levels in atoms. This perturbation is known as the LAMB SHIFT, named after the American physicist, Willis Lamb. This work carried out in the late 1940's, using techniques developed for wartime radar, showed that the effect of zero-point fluctuations of the electromagnetic field was to jiggle the electrons slightly in their atomic orbits, leading to a shift in frequency of transitions of about 1000 MEGAHERTZ.
Another, also named after its discoverer, is the CASIMIR EFFECT -- which predicts that two metal plates close together ATTRACT EACH OTHER. Consider plates set at a certain distance apart. In the space between the plates, only those vacuum fluctuations for which a whole number of half-waves just spans the distance can exist, just like waves formed by shaking a rope tied at both ends. Outside the plates, the fluctuations can have many more values because there is more space. The number of modes outside the plates, all of which carry energy and momentum, is greater than those inside. This imbalance PUSHES THE PLATES TOGETHER.
_ _
| | | |
| | | |
\\ | | | | //
\\ | | | | //
ZPE ___________\\| | | |//__________ ZPE
Push
//| | | |\\
Push
// | | | | \\
// | | | | \\
| | | |
| | | |
|_| |_|
Metal Plates
The Casimir Effect : An imbalance in the quantum fluctuations of empty space can PUSH two metal plates together
What does this have to do with our basic question of why the electron in a simple hydrogen atom does not radiate as it circles the protons in its lowest-energy orbit? I have considered this point by taking into account what other physicists have learned over the years about the effects of zero-point energy. I discovered that you can consider the electron as continually radiating away its energy as predicted by classical theory, but SIMULTANEOUSLY ABSORBING a COMPENSATING AMOUNT of energy from the ever-present sea of zero-point energy in which the atom is immersed. An equilibrium between these two processes leads to the correct values for the parameters that define the lowest energy, or ground-state orbit (see "Why atoms don't collapse," NEW SCIENTIST, July 1987). Thus there is a DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM in which the zero-point energy stabilizes the electron in a set ground-state orbit. It seems that the very stability of matter itself appears to depend on an underlying sea of electromagnetic zero-point energy.
Gravity as a Long-Range Casimir Force
As well as providing new insights into quantum theory, zero-point fluctuations also give us some insight into gravity. Einstein's general theory of relativity describes gravity well but we still do not know its fundamental nature very well. The theory is basically descriptive without revealing the underlying dynamics for that description. As a result, attempts to unify gravity with the other forces (electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces) or to develop a quantum theory of gravity have foundered again and again on difficulties that can be traced back to a lack of understanding at a fundamental level. To rectify these difficulties, theorists have resorted to ever-increasing levels of mathematical sophistication and abstraction, as in the recent development of supergravity and superstring theories.
The well-known Soviet physicist Andrei Sakharov took a completely different tack to explain such difficulties. He suggested that gravity might not be a fundamental interaction at all, but rather a secondary or RESIDUAL effect associated with other, non-gravitational fields. Gravity might be an effect brought about by changes in the zero-point energy of the vacuum, due to the presence of matter ("A key to understanding gravity", NEW SCIENTIST, April 1981). If correct, you could then consider gravity as a variation on the Casimir theme, in which the pressures of background zero-point energy were again responsible. Although Sakharov did not develop the concept much further, he did outline certain criteria such a theory would have to meet - for example, predicting the value of the gravitational constant G in terms of the parameters given by zero-point energy theory.
I have studied Sakharov's approach to gravity in detail with some positive results. A particle sitting in the sea of electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations develops a "jitter" motion, or ZITTERBEWEGUNG as German physicists have named it. When there are two or more particles, they are each influenced not only by the fluctuating background field, but also by the fields generated by the other particles, all similarly undergoing Zitterbewegung motion. The coupling between particles due to these fields produces the attractive gravitational force. Gravity can, therefore, be understood as a sort of LONG-RANGE Casimir force.
Because of its electromagnetic underpinning, gravitational theory in this form constitutes what is known as an "already-unified" theory. The main benefit of the new approach is that it helps us to understand characteristics of the way gravity works that were previously unexplained. These include why gravity is so weak; why positive but not negative mass exists; and the fact that gravity cannot be shielded because zero-point fluctuations pervade space and so cannot be shielded.
So, if we have an explanation for non-radiating atomic ground states and for gravity, do we know where the electromagnetic zero-point energy comes from in the first place? There are two schools of thought. One is that it is just simply a part of the boundary conditions of our Universe like, for example, the background radiation left over from the big bang. The other is that the zero-point energy is generated by quantum-fluctuation motion of the charged particles of the latter. I assumed that zero-point fields drive the motion throughout the Universe, in turn, generate the zero-point fields in the form of a self-regenerating feedback cycle, not unlike a cat chasing its own tail.
This self-consistent approach yielded the correct values for the zero-point field. Thus, the zero-point fields observed at any given point are due to random radiation arriving from particles throughout the Universe that are themselves undergoing zero-point motion ("Where does the zero-point energy come from?", NEW SCIENTIST, December 2, 1989). These self-regenerating zero-point fields also produce the familiar properties of quantum theory, such as fluctuation phenomena and the uncertainty principle, for example. This means that it might be possible to model many aspects of quantum theory on the basis of self-consistent, random interactions between particles and the zero-point fluctuation fields they generate.
Although a knowledge of zero-point fields emerged from quantum physics as that subject matured, Timothy Boyer at City College in New York took a contrary view. In the late 1960's, he began asking what would happen if we took classical physics as it was and introduced a background of random, classical fluctuating zero-point fields. Such fields would presumably have originated in the initial random processes of the big bang and then by regeneration as I have just described. Could such an all-classical model reproduce quantum theory in its entirety, and might this possibility have been overlooked by the founders of quantum theory who were not aware of the existence of such a fluctuating background field?
Boyer began by tackling the problems that led to quantum theory being introduced in the first place, such as the blackbody radiation curve and the photoelectric effect. His upstart, neoclassical approach reproduced the known quantum results one by one. This approach is called STOCHASTIC ELECTRODYNMAICS (SED), in contrast to QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS (QED). Indeed, Peter Milonni at the Los Alamos National Labroratory in the US noted in a review of the Boyer work that if physicists in 1900 had thought of taking this route, they would probably have been more comfortable with this classical approach than with Max Planck's hypothesis of the quantum. One can only speculate as to the direction that physics would have taken them.
The list of topics successfully analysed using the SED approach, which produce THE SAME RESULTS as when the QED approach is used, has now been extended to include the harmonic oscillator, Casimir and van der Waals forces and the thermal effects of acceleration through the vacuum. Out of this work emerged the reasons for such phenomena as the uncertainty principle, the fluctuating motion of particles, the existence of van der Waals forces even at zero temperature, and so forth, all show to be due to the influence of the unceasing activity of the random background fields.
There are also some notable gaps in the development of SED; for example, deriving Schrodinger's equation, as yet turns out to be an intractable problem. Several researchers are confident, however, that this obstacle can be overcome. Until theory as we have come to know it will be entirely replaced by a refurbished classical theory in the near future. But regardless of the final outcome, the successes to date of the SED approach, by its highlighting of the role of background zero-point fluctuations, means that when the final chapter is written on quantum theory, field fluctuations in empty space will be accorded an honoured position.
And now to the biggest question of all, where did the Universe come from? Or, in modern terminology, what started the big bang? Could quantum fluctuations of empty space have something to do with this as well? Edward Tyron of the City University of New York thought so in 1973 when he proposed that our Universe may have originated as a fluctuation of the vacuum on a large scale, as "simply one of those things which happen from time to time". This idea was later refined and updated within the context of inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, who proposed that the universe is created by quantum tunnelling from literally nothing into the something we call the Universe. Although highly speculative, these models indicate that physicists find themselves turning again and again to the void and fluctuations therein for their answers.
Those with a practical bent of mind may be left with yet one more unanswered question. Can you find mundane applications for this emerging Rosetta Stone of physics? Will it be possible to extract electrical energy from the vacuum? Robert Forward at Hughes Research Laboratories in Malibu, California has considered this possibility. Could the engineer of the future specialise in "vacuum engineering" as the Nobel laureate Tsun-Dao Lee has put it? Could the energy crises be solved by harnessing the energies of the zero-point "sea"? After all, the basic form of zero-point energy is highly random and tends to cancel itself out, so if a way could be found to bring order out of chaos, then, because of the highly energetic nature of the vacuum fluctuations, relatively large effects could be produced.
Given our relative ignorance at this point, we must fall back on a quote given by the Soviet science historian Roman Poldolny when contemplating this issue. "It would be just as presumptuous to deny the feasibility of useful application as it would be irresponsible to guarantee such application." Only the future can reveal the ultimate use to which humans will put this remaining fire of the gods, the quantum fluctuations of empty space. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Harold Puthoff is a theoretical physicist at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin in Texas. He specializes in Quantum Electrodynamics.
Here's a link A magazine article by Hal Puthoff
www.earthtech.org/publications/fusion_facts.pdf
www.earthtech.org/publications/spec_sci_tech.pdf
www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm
So, you can see there is more going on in this Universe than meets the eye. If the ZPE exists, and there is nobody claiming that it doesn't, then it is not a wild guess to surmise that light travels in the ZPE and not in our ordinary outside space. In fact, in view of the INSIDE of space perspective, it is obvious that is where it is all happening.
And this is a good place to restate my original thought, all of science should be re-examined to take into account the INSIDE of everything.
Also
(from North)
obviously this is not zero point energy. for a point to have no energy the pattern would not show, strictly speaking.
i would think that strictly speaking, Zero means Zero(if not define further your concept of Zero) you should know better.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<hr noshade size="1">
That's reasonable conclusion, but not in this case. This concept of the ZPE has gone far beyond mere speculation. NASA writes:
www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/ipspaper.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"Zero Point Energy (ZPE) is the term used to describe the random electromagnetic oscillations that are left in a vacuum after all other energy has been removed (ref 13). This can be explained in terms of quantum theory, where there exists energy even in the absolute lowest state of a harmonic oscillator. The lowest state of an electromagnetic oscillation is equal to one-half the Planck constant times the frequency. If all the energy for all the possible frequencies is summed up, the result is an enormous energy density, ranging from 1036 to 1070 Joules/m3. In simplistic terms there is enough energy in a cubic centimeter of the empty vacuum to boil away Earth's oceans. First predicted in 1948, ZPE has been linked to a number of experimental observations. Examples include the Casimir effect (ref 14), Van der Waal forces (ref 15), the Lamb-Retherford Shift (ref 10, p. 427), explanations of the Planck blackbody radiation spectrum (ref 16), the stability of the ground state of the hydrogen atom from radiative collapse (ref 17), and the effect of cavities to inhibit or enhance the spontaneous emission from excited atoms (ref 18).
Regarding the inertia and gravity theories mentioned earlier, they take the perspective that all matter is fundamentally constructed of electrically charged particles and that these particles are constantly interacting with this ZPE background. From this perspective the property of inertia, the resistance to change of a particle's velocity, is described as a high- frequency electromagnetic drag against the Zero Point Fluctuations. Gravity, the attraction between masses, is described as Van der Waals forces between oscillating dipoles, where these dipoles are the charged particles that have been set into oscillation by the ZPE background."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It all started for me with this philosophical question, the answer was quite a surprise. My synchronistic experiences over the years led me to wonder how synchronicity could possibly happen. I assumed right away that it wasn't magic, and I came up with the idea of an INSIDE of space. Since our ordinary physical space dictates that synchronicity is impossible, it there something else going on? I found in the literature many instances of unexplained events, especially one about how an atom can do an atom forever. Atoms are not inert bits of matter, they are Electro Magnetic fields, and fields by definition are doing something. I couldn't accept the textbook explanation that atoms move forever because they can't do anything else. I found other anomalies like virtual particles that pop up and then return to where they came from before Heisenberg uncertanty noticed, I couldn't accept that either, like where did they come from in the first place? Then there are the infinities that are "renormalized" out of the equations, what if the infinities are supposed to be found there? And then one day, it came to me...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
In a message dated 5/31/99 4:39:07 PM, Thommandel writes to the quantum-mind list.
<< ...Which reminds me of a question: Does an electron radiate energy while in its "orbit?" I understand that it does at least enough to create magnetism. I also understand that the electron does not decay and fall into the nucleus because it is locked in its orbit, it can't fall. But that doesn't explain where all this energy is coming from to keep it in orbit whether or not it can fall in the first place. I think that all subatomic particles are fed energy continuously from the INSIDE of space.
tom >>
[Hal Puthoff ]
This is explained in my paper: H. E. Puthoff, "The Ground state of hydrogen as a zero-point-fluctuation-determined state," Phys. Rev. D vol 35, p. 3266, 1987. It is as you say: absorption of energy from the vacuum fluctuations just balances radiation due to acceleration in the orbit. The balance exists (and is stable) only for the Bohr-orbit ground state.
[tom] << So what you are saying is that all radiated energy from atomic particles is balanced by an energy input from the vacuum!? How come this wasn't touted as a great discovery of quantum physics? tom >>
[Hal Puthoff]
Among a certain group of physicists (those interested in the physics of vcuum fluctuations) it is touted. I have provided over 500 reprints. A nice "tout" was presented in the 9 Jul 1987 issue of New Scientist, p. 26, in an article titled "Why atoms don't collapse."
[tom]<< Have you read Laslo's work on the infinite zero point quantum vacuum field? tom>>
[Hal Puthoff]
He has interviewed me at length, arranged for me to address the Gorbachev World Forum on the issue of a new paradigm in physics, and I do have his books. Attached is a recent summary of the "zero-point-energy" www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm work, that covers much more than just the atom collapse issue. It is a paper presented at a NASA conference on "Breakthrough Propulsion Physics."
Best regards,
Hal
Subj: RE: The DIAMONDS children play with...
Date: 6/5/99 1:04:34 AM Central Daylight Time
From: jfirmage@uswebcks.com (Joe Firmage)
To: Thommandel@AOL.COM
I agree that this is a seminal piece of work. The true nature of "energy in Space" (more to the point, the very *definition* of "Space" and "energy") will soon be demonstrated to represent the greatest paradigm shift in physics since Galileo, with similarly staggering philosophical implications.
In the process, the presumed limits of humanity's reach across the Cosmos -- and by unequivocal implication, those of extraterrestrial life -- that have been in place for 90 years will be swept away.
This group will find particularly interesting the first installment in the ISSO's Internet public science education series, to be presented in July 1999. This kickoff for the series will compare and contrast a small, select number of complementary physics models that I believe are the harbingers of the sweeping scientific revolutions we're about to witness. Dr. Puthoff's analysis is one those that will be featured.
Joe Firmage
Subj: repy to Diamonds
Date: 6/6/99 4:03:29 PM Central Daylight Time
From: drboylan@jps.net (Richard J. Boylan, Ph.D.)
Joe,
Indeed. And none too soon! Conventional science has had the
unfortunate effect of making certain scientists feel that they are the
center of the universe, knowing all, and in a position to control
every process.
The new, cosmic consciousness-centered scientific paradigm will
offer a more humbling yet simultaneously more exciting persperctive.
And, in the bargain, we will acknowledge our Distant Cousins, who
have actually been around to assist us for many aeons.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Richard Boylan<hr noshade size="1">
<hr noshade size="1">
www.calphysics.org/articles/merc2000b.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Swimming in the Zero-Point Sea
An oscillating pendulum, like the one in a grandfather clock but without recovery mechanism, will eventually come to rest. But a microscopic pendulum governed by quantum laws can never come to a complete stop. The famous Heisenberg uncertainty relation forbids removing all the energy from such an oscillator. In fact, there is a well defined minimum average energy, hf/2, where h is Planck’s constant and f is the oscillation frequency.
Propagating electromagnetic fields—such as radio waves, visible light, x rays, gamma rays—behave like oscillators. All of them may be considered waves moving at the speed of light. A specific manner of field oscillation with a characteristic frequency, direction, and polarization state of a propagating field is called a propagating mode (there are also stationary modes). Each mode is like an oscillator and has the same minimum average energy as the quantum pendulum, hf/2. If you sum up all the modes, you get the electromagnetic zero-point field. It is called the zero-point field because it corresponds to the equilibrium radiation left as the temperature goes to absolute zero (T=0). It is the lowest energy state, but, in fact, the zero-point field contains a vast amount of energy. All the light we see and radio waves we pick up are like tiny ripples atop the vast electromagnetic zero-point radiation field. You could say that we spend our lives surfing on top of a zero-point sea, experiencing the waves on the surface while oblivious to the vast depths below. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Corraboration
www.calphysics.org/articles/wesson.pdf
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">In recent years, it has been suggested that the electromagnetic zero-point field (zpf) is not merely an artefact of quantum mechanics, but a real entity with major implications for gravity, astrophysics and technology. This view is shared by a number of researchers, including Boyer (1980), McCrea (1986), Putho® (1987) and Rueda and Haisch (1998a). The present work is a report on research into the zpf during the last decade, with recommendations about where investigations should be directed in the future. The theoretical basis for believing in a real zpf is simple. A onedimensional harmonic oscillator has states which can be raised or lowered in units n of ¹h! where ¹h is Planck's constant divided by 2¼ and ! is the frequency. In terms of the momentum operator ^p and the position operator ^q, the hamiltonian (energy) of the system is ^H = (^p2 +!2^q2)=2. The excited
states have energy En = (n+ 1=2) ¹h!, a relation which is known to lead to acceptable results in quantum-mechanical calculations for n ¸ 0. However, if the kinetic energy of the system (or alternatively the temperature) goes to zero, there remains a zero-point energy of ¹h!=2. This, summed over frequencies, represents a zero-point ¯eld with a large energy density.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
kjmaclean.com/ZeroPointEnergy.html#_Toc493648629
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Everything for Nothing
By Dr Hal Puthoff
Classical physics tells us that if we think of an atom as a miniature solar system with electronic planets orbiting a nuclear sun, then it should not exist. The circling electrons SHOULD RADIATE AWAY their energy like microscopic radio antennas and spiral into the nucleus. To resolve this problem, physicists had to introduce a set of mathematical rules, called quantum mechanics, to describe what happens. Quantum theory endows matter and energy with both wave and particle-like characteristics. It also restrains electrons to particular orbits, or energy levels, so they cannot radiate energy unless they jump from one orbit to another.
Measuring the spectral lines of atoms verifies that quantum theory is correct. Atoms appear to emit or absorb packets of light, or photons, with a wavelength that exactly coincides with the difference between its energy levels as predicted by quantum theory. As a result, the majority of physicists are content simply to use quantum rules that describe so accurately what happens in their experiments.
Nevertheless, when we repeat the question: "But why doesn't the electron radiate away its energy?", the answer is: "Well, in quantum theory it JUST DOESN'T". It is at this point that not only the layman but also some physicists begin to feel that someone is not playing fair. Indeed, much of modern physics is based on theories couched in a form that works but they do not answer the fundamental questions of what gravity is, why the Universe is the way it is, or how it got started anyway. Surprisingly, there may be answers to these seemingly unanswerable questions. Perhaps even more surprising, the answers seem to be emerging from empty space, the vacuum, the void.
In fact, according to quantum theory, the vacuum, the space between particles of matter as well as between the stars, is not empty, it is filled with vast amounts of fluctuating energy.
To understand this extraordinary idea, we will have to take a detour into the phenomenon of "fluctuations" with which quantum theory abounds. Fluctuations arise as one of the most fundamental concepts to come out of the mathematics of quantum theory. This is the uncertainty principle enunciated by Werner Heisenberg in 1927, which says that it is impossible to know everything about a system because of what would seem to be inherent fluctuations in the very fabric of nature itself. Indeed, quantum mechanics is a statistical theory that deals with probabilities and it has some profound consequences for our understanding of reality. For instance, we cannot know the position and the momentum of an electron at the same time. If we know its momentum, or energy, accurately, then we can determine its position only probabilistically.
This "fuzziness" of positions described in terms of probability waves gives a measure of the size and shape over which an electronic orbit fluctuates in an atom. It also means that the energy of a particle or system is "fuzzy" and thus there is a slight probability of it changing, or fluctuating, to another value. In fact, a system can actually, by fluctuation, "tunnel" through an energy barrier because there is a small but finite probability of the system existing on the other side of the barrier. I shall discuss later a possible cause for such fluctuation phenomena.
The basic fuzziness of quantum theory means that there are fundamental phenomena which classical physics does not predict. For example, according to classical physics, any simple oscillator, such as a pendulum, when set in motion, comes to rest because of fiction. But quantum theory predicts that such an oscillator would not completely come to rest, but instead, would continue to jiggle randomly about its resting point with a small amount of residual energy, the so-called zero-point energy.
The adjective zero-point denotes that such motion exists even at a temperature of absolute zero where no thermal agitation effects remain. Although we cannot observe the zero-point energy on, say, the pendulum of a grandfather clock because it is so minute, it is nonetheless real. In many physical systems this has important consequences. One example is the presence of a certain amount of "noise" in a microwave receiver that can NEVER be removed, no matter how perfect the technology.
This zero-point energy is the result of the unpredictable random fluctuations of the vacuum energy, as predicted by the uncertainty principle, which is zero in classical theory. In fact, these fluctuations can be intense enough TO CAUSE PARTICLES TO FORM from the vacuum SPONTANEOUSLY, provided they disappear again before violating the uncertainty principle. This temporary formation of "virtual" particles is somewhat akin to the spray that forms near a turbulent waterfall.
Of all the zero-point fluctuation phenomena, the zero-point fluctuations of electromagnetic energy are the most easy to detect. Electromagnetic waves have standing, or travelling modes, that are a bit like the various modes of waves going along a rope that is shaken. Each set of waves has its own characteristic set of nodes and crests. It turns out that even though the zero-point energy in any particular mode of an electromagnetic field is minute (equivalent to half a photon's worth), there are nearly an infinite number of possible modes of propagation, that is frequencies and directions. The zero-point energy ADDED UP OVER ALL POSSIBLE MODES, therefore, is QUITE ENORMOUS. As hard as it is to believe, it is greater than the energy density in the atomic nucleus. And this in all of the so-called "empty" space around us.
Because the zero-point energy of the electromagnetic fields is so large, you might expect to see its effects easily, but this is not the case because its density is very uniform. Just as a vase standing in a true void is not likely to fall over spontaneously, so a vase bombarded UNIFORMLY on all sides by packets of zero-point energy would not do likewise because of the BALANCED CONDITIONS of the uniform bombardment. The only evidence of such a barrage of energy might be minute jiggling of the vase. Such a mechanism is thought to be involved in the quantum JIGGLE of zero-point motions.
There are situations, however, where the uniformity of the electromagnetic zero-point energy is slightly disturbed and this leads to effects you can ACTUALLY MEASURE. One situation is when the zero-point energy perturbs slightly the spectra of lines from transitions between quantum levels in atoms. This perturbation is known as the LAMB SHIFT, named after the American physicist, Willis Lamb. This work carried out in the late 1940's, using techniques developed for wartime radar, showed that the effect of zero-point fluctuations of the electromagnetic field was to jiggle the electrons slightly in their atomic orbits, leading to a shift in frequency of transitions of about 1000 MEGAHERTZ.
Another, also named after its discoverer, is the CASIMIR EFFECT -- which predicts that two metal plates close together ATTRACT EACH OTHER. Consider plates set at a certain distance apart. In the space between the plates, only those vacuum fluctuations for which a whole number of half-waves just spans the distance can exist, just like waves formed by shaking a rope tied at both ends. Outside the plates, the fluctuations can have many more values because there is more space. The number of modes outside the plates, all of which carry energy and momentum, is greater than those inside. This imbalance PUSHES THE PLATES TOGETHER.
_ _
| | | |
| | | |
\\ | | | | //
\\ | | | | //
ZPE ___________\\| | | |//__________ ZPE
Push
//| | | |\\
Push
// | | | | \\
// | | | | \\
| | | |
| | | |
|_| |_|
Metal Plates
The Casimir Effect : An imbalance in the quantum fluctuations of empty space can PUSH two metal plates together
What does this have to do with our basic question of why the electron in a simple hydrogen atom does not radiate as it circles the protons in its lowest-energy orbit? I have considered this point by taking into account what other physicists have learned over the years about the effects of zero-point energy. I discovered that you can consider the electron as continually radiating away its energy as predicted by classical theory, but SIMULTANEOUSLY ABSORBING a COMPENSATING AMOUNT of energy from the ever-present sea of zero-point energy in which the atom is immersed. An equilibrium between these two processes leads to the correct values for the parameters that define the lowest energy, or ground-state orbit (see "Why atoms don't collapse," NEW SCIENTIST, July 1987). Thus there is a DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM in which the zero-point energy stabilizes the electron in a set ground-state orbit. It seems that the very stability of matter itself appears to depend on an underlying sea of electromagnetic zero-point energy.
Gravity as a Long-Range Casimir Force
As well as providing new insights into quantum theory, zero-point fluctuations also give us some insight into gravity. Einstein's general theory of relativity describes gravity well but we still do not know its fundamental nature very well. The theory is basically descriptive without revealing the underlying dynamics for that description. As a result, attempts to unify gravity with the other forces (electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces) or to develop a quantum theory of gravity have foundered again and again on difficulties that can be traced back to a lack of understanding at a fundamental level. To rectify these difficulties, theorists have resorted to ever-increasing levels of mathematical sophistication and abstraction, as in the recent development of supergravity and superstring theories.
The well-known Soviet physicist Andrei Sakharov took a completely different tack to explain such difficulties. He suggested that gravity might not be a fundamental interaction at all, but rather a secondary or RESIDUAL effect associated with other, non-gravitational fields. Gravity might be an effect brought about by changes in the zero-point energy of the vacuum, due to the presence of matter ("A key to understanding gravity", NEW SCIENTIST, April 1981). If correct, you could then consider gravity as a variation on the Casimir theme, in which the pressures of background zero-point energy were again responsible. Although Sakharov did not develop the concept much further, he did outline certain criteria such a theory would have to meet - for example, predicting the value of the gravitational constant G in terms of the parameters given by zero-point energy theory.
I have studied Sakharov's approach to gravity in detail with some positive results. A particle sitting in the sea of electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations develops a "jitter" motion, or ZITTERBEWEGUNG as German physicists have named it. When there are two or more particles, they are each influenced not only by the fluctuating background field, but also by the fields generated by the other particles, all similarly undergoing Zitterbewegung motion. The coupling between particles due to these fields produces the attractive gravitational force. Gravity can, therefore, be understood as a sort of LONG-RANGE Casimir force.
Because of its electromagnetic underpinning, gravitational theory in this form constitutes what is known as an "already-unified" theory. The main benefit of the new approach is that it helps us to understand characteristics of the way gravity works that were previously unexplained. These include why gravity is so weak; why positive but not negative mass exists; and the fact that gravity cannot be shielded because zero-point fluctuations pervade space and so cannot be shielded.
So, if we have an explanation for non-radiating atomic ground states and for gravity, do we know where the electromagnetic zero-point energy comes from in the first place? There are two schools of thought. One is that it is just simply a part of the boundary conditions of our Universe like, for example, the background radiation left over from the big bang. The other is that the zero-point energy is generated by quantum-fluctuation motion of the charged particles of the latter. I assumed that zero-point fields drive the motion throughout the Universe, in turn, generate the zero-point fields in the form of a self-regenerating feedback cycle, not unlike a cat chasing its own tail.
This self-consistent approach yielded the correct values for the zero-point field. Thus, the zero-point fields observed at any given point are due to random radiation arriving from particles throughout the Universe that are themselves undergoing zero-point motion ("Where does the zero-point energy come from?", NEW SCIENTIST, December 2, 1989). These self-regenerating zero-point fields also produce the familiar properties of quantum theory, such as fluctuation phenomena and the uncertainty principle, for example. This means that it might be possible to model many aspects of quantum theory on the basis of self-consistent, random interactions between particles and the zero-point fluctuation fields they generate.
Although a knowledge of zero-point fields emerged from quantum physics as that subject matured, Timothy Boyer at City College in New York took a contrary view. In the late 1960's, he began asking what would happen if we took classical physics as it was and introduced a background of random, classical fluctuating zero-point fields. Such fields would presumably have originated in the initial random processes of the big bang and then by regeneration as I have just described. Could such an all-classical model reproduce quantum theory in its entirety, and might this possibility have been overlooked by the founders of quantum theory who were not aware of the existence of such a fluctuating background field?
Boyer began by tackling the problems that led to quantum theory being introduced in the first place, such as the blackbody radiation curve and the photoelectric effect. His upstart, neoclassical approach reproduced the known quantum results one by one. This approach is called STOCHASTIC ELECTRODYNMAICS (SED), in contrast to QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS (QED). Indeed, Peter Milonni at the Los Alamos National Labroratory in the US noted in a review of the Boyer work that if physicists in 1900 had thought of taking this route, they would probably have been more comfortable with this classical approach than with Max Planck's hypothesis of the quantum. One can only speculate as to the direction that physics would have taken them.
The list of topics successfully analysed using the SED approach, which produce THE SAME RESULTS as when the QED approach is used, has now been extended to include the harmonic oscillator, Casimir and van der Waals forces and the thermal effects of acceleration through the vacuum. Out of this work emerged the reasons for such phenomena as the uncertainty principle, the fluctuating motion of particles, the existence of van der Waals forces even at zero temperature, and so forth, all show to be due to the influence of the unceasing activity of the random background fields.
There are also some notable gaps in the development of SED; for example, deriving Schrodinger's equation, as yet turns out to be an intractable problem. Several researchers are confident, however, that this obstacle can be overcome. Until theory as we have come to know it will be entirely replaced by a refurbished classical theory in the near future. But regardless of the final outcome, the successes to date of the SED approach, by its highlighting of the role of background zero-point fluctuations, means that when the final chapter is written on quantum theory, field fluctuations in empty space will be accorded an honoured position.
And now to the biggest question of all, where did the Universe come from? Or, in modern terminology, what started the big bang? Could quantum fluctuations of empty space have something to do with this as well? Edward Tyron of the City University of New York thought so in 1973 when he proposed that our Universe may have originated as a fluctuation of the vacuum on a large scale, as "simply one of those things which happen from time to time". This idea was later refined and updated within the context of inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, who proposed that the universe is created by quantum tunnelling from literally nothing into the something we call the Universe. Although highly speculative, these models indicate that physicists find themselves turning again and again to the void and fluctuations therein for their answers.
Those with a practical bent of mind may be left with yet one more unanswered question. Can you find mundane applications for this emerging Rosetta Stone of physics? Will it be possible to extract electrical energy from the vacuum? Robert Forward at Hughes Research Laboratories in Malibu, California has considered this possibility. Could the engineer of the future specialise in "vacuum engineering" as the Nobel laureate Tsun-Dao Lee has put it? Could the energy crises be solved by harnessing the energies of the zero-point "sea"? After all, the basic form of zero-point energy is highly random and tends to cancel itself out, so if a way could be found to bring order out of chaos, then, because of the highly energetic nature of the vacuum fluctuations, relatively large effects could be produced.
Given our relative ignorance at this point, we must fall back on a quote given by the Soviet science historian Roman Poldolny when contemplating this issue. "It would be just as presumptuous to deny the feasibility of useful application as it would be irresponsible to guarantee such application." Only the future can reveal the ultimate use to which humans will put this remaining fire of the gods, the quantum fluctuations of empty space. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Harold Puthoff is a theoretical physicist at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin in Texas. He specializes in Quantum Electrodynamics.
Here's a link A magazine article by Hal Puthoff
www.earthtech.org/publications/fusion_facts.pdf
www.earthtech.org/publications/spec_sci_tech.pdf
www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm
So, you can see there is more going on in this Universe than meets the eye. If the ZPE exists, and there is nobody claiming that it doesn't, then it is not a wild guess to surmise that light travels in the ZPE and not in our ordinary outside space. In fact, in view of the INSIDE of space perspective, it is obvious that is where it is all happening.
And this is a good place to restate my original thought, all of science should be re-examined to take into account the INSIDE of everything.
Also
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 9 months ago #12344
by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> (North writes)
...as well in your reference to language and its restrictions. this is nonsense. language evolves, grows with time , and slowly defines better what we are trying to get across. think about it from Sanskrit to now you are trying to tell me language does not change, we create new words, phrases etc. to express thoughts. If your argument was true then the dictionary would be a stagnant book of definitions -- it is not. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
North, why don't you believe me? I am not saying anything new, a lot of research has been done with our language, and a lot of conclusions have been formed. I have looked at these conclusions in a deep way, and there is a message to be heard.
I used to think that knowledge meant words. For a long time but one day I was sucked in by the promise of a superior knowledge, I thought it would be the knowledge of something. I wanted that. But the book they gave me was titled "Be Here Now." I found out that words are not the thing.There is a BIG story about words. There is a whole lot more going on than just what words can say. But even before we get to that, Zen says, "Do not mistake the pointing finger for the moon." Words are all we got to talk with, but that doesn't mean what words say is real. And especially ALL that is real. Once freed of this self-imposed constraint, once we throw out the old, we can use words like the tools that they are. Play with them, knowing that it is all bull****.
Here is a "story" of words that I have found. Took me thirty years to find these, and a lot of reading words. I mean, we are floating dead in the water, and the only tools given us, our oars, we use to hit eachother over the head, instead of working with them...
Words and Language
WILLIAM JAMES
"Out of what is in itselt an indistinguishable, swarming continuum, devoid of distinction (sunyata), or emphasis, our senses make for us, by attending to this motion and ignoring that, a world full of contrasts, of sharp accents, of abrupt changes, of picturesque light and shade. Helmholtz says that we notice only those sensations which are signs to us of things. But what are things? Nothing, as we shall abundantly see, but special groups of sensible qualities, which happen practically or aesthetically to interest us, to which we therefore give substantive names, and which we exalt to this exclusive status of independence and dignity."
ALDOUS HUXLEY
"Every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the linguistic tradition into which he has been born - the beneficiary inasmuch as language gives access to the accumulated records of other people's experience, the victim in so far as it confirms him in the belief that reduced awareness is the only awareness and as it bedevils his sense of reality, so that he is all too apt to take his concepts for data, his words for actual things." [TDOP Huxley 23]
DAVID BOHM
"Indeed, to some extent it has always been necessary and proper for man, in his thinking, to divide things up, if we tried to deal with the whole of reality at once, we would be swamped. However when this mode of thought is applied more broadly to man's notion of himself and the whole world in which he lives, (i.e. in his world-view) then man ceases to regard the resultant divisions as merely useful or convenient and begins to see and experience himself and this world as actually constituted of separately existing fragments. What is needed is a relativistic theory, to give up altogether the notion that the world is constituted of basic objects or building blocks. Rather one has to view the world in terms of universal flux of events and processes."
KEN WILBER
Bergson was also aware of the spurios reality of "things" because, - as he himself pointed out - thought creates things by slicing up reality into small bits that it can easily grasp. Thus when you are think-ing you are thing-ing. Thought does not report things, it distorts reality to create things, and, as Bergson noted, "In so doing it allows what is the very essence of the real to escape." Thus to the extent we actually imagine a world of discrete and separate things, conceptions have become perceptions, and we have in this manner populated our universe with nothing but ghosts. Therefore the Madhyamika declares that Reality, besides being void of conceptual elaboration, is likewise Void of separate things.The doctrine of mutual interpenetration and mutual identification of the Dharmadhatu represents man's highest attempt to put into words that non-dual experience of Reality which itself remains wordless, ineffable, unspeakable, that nameless nothingness. The Dharmadhatu is not entirely foreign to Western thought, for something very similar to it is seen emerging in modern Systems Theory, in Gestalt psychology, and in the organismic philosophy of Whitehead. As a matter of fact, Western science as a whole is moving very rapidly towards a Dharmadhatu view of the cosmos, as biophysicist Ludwig von Bertalanffy states: "We may state as a characteristic of modern sciece that the scheme of isolable units acting in one-way-causality has proved to be insufficient. Hence the appearence, in all fields of science, of notions like wholeness, holistic, organismic, gestalt, etc, which signify that in the last resort, we must think in terms of systems of elements in mutual interaction."
ALAN WATTS
THE JOYOUS COSMOLOGY
"The principle is that all dualities and opposites are not disjoined but polar. They do not confront eachother from afar, they expoliate from a common center. Ordinary thinking conceals polarity and relativity because it employs terms and terminals, the poles, neglecting what lies inbetween them. The difference of front to back, to be or not to be, hides their unity and mutuality."
D.T. SUZUKI
"According to the philosophy of Zen, we are too much a slave to the conventional way of thinking. which is dualistic through and through. No "interpenetration" is allowed, there takes place no fusing of opposites in our everyday logic. What belongs to God is not of this world, and what is of this world is incompatible with the divine. Black is not white, and white is not black. Tiger is tiger, and cat is cat, and they will never be one. Water flows, a mountain towers. This is the way things or ideas go in this universe of the senses and syllogisms. Zen, however, upsets this scheme of thought and substitutes a new one in which there exists no logic, no dualistic arrangement of ideas. We believe in dualism chiefly because of our traditional training. Whether ideas really correspond to facts is another matter requiring a special investigation. Ordinarily we do not inquire into the matter, we just accept what is instilled into our minds; for to accept is more convenient and practical, and life is to a certain extent, though not in reality, made thereby easier. We are in nature conservatives, not because we are lazy, but because we like repose and peace, even superficially. But the time comes when traditional logic holds true no more, for we begin to feel contradictions and splits and consequently spiritual anguish. We lose trustful repose which we experienced when we blindly followed the traditional ways of thinking. Eckhart says that we are all seeking repose whether consciously or not just as the stone cannot cease moving until it touches the earth. Evidently the repose we seemed to enjoy before we were awakened to the contradictions involved in our logic was not the real one, the stone has kept moving down toward the ground. Where then is the ground of non-dualism on which the soul can be really and truthfully tranquil and blessed? To quote Echart again, "Simple people conceive that we are to see God as if He stood on that side and we on this. It is not so; God and I are one in the act of my perceiving Him." In this absolute oneness of things Zen establishes the foundations of its philosophy. The idea of absolute oneness is not the exclusive possesion of Zen. There are other religious and philosophies that preach the same doctrine. If Zen, like other monisms or theisms, merely laid down this principle and did not have anythng specifically to be known as Zen, it would have long ceased to exist as such. But there is in Zen something unique which makes up its life and justifies its claim to be the most precious heritage of Eastern culture. The following "Mondo" or dialogue (literally questioning and answering) will give us a glimsp into the ways of Zen, A monk asked Joshu, one of the greatest masters in China, "What is the ultimate word of Truth?" Instead of giving him any specific answer he made a simple response saying, "Yes." The monk who naturally failed to see any sense in this kind of response asked for a second time, and to this the Master roared back. "I am not deaf!" See how irrelevantly (shall I say) the all-important problem of absolute oneness or of the ultimate reason is treated here! But this is characteristic of Zen, this is where Zen transcends logic and overrides the tyranny and misrepresentation of ideas. As I have said before, Zen mistrusts the intellect, does not rely upon traditional and dualistic methods of reasoning, and handles problems after its own original manners....To understand all this, it is necessary that we should acquire a "third eye", as they say, and learn to look at things from a new point of view."
Zen
I-hsüan
A Sermon
Reverend Sirs, time is precious. Don't make the mistake of following others in desperately studying meditation or the Path, learning words or phrases, seeking after the Buddha or patriarchs or good friends. Followers of the Path, you have only one father and one mother. What else do you want? Look into yourselves . An ancient sage said that Yajna-datta thought he had lost his head [and sought after it], but when his seeking mind was stopped he realized that he had never lost it.
From Sources of Chinese Tradition (de Bary, Chan and Watson, ed. and trans.), pp. 360--363
Typed 31 March 1995
CRS
Ken Wilber
HOW BIG IS OUR UMBRELLA?
And when we pause from all this research, and put theory temporarily to rest, and when we relax into the primordial ground of our own intrinsic awareness, what will we find therein? When the joy of the robin sings on a clear morning dawn, where is our consciousness then? When the sunlight beams from the glory of a snow-capped mountain, where is consciousness then? In the place that time forgot, in this eternal moment without date or duration, in the secret cave of the heart where time touches eternity and space cries out for infinity, when the raindrop pulses on the temple roof, and announces the beauty of the divine with every single beat, when the moonlight reflects in a simple dewdrop to remind us who and what we are, and when in the entire universe there is nothing but the sound of a lonely waterfall somewhere in the mists, gently calling your name-where is consciousness then?
GOETHE
"My friend, all theory is gray, and the Golden tree of life is green."
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
so the universe speaks to us in both silence and sound.
the universe is more complex than the above. the universe does not limit its expression of its exitence to just pacific things of understanding( pure thought) it also brings forth the understanding of how things work(photosynthesis) and the dangers for not learning in real terms(asteroids). now think of the knowledge this implies. now our ability to deal with the truth of what we find, that is the essence of our future survival as beings on this planet.
without language we have no choices,(extinction), language gives us at the very least the choice of when. depending on what we do with it.
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> (North writes)
...as well in your reference to language and its restrictions. this is nonsense. language evolves, grows with time , and slowly defines better what we are trying to get across. think about it from Sanskrit to now you are trying to tell me language does not change, we create new words, phrases etc. to express thoughts. If your argument was true then the dictionary would be a stagnant book of definitions -- it is not. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
North, why don't you believe me? I am not saying anything new, a lot of research has been done with our language, and a lot of conclusions have been formed. I have looked at these conclusions in a deep way, and there is a message to be heard.
I used to think that knowledge meant words. For a long time but one day I was sucked in by the promise of a superior knowledge, I thought it would be the knowledge of something. I wanted that. But the book they gave me was titled "Be Here Now." I found out that words are not the thing.There is a BIG story about words. There is a whole lot more going on than just what words can say. But even before we get to that, Zen says, "Do not mistake the pointing finger for the moon." Words are all we got to talk with, but that doesn't mean what words say is real. And especially ALL that is real. Once freed of this self-imposed constraint, once we throw out the old, we can use words like the tools that they are. Play with them, knowing that it is all bull****.
Here is a "story" of words that I have found. Took me thirty years to find these, and a lot of reading words. I mean, we are floating dead in the water, and the only tools given us, our oars, we use to hit eachother over the head, instead of working with them...
Words and Language
WILLIAM JAMES
"Out of what is in itselt an indistinguishable, swarming continuum, devoid of distinction (sunyata), or emphasis, our senses make for us, by attending to this motion and ignoring that, a world full of contrasts, of sharp accents, of abrupt changes, of picturesque light and shade. Helmholtz says that we notice only those sensations which are signs to us of things. But what are things? Nothing, as we shall abundantly see, but special groups of sensible qualities, which happen practically or aesthetically to interest us, to which we therefore give substantive names, and which we exalt to this exclusive status of independence and dignity."
ALDOUS HUXLEY
"Every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the linguistic tradition into which he has been born - the beneficiary inasmuch as language gives access to the accumulated records of other people's experience, the victim in so far as it confirms him in the belief that reduced awareness is the only awareness and as it bedevils his sense of reality, so that he is all too apt to take his concepts for data, his words for actual things." [TDOP Huxley 23]
DAVID BOHM
"Indeed, to some extent it has always been necessary and proper for man, in his thinking, to divide things up, if we tried to deal with the whole of reality at once, we would be swamped. However when this mode of thought is applied more broadly to man's notion of himself and the whole world in which he lives, (i.e. in his world-view) then man ceases to regard the resultant divisions as merely useful or convenient and begins to see and experience himself and this world as actually constituted of separately existing fragments. What is needed is a relativistic theory, to give up altogether the notion that the world is constituted of basic objects or building blocks. Rather one has to view the world in terms of universal flux of events and processes."
KEN WILBER
Bergson was also aware of the spurios reality of "things" because, - as he himself pointed out - thought creates things by slicing up reality into small bits that it can easily grasp. Thus when you are think-ing you are thing-ing. Thought does not report things, it distorts reality to create things, and, as Bergson noted, "In so doing it allows what is the very essence of the real to escape." Thus to the extent we actually imagine a world of discrete and separate things, conceptions have become perceptions, and we have in this manner populated our universe with nothing but ghosts. Therefore the Madhyamika declares that Reality, besides being void of conceptual elaboration, is likewise Void of separate things.The doctrine of mutual interpenetration and mutual identification of the Dharmadhatu represents man's highest attempt to put into words that non-dual experience of Reality which itself remains wordless, ineffable, unspeakable, that nameless nothingness. The Dharmadhatu is not entirely foreign to Western thought, for something very similar to it is seen emerging in modern Systems Theory, in Gestalt psychology, and in the organismic philosophy of Whitehead. As a matter of fact, Western science as a whole is moving very rapidly towards a Dharmadhatu view of the cosmos, as biophysicist Ludwig von Bertalanffy states: "We may state as a characteristic of modern sciece that the scheme of isolable units acting in one-way-causality has proved to be insufficient. Hence the appearence, in all fields of science, of notions like wholeness, holistic, organismic, gestalt, etc, which signify that in the last resort, we must think in terms of systems of elements in mutual interaction."
ALAN WATTS
THE JOYOUS COSMOLOGY
"The principle is that all dualities and opposites are not disjoined but polar. They do not confront eachother from afar, they expoliate from a common center. Ordinary thinking conceals polarity and relativity because it employs terms and terminals, the poles, neglecting what lies inbetween them. The difference of front to back, to be or not to be, hides their unity and mutuality."
D.T. SUZUKI
"According to the philosophy of Zen, we are too much a slave to the conventional way of thinking. which is dualistic through and through. No "interpenetration" is allowed, there takes place no fusing of opposites in our everyday logic. What belongs to God is not of this world, and what is of this world is incompatible with the divine. Black is not white, and white is not black. Tiger is tiger, and cat is cat, and they will never be one. Water flows, a mountain towers. This is the way things or ideas go in this universe of the senses and syllogisms. Zen, however, upsets this scheme of thought and substitutes a new one in which there exists no logic, no dualistic arrangement of ideas. We believe in dualism chiefly because of our traditional training. Whether ideas really correspond to facts is another matter requiring a special investigation. Ordinarily we do not inquire into the matter, we just accept what is instilled into our minds; for to accept is more convenient and practical, and life is to a certain extent, though not in reality, made thereby easier. We are in nature conservatives, not because we are lazy, but because we like repose and peace, even superficially. But the time comes when traditional logic holds true no more, for we begin to feel contradictions and splits and consequently spiritual anguish. We lose trustful repose which we experienced when we blindly followed the traditional ways of thinking. Eckhart says that we are all seeking repose whether consciously or not just as the stone cannot cease moving until it touches the earth. Evidently the repose we seemed to enjoy before we were awakened to the contradictions involved in our logic was not the real one, the stone has kept moving down toward the ground. Where then is the ground of non-dualism on which the soul can be really and truthfully tranquil and blessed? To quote Echart again, "Simple people conceive that we are to see God as if He stood on that side and we on this. It is not so; God and I are one in the act of my perceiving Him." In this absolute oneness of things Zen establishes the foundations of its philosophy. The idea of absolute oneness is not the exclusive possesion of Zen. There are other religious and philosophies that preach the same doctrine. If Zen, like other monisms or theisms, merely laid down this principle and did not have anythng specifically to be known as Zen, it would have long ceased to exist as such. But there is in Zen something unique which makes up its life and justifies its claim to be the most precious heritage of Eastern culture. The following "Mondo" or dialogue (literally questioning and answering) will give us a glimsp into the ways of Zen, A monk asked Joshu, one of the greatest masters in China, "What is the ultimate word of Truth?" Instead of giving him any specific answer he made a simple response saying, "Yes." The monk who naturally failed to see any sense in this kind of response asked for a second time, and to this the Master roared back. "I am not deaf!" See how irrelevantly (shall I say) the all-important problem of absolute oneness or of the ultimate reason is treated here! But this is characteristic of Zen, this is where Zen transcends logic and overrides the tyranny and misrepresentation of ideas. As I have said before, Zen mistrusts the intellect, does not rely upon traditional and dualistic methods of reasoning, and handles problems after its own original manners....To understand all this, it is necessary that we should acquire a "third eye", as they say, and learn to look at things from a new point of view."
Zen
I-hsüan
A Sermon
Reverend Sirs, time is precious. Don't make the mistake of following others in desperately studying meditation or the Path, learning words or phrases, seeking after the Buddha or patriarchs or good friends. Followers of the Path, you have only one father and one mother. What else do you want? Look into yourselves . An ancient sage said that Yajna-datta thought he had lost his head [and sought after it], but when his seeking mind was stopped he realized that he had never lost it.
From Sources of Chinese Tradition (de Bary, Chan and Watson, ed. and trans.), pp. 360--363
Typed 31 March 1995
CRS
Ken Wilber
HOW BIG IS OUR UMBRELLA?
And when we pause from all this research, and put theory temporarily to rest, and when we relax into the primordial ground of our own intrinsic awareness, what will we find therein? When the joy of the robin sings on a clear morning dawn, where is our consciousness then? When the sunlight beams from the glory of a snow-capped mountain, where is consciousness then? In the place that time forgot, in this eternal moment without date or duration, in the secret cave of the heart where time touches eternity and space cries out for infinity, when the raindrop pulses on the temple roof, and announces the beauty of the divine with every single beat, when the moonlight reflects in a simple dewdrop to remind us who and what we are, and when in the entire universe there is nothing but the sound of a lonely waterfall somewhere in the mists, gently calling your name-where is consciousness then?
GOETHE
"My friend, all theory is gray, and the Golden tree of life is green."
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
so the universe speaks to us in both silence and sound.
the universe is more complex than the above. the universe does not limit its expression of its exitence to just pacific things of understanding( pure thought) it also brings forth the understanding of how things work(photosynthesis) and the dangers for not learning in real terms(asteroids). now think of the knowledge this implies. now our ability to deal with the truth of what we find, that is the essence of our future survival as beings on this planet.
without language we have no choices,(extinction), language gives us at the very least the choice of when. depending on what we do with it.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 9 months ago #12315
by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> (from Tommy) PS. Peter Gariaev at the Russiah Academy of Sciences, has this notion of "phantom DNA", He uses a laser to detect the holographic Light fields of a DNA particle, and translates this to RF. It shows up on a screen as a pattern. When they remove the sample, and recalibrate the chamber, they are able to see a clear pattern from the DNA. They attibute this to the ZPE. Don't know yet, if this is true. But if it is...
(from North)
obviously this is not zero point energy. for a point to have no energy the pattern would not show, strictly speaking.
i would think that strictly speaking, Zero means Zero(if not define further your concept of Zero) you should know better.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<hr noshade size="1">
That's reasonable conclusion, but not in this case. This concept of the ZPE has gone far beyond mere speculation. NASA writes:
www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/ipspaper.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"Zero Point Energy (ZPE) is the term used to describe the random electromagnetic oscillations that are left in a vacuum after all other energy has been removed (ref 13). This can be explained in terms of quantum theory, where there exists energy even in the absolute lowest state of a harmonic oscillator. The lowest state of an electromagnetic oscillation is equal to one-half the Planck constant times the frequency. If all the energy for all the possible frequencies is summed up, the result is an enormous energy density, ranging from 1036 to 1070 Joules/m3. In simplistic terms there is enough energy in a cubic centimeter of the empty vacuum to boil away Earth's oceans. First predicted in 1948, ZPE has been linked to a number of experimental observations. Examples include the Casimir effect (ref 14), Van der Waal forces (ref 15), the Lamb-Retherford Shift (ref 10, p. 427), explanations of the Planck blackbody radiation spectrum (ref 16), the stability of the ground state of the hydrogen atom from radiative collapse (ref 17), and the effect of cavities to inhibit or enhance the spontaneous emission from excited atoms (ref 18).
Regarding the inertia and gravity theories mentioned earlier, they take the perspective that all matter is fundamentally constructed of electrically charged particles and that these particles are constantly interacting with this ZPE background. From this perspective the property of inertia, the resistance to change of a particle's velocity, is described as a high- frequency electromagnetic drag against the Zero Point Fluctuations. Gravity, the attraction between masses, is described as Van der Waals forces between oscillating dipoles, where these dipoles are the charged particles that have been set into oscillation by the ZPE background."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It all started for me with this philosophical question, the answer was quite a surprise. My synchronistic experiences over the years led me to wonder how synchronicity could possibly happen. I assumed right away that it wasn't magic, and I came up with the idea of an INSIDE of space. Since our ordinary physical space dictates that synchronicity is impossible, it there something else going on? I found in the literature many instances of unexplained events, especially one about how an atom can do an atom forever. Atoms are not inert bits of matter, they are Electro Magnetic fields, and fields by definition are doing something. I couldn't accept the textbook explanation that atoms move forever because they can't do anything else. I found other anomalies like virtual particles that pop up and then return to where they came from before Heisenberg uncertanty noticed, I couldn't accept that either, like where did they come from in the first place? Then there are the infinities that are "renormalized" out of the equations, what if the infinities are supposed to be found there? And then one day, it came to me...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
In a message dated 5/31/99 4:39:07 PM, Thommandel writes to the quantum-mind list.
<< ...Which reminds me of a question: Does an electron radiate energy while in its "orbit?" I understand that it does at least enough to create magnetism. I also understand that the electron does not decay and fall into the nucleus because it is locked in its orbit, it can't fall. But that doesn't explain where all this energy is coming from to keep it in orbit whether or not it can fall in the first place. I think that all subatomic particles are fed energy continuously from the INSIDE of space.
tom >>
[Hal Puthoff ]
This is explained in my paper: H. E. Puthoff, "The Ground state of hydrogen as a zero-point-fluctuation-determined state," Phys. Rev. D vol 35, p. 3266, 1987. It is as you say: absorption of energy from the vacuum fluctuations just balances radiation due to acceleration in the orbit. The balance exists (and is stable) only for the Bohr-orbit ground state.
[tom] << So what you are saying is that all radiated energy from atomic particles is balanced by an energy input from the vacuum!? How come this wasn't touted as a great discovery of quantum physics? tom >>
[Hal Puthoff]
Among a certain group of physicists (those interested in the physics of vcuum fluctuations) it is touted. I have provided over 500 reprints. A nice "tout" was presented in the 9 Jul 1987 issue of New Scientist, p. 26, in an article titled "Why atoms don't collapse."
[tom]<< Have you read Laslo's work on the infinite zero point quantum vacuum field? tom>>
[Hal Puthoff]
He has interviewed me at length, arranged for me to address the Gorbachev World Forum on the issue of a new paradigm in physics, and I do have his books. Attached is a recent summary of the "zero-point-energy" www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm work, that covers much more than just the atom collapse issue. It is a paper presented at a NASA conference on "Breakthrough Propulsion Physics."
Best regards,
Hal
Subj: RE: The DIAMONDS children play with...
Date: 6/5/99 1:04:34 AM Central Daylight Time
From: jfirmage@uswebcks.com (Joe Firmage)
To: Thommandel@AOL.COM
I agree that this is a seminal piece of work. The true nature of "energy in Space" (more to the point, the very *definition* of "Space" and "energy") will soon be demonstrated to represent the greatest paradigm shift in physics since Galileo, with similarly staggering philosophical implications.
In the process, the presumed limits of humanity's reach across the Cosmos -- and by unequivocal implication, those of extraterrestrial life -- that have been in place for 90 years will be swept away.
This group will find particularly interesting the first installment in the ISSO's Internet public science education series, to be presented in July 1999. This kickoff for the series will compare and contrast a small, select number of complementary physics models that I believe are the harbingers of the sweeping scientific revolutions we're about to witness. Dr. Puthoff's analysis is one those that will be featured.
Joe Firmage
Subj: repy to Diamonds
Date: 6/6/99 4:03:29 PM Central Daylight Time
From: drboylan@jps.net (Richard J. Boylan, Ph.D.)
Joe,
Indeed. And none too soon! Conventional science has had the
unfortunate effect of making certain scientists feel that they are the
center of the universe, knowing all, and in a position to control
every process.
The new, cosmic consciousness-centered scientific paradigm will
offer a more humbling yet simultaneously more exciting persperctive.
And, in the bargain, we will acknowledge our Distant Cousins, who
have actually been around to assist us for many aeons.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Richard Boylan<hr noshade size="1">
<hr noshade size="1">
www.calphysics.org/articles/merc2000b.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Swimming in the Zero-Point Sea
An oscillating pendulum, like the one in a grandfather clock but without recovery mechanism, will eventually come to rest. But a microscopic pendulum governed by quantum laws can never come to a complete stop. The famous Heisenberg uncertainty relation forbids removing all the energy from such an oscillator. In fact, there is a well defined minimum average energy, hf/2, where h is Planck’s constant and f is the oscillation frequency.
Propagating electromagnetic fields—such as radio waves, visible light, x rays, gamma rays—behave like oscillators. All of them may be considered waves moving at the speed of light. A specific manner of field oscillation with a characteristic frequency, direction, and polarization state of a propagating field is called a propagating mode (there are also stationary modes). Each mode is like an oscillator and has the same minimum average energy as the quantum pendulum, hf/2. If you sum up all the modes, you get the electromagnetic zero-point field. It is called the zero-point field because it corresponds to the equilibrium radiation left as the temperature goes to absolute zero (T=0). It is the lowest energy state, but, in fact, the zero-point field contains a vast amount of energy. All the light we see and radio waves we pick up are like tiny ripples atop the vast electromagnetic zero-point radiation field. You could say that we spend our lives surfing on top of a zero-point sea, experiencing the waves on the surface while oblivious to the vast depths below. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Corraboration
www.calphysics.org/articles/wesson.pdf
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">In recent years, it has been suggested that the electromagnetic zero-point field (zpf) is not merely an artefact of quantum mechanics, but a real entity with major implications for gravity, astrophysics and technology. This view is shared by a number of researchers, including Boyer (1980), McCrea (1986), Putho® (1987) and Rueda and Haisch (1998a). The present work is a report on research into the zpf during the last decade, with recommendations about where investigations should be directed in the future. The theoretical basis for believing in a real zpf is simple. A onedimensional harmonic oscillator has states which can be raised or lowered in units n of ¹h! where ¹h is Planck's constant divided by 2¼ and ! is the frequency. In terms of the momentum operator ^p and the position operator ^q, the hamiltonian (energy) of the system is ^H = (^p2 +!2^q2)=2. The excited
states have energy En = (n+ 1=2) ¹h!, a relation which is known to lead to acceptable results in quantum-mechanical calculations for n ¸ 0. However, if the kinetic energy of the system (or alternatively the temperature) goes to zero, there remains a zero-point energy of ¹h!=2. This, summed over frequencies, represents a zero-point ¯eld with a large energy density.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
kjmaclean.com/ZeroPointEnergy.html#_Toc493648629
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Everything for Nothing
By Dr Hal Puthoff
Classical physics tells us that if we think of an atom as a miniature solar system with electronic planets orbiting a nuclear sun, then it should not exist. The circling electrons SHOULD RADIATE AWAY their energy like microscopic radio antennas and spiral into the nucleus. To resolve this problem, physicists had to introduce a set of mathematical rules, called quantum mechanics, to describe what happens. Quantum theory endows matter and energy with both wave and particle-like characteristics. It also restrains electrons to particular orbits, or energy levels, so they cannot radiate energy unless they jump from one orbit to another.
Measuring the spectral lines of atoms verifies that quantum theory is correct. Atoms appear to emit or absorb packets of light, or photons, with a wavelength that exactly coincides with the difference between its energy levels as predicted by quantum theory. As a result, the majority of physicists are content simply to use quantum rules that describe so accurately what happens in their experiments.
Nevertheless, when we repeat the question: "But why doesn't the electron radiate away its energy?", the answer is: "Well, in quantum theory it JUST DOESN'T". It is at this point that not only the layman but also some physicists begin to feel that someone is not playing fair. Indeed, much of modern physics is based on theories couched in a form that works but they do not answer the fundamental questions of what gravity is, why the Universe is the way it is, or how it got started anyway. Surprisingly, there may be answers to these seemingly unanswerable questions. Perhaps even more surprising, the answers seem to be emerging from empty space, the vacuum, the void.
In fact, according to quantum theory, the vacuum, the space between particles of matter as well as between the stars, is not empty, it is filled with vast amounts of fluctuating energy.
To understand this extraordinary idea, we will have to take a detour into the phenomenon of "fluctuations" with which quantum theory abounds. Fluctuations arise as one of the most fundamental concepts to come out of the mathematics of quantum theory. This is the uncertainty principle enunciated by Werner Heisenberg in 1927, which says that it is impossible to know everything about a system because of what would seem to be inherent fluctuations in the very fabric of nature itself. Indeed, quantum mechanics is a statistical theory that deals with probabilities and it has some profound consequences for our understanding of reality. For instance, we cannot know the position and the momentum of an electron at the same time. If we know its momentum, or energy, accurately, then we can determine its position only probabilistically.
This "fuzziness" of positions described in terms of probability waves gives a measure of the size and shape over which an electronic orbit fluctuates in an atom. It also means that the energy of a particle or system is "fuzzy" and thus there is a slight probability of it changing, or fluctuating, to another value. In fact, a system can actually, by fluctuation, "tunnel" through an energy barrier because there is a small but finite probability of the system existing on the other side of the barrier. I shall discuss later a possible cause for such fluctuation phenomena.
The basic fuzziness of quantum theory means that there are fundamental phenomena which classical physics does not predict. For example, according to classical physics, any simple oscillator, such as a pendulum, when set in motion, comes to rest because of fiction. But quantum theory predicts that such an oscillator would not completely come to rest, but instead, would continue to jiggle randomly about its resting point with a small amount of residual energy, the so-called zero-point energy.
The adjective zero-point denotes that such motion exists even at a temperature of absolute zero where no thermal agitation effects remain. Although we cannot observe the zero-point energy on, say, the pendulum of a grandfather clock because it is so minute, it is nonetheless real. In many physical systems this has important consequences. One example is the presence of a certain amount of "noise" in a microwave receiver that can NEVER be removed, no matter how perfect the technology.
This zero-point energy is the result of the unpredictable random fluctuations of the vacuum energy, as predicted by the uncertainty principle, which is zero in classical theory. In fact, these fluctuations can be intense enough TO CAUSE PARTICLES TO FORM from the vacuum SPONTANEOUSLY, provided they disappear again before violating the uncertainty principle. This temporary formation of "virtual" particles is somewhat akin to the spray that forms near a turbulent waterfall.
Of all the zero-point fluctuation phenomena, the zero-point fluctuations of electromagnetic energy are the most easy to detect. Electromagnetic waves have standing, or travelling modes, that are a bit like the various modes of waves going along a rope that is shaken. Each set of waves has its own characteristic set of nodes and crests. It turns out that even though the zero-point energy in any particular mode of an electromagnetic field is minute (equivalent to half a photon's worth), there are nearly an infinite number of possible modes of propagation, that is frequencies and directions. The zero-point energy ADDED UP OVER ALL POSSIBLE MODES, therefore, is QUITE ENORMOUS. As hard as it is to believe, it is greater than the energy density in the atomic nucleus. And this in all of the so-called "empty" space around us.
Because the zero-point energy of the electromagnetic fields is so large, you might expect to see its effects easily, but this is not the case because its density is very uniform. Just as a vase standing in a true void is not likely to fall over spontaneously, so a vase bombarded UNIFORMLY on all sides by packets of zero-point energy would not do likewise because of the BALANCED CONDITIONS of the uniform bombardment. The only evidence of such a barrage of energy might be minute jiggling of the vase. Such a mechanism is thought to be involved in the quantum JIGGLE of zero-point motions.
There are situations, however, where the uniformity of the electromagnetic zero-point energy is slightly disturbed and this leads to effects you can ACTUALLY MEASURE. One situation is when the zero-point energy perturbs slightly the spectra of lines from transitions between quantum levels in atoms. This perturbation is known as the LAMB SHIFT, named after the American physicist, Willis Lamb. This work carried out in the late 1940's, using techniques developed for wartime radar, showed that the effect of zero-point fluctuations of the electromagnetic field was to jiggle the electrons slightly in their atomic orbits, leading to a shift in frequency of transitions of about 1000 MEGAHERTZ.
Another, also named after its discoverer, is the CASIMIR EFFECT -- which predicts that two metal plates close together ATTRACT EACH OTHER. Consider plates set at a certain distance apart. In the space between the plates, only those vacuum fluctuations for which a whole number of half-waves just spans the distance can exist, just like waves formed by shaking a rope tied at both ends. Outside the plates, the fluctuations can have many more values because there is more space. The number of modes outside the plates, all of which carry energy and momentum, is greater than those inside. This imbalance PUSHES THE PLATES TOGETHER.
_ _
| | | |
| | | |
\\ | | | | //
\\ | | | | //
ZPE ___________\\| | | |//__________ ZPE
Push
//| | | |\\
Push
// | | | | \\
// | | | | \\
| | | |
| | | |
|_| |_|
Metal Plates
The Casimir Effect : An imbalance in the quantum fluctuations of empty space can PUSH two metal plates together
What does this have to do with our basic question of why the electron in a simple hydrogen atom does not radiate as it circles the protons in its lowest-energy orbit? I have considered this point by taking into account what other physicists have learned over the years about the effects of zero-point energy. I discovered that you can consider the electron as continually radiating away its energy as predicted by classical theory, but SIMULTANEOUSLY ABSORBING a COMPENSATING AMOUNT of energy from the ever-present sea of zero-point energy in which the atom is immersed. An equilibrium between these two processes leads to the correct values for the parameters that define the lowest energy, or ground-state orbit (see "Why atoms don't collapse," NEW SCIENTIST, July 1987). Thus there is a DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM in which the zero-point energy stabilizes the electron in a set ground-state orbit. It seems that the very stability of matter itself appears to depend on an underlying sea of electromagnetic zero-point energy.
Gravity as a Long-Range Casimir Force
As well as providing new insights into quantum theory, zero-point fluctuations also give us some insight into gravity. Einstein's general theory of relativity describes gravity well but we still do not know its fundamental nature very well. The theory is basically descriptive without revealing the underlying dynamics for that description. As a result, attempts to unify gravity with the other forces (electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces) or to develop a quantum theory of gravity have foundered again and again on difficulties that can be traced back to a lack of understanding at a fundamental level. To rectify these difficulties, theorists have resorted to ever-increasing levels of mathematical sophistication and abstraction, as in the recent development of supergravity and superstring theories.
The well-known Soviet physicist Andrei Sakharov took a completely different tack to explain such difficulties. He suggested that gravity might not be a fundamental interaction at all, but rather a secondary or RESIDUAL effect associated with other, non-gravitational fields. Gravity might be an effect brought about by changes in the zero-point energy of the vacuum, due to the presence of matter ("A key to understanding gravity", NEW SCIENTIST, April 1981). If correct, you could then consider gravity as a variation on the Casimir theme, in which the pressures of background zero-point energy were again responsible. Although Sakharov did not develop the concept much further, he did outline certain criteria such a theory would have to meet - for example, predicting the value of the gravitational constant G in terms of the parameters given by zero-point energy theory.
I have studied Sakharov's approach to gravity in detail with some positive results. A particle sitting in the sea of electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations develops a "jitter" motion, or ZITTERBEWEGUNG as German physicists have named it. When there are two or more particles, they are each influenced not only by the fluctuating background field, but also by the fields generated by the other particles, all similarly undergoing Zitterbewegung motion. The coupling between particles due to these fields produces the attractive gravitational force. Gravity can, therefore, be understood as a sort of LONG-RANGE Casimir force.
Because of its electromagnetic underpinning, gravitational theory in this form constitutes what is known as an "already-unified" theory. The main benefit of the new approach is that it helps us to understand characteristics of the way gravity works that were previously unexplained. These include why gravity is so weak; why positive but not negative mass exists; and the fact that gravity cannot be shielded because zero-point fluctuations pervade space and so cannot be shielded.
So, if we have an explanation for non-radiating atomic ground states and for gravity, do we know where the electromagnetic zero-point energy comes from in the first place? There are two schools of thought. One is that it is just simply a part of the boundary conditions of our Universe like, for example, the background radiation left over from the big bang. The other is that the zero-point energy is generated by quantum-fluctuation motion of the charged particles of the latter. I assumed that zero-point fields drive the motion throughout the Universe, in turn, generate the zero-point fields in the form of a self-regenerating feedback cycle, not unlike a cat chasing its own tail.
This self-consistent approach yielded the correct values for the zero-point field. Thus, the zero-point fields observed at any given point are due to random radiation arriving from particles throughout the Universe that are themselves undergoing zero-point motion ("Where does the zero-point energy come from?", NEW SCIENTIST, December 2, 1989). These self-regenerating zero-point fields also produce the familiar properties of quantum theory, such as fluctuation phenomena and the uncertainty principle, for example. This means that it might be possible to model many aspects of quantum theory on the basis of self-consistent, random interactions between particles and the zero-point fluctuation fields they generate.
Although a knowledge of zero-point fields emerged from quantum physics as that subject matured, Timothy Boyer at City College in New York took a contrary view. In the late 1960's, he began asking what would happen if we took classical physics as it was and introduced a background of random, classical fluctuating zero-point fields. Such fields would presumably have originated in the initial random processes of the big bang and then by regeneration as I have just described. Could such an all-classical model reproduce quantum theory in its entirety, and might this possibility have been overlooked by the founders of quantum theory who were not aware of the existence of such a fluctuating background field?
Boyer began by tackling the problems that led to quantum theory being introduced in the first place, such as the blackbody radiation curve and the photoelectric effect. His upstart, neoclassical approach reproduced the known quantum results one by one. This approach is called STOCHASTIC ELECTRODYNMAICS (SED), in contrast to QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS (QED). Indeed, Peter Milonni at the Los Alamos National Labroratory in the US noted in a review of the Boyer work that if physicists in 1900 had thought of taking this route, they would probably have been more comfortable with this classical approach than with Max Planck's hypothesis of the quantum. One can only speculate as to the direction that physics would have taken them.
The list of topics successfully analysed using the SED approach, which produce THE SAME RESULTS as when the QED approach is used, has now been extended to include the harmonic oscillator, Casimir and van der Waals forces and the thermal effects of acceleration through the vacuum. Out of this work emerged the reasons for such phenomena as the uncertainty principle, the fluctuating motion of particles, the existence of van der Waals forces even at zero temperature, and so forth, all show to be due to the influence of the unceasing activity of the random background fields.
There are also some notable gaps in the development of SED; for example, deriving Schrodinger's equation, as yet turns out to be an intractable problem. Several researchers are confident, however, that this obstacle can be overcome. Until theory as we have come to know it will be entirely replaced by a refurbished classical theory in the near future. But regardless of the final outcome, the successes to date of the SED approach, by its highlighting of the role of background zero-point fluctuations, means that when the final chapter is written on quantum theory, field fluctuations in empty space will be accorded an honoured position.
And now to the biggest question of all, where did the Universe come from? Or, in modern terminology, what started the big bang? Could quantum fluctuations of empty space have something to do with this as well? Edward Tyron of the City University of New York thought so in 1973 when he proposed that our Universe may have originated as a fluctuation of the vacuum on a large scale, as "simply one of those things which happen from time to time". This idea was later refined and updated within the context of inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, who proposed that the universe is created by quantum tunnelling from literally nothing into the something we call the Universe. Although highly speculative, these models indicate that physicists find themselves turning again and again to the void and fluctuations therein for their answers.
Those with a practical bent of mind may be left with yet one more unanswered question. Can you find mundane applications for this emerging Rosetta Stone of physics? Will it be possible to extract electrical energy from the vacuum? Robert Forward at Hughes Research Laboratories in Malibu, California has considered this possibility. Could the engineer of the future specialise in "vacuum engineering" as the Nobel laureate Tsun-Dao Lee has put it? Could the energy crises be solved by harnessing the energies of the zero-point "sea"? After all, the basic form of zero-point energy is highly random and tends to cancel itself out, so if a way could be found to bring order out of chaos, then, because of the highly energetic nature of the vacuum fluctuations, relatively large effects could be produced.
Given our relative ignorance at this point, we must fall back on a quote given by the Soviet science historian Roman Poldolny when contemplating this issue. "It would be just as presumptuous to deny the feasibility of useful application as it would be irresponsible to guarantee such application." Only the future can reveal the ultimate use to which humans will put this remaining fire of the gods, the quantum fluctuations of empty space. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Harold Puthoff is a theoretical physicist at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin in Texas. He specializes in Quantum Electrodynamics.
Here's a link A magazine article by Hal Puthoff
www.earthtech.org/publications/fusion_facts.pdf
www.earthtech.org/publications/spec_sci_tech.pdf
www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm
So, you can see there is more going on in this Universe than meets the eye. If the ZPE exists, and there is nobody claiming that it doesn't, then it is not a wild guess to surmise that light travels in the ZPE and not in our ordinary outside space. In fact, in view of the INSIDE of space perspective, it is obvious that is where it is all happening.
And this is a good place to restate my original thought, all of science should be re-examined to take into account the INSIDE of everything.
Also
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
and yet nowhere in all of this did see any mention of Cosmic Plasmas and/or plasmas.
when i wrote to the Chandra telescope and asked could not the ring of dark matter be caused by Cosmic Plasmas and electric currents? they asked if i could explain my theory in more detail!!! my theory for crying out loud!! it was obvious they had never heard of it or if they had ignored it. but i think they just never heard of it before.
my point being is that, those who are suppose to be in the know,even those that run a multi-million dollar telescope have not heard of Cosmic Plasmas.
for me awhile ago i brought forth the idea that, within each atom lies plasma. and i still think so and it seems the rest perhaps are starting to finding this out. so there findings are not much of surprise to me.
just to add Cosmic Plasma at temps., lower that liquid hydrogen,become a crystal!
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> (from Tommy) PS. Peter Gariaev at the Russiah Academy of Sciences, has this notion of "phantom DNA", He uses a laser to detect the holographic Light fields of a DNA particle, and translates this to RF. It shows up on a screen as a pattern. When they remove the sample, and recalibrate the chamber, they are able to see a clear pattern from the DNA. They attibute this to the ZPE. Don't know yet, if this is true. But if it is...
(from North)
obviously this is not zero point energy. for a point to have no energy the pattern would not show, strictly speaking.
i would think that strictly speaking, Zero means Zero(if not define further your concept of Zero) you should know better.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<hr noshade size="1">
That's reasonable conclusion, but not in this case. This concept of the ZPE has gone far beyond mere speculation. NASA writes:
www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/ipspaper.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">"Zero Point Energy (ZPE) is the term used to describe the random electromagnetic oscillations that are left in a vacuum after all other energy has been removed (ref 13). This can be explained in terms of quantum theory, where there exists energy even in the absolute lowest state of a harmonic oscillator. The lowest state of an electromagnetic oscillation is equal to one-half the Planck constant times the frequency. If all the energy for all the possible frequencies is summed up, the result is an enormous energy density, ranging from 1036 to 1070 Joules/m3. In simplistic terms there is enough energy in a cubic centimeter of the empty vacuum to boil away Earth's oceans. First predicted in 1948, ZPE has been linked to a number of experimental observations. Examples include the Casimir effect (ref 14), Van der Waal forces (ref 15), the Lamb-Retherford Shift (ref 10, p. 427), explanations of the Planck blackbody radiation spectrum (ref 16), the stability of the ground state of the hydrogen atom from radiative collapse (ref 17), and the effect of cavities to inhibit or enhance the spontaneous emission from excited atoms (ref 18).
Regarding the inertia and gravity theories mentioned earlier, they take the perspective that all matter is fundamentally constructed of electrically charged particles and that these particles are constantly interacting with this ZPE background. From this perspective the property of inertia, the resistance to change of a particle's velocity, is described as a high- frequency electromagnetic drag against the Zero Point Fluctuations. Gravity, the attraction between masses, is described as Van der Waals forces between oscillating dipoles, where these dipoles are the charged particles that have been set into oscillation by the ZPE background."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It all started for me with this philosophical question, the answer was quite a surprise. My synchronistic experiences over the years led me to wonder how synchronicity could possibly happen. I assumed right away that it wasn't magic, and I came up with the idea of an INSIDE of space. Since our ordinary physical space dictates that synchronicity is impossible, it there something else going on? I found in the literature many instances of unexplained events, especially one about how an atom can do an atom forever. Atoms are not inert bits of matter, they are Electro Magnetic fields, and fields by definition are doing something. I couldn't accept the textbook explanation that atoms move forever because they can't do anything else. I found other anomalies like virtual particles that pop up and then return to where they came from before Heisenberg uncertanty noticed, I couldn't accept that either, like where did they come from in the first place? Then there are the infinities that are "renormalized" out of the equations, what if the infinities are supposed to be found there? And then one day, it came to me...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
In a message dated 5/31/99 4:39:07 PM, Thommandel writes to the quantum-mind list.
<< ...Which reminds me of a question: Does an electron radiate energy while in its "orbit?" I understand that it does at least enough to create magnetism. I also understand that the electron does not decay and fall into the nucleus because it is locked in its orbit, it can't fall. But that doesn't explain where all this energy is coming from to keep it in orbit whether or not it can fall in the first place. I think that all subatomic particles are fed energy continuously from the INSIDE of space.
tom >>
[Hal Puthoff ]
This is explained in my paper: H. E. Puthoff, "The Ground state of hydrogen as a zero-point-fluctuation-determined state," Phys. Rev. D vol 35, p. 3266, 1987. It is as you say: absorption of energy from the vacuum fluctuations just balances radiation due to acceleration in the orbit. The balance exists (and is stable) only for the Bohr-orbit ground state.
[tom] << So what you are saying is that all radiated energy from atomic particles is balanced by an energy input from the vacuum!? How come this wasn't touted as a great discovery of quantum physics? tom >>
[Hal Puthoff]
Among a certain group of physicists (those interested in the physics of vcuum fluctuations) it is touted. I have provided over 500 reprints. A nice "tout" was presented in the 9 Jul 1987 issue of New Scientist, p. 26, in an article titled "Why atoms don't collapse."
[tom]<< Have you read Laslo's work on the infinite zero point quantum vacuum field? tom>>
[Hal Puthoff]
He has interviewed me at length, arranged for me to address the Gorbachev World Forum on the issue of a new paradigm in physics, and I do have his books. Attached is a recent summary of the "zero-point-energy" www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm work, that covers much more than just the atom collapse issue. It is a paper presented at a NASA conference on "Breakthrough Propulsion Physics."
Best regards,
Hal
Subj: RE: The DIAMONDS children play with...
Date: 6/5/99 1:04:34 AM Central Daylight Time
From: jfirmage@uswebcks.com (Joe Firmage)
To: Thommandel@AOL.COM
I agree that this is a seminal piece of work. The true nature of "energy in Space" (more to the point, the very *definition* of "Space" and "energy") will soon be demonstrated to represent the greatest paradigm shift in physics since Galileo, with similarly staggering philosophical implications.
In the process, the presumed limits of humanity's reach across the Cosmos -- and by unequivocal implication, those of extraterrestrial life -- that have been in place for 90 years will be swept away.
This group will find particularly interesting the first installment in the ISSO's Internet public science education series, to be presented in July 1999. This kickoff for the series will compare and contrast a small, select number of complementary physics models that I believe are the harbingers of the sweeping scientific revolutions we're about to witness. Dr. Puthoff's analysis is one those that will be featured.
Joe Firmage
Subj: repy to Diamonds
Date: 6/6/99 4:03:29 PM Central Daylight Time
From: drboylan@jps.net (Richard J. Boylan, Ph.D.)
Joe,
Indeed. And none too soon! Conventional science has had the
unfortunate effect of making certain scientists feel that they are the
center of the universe, knowing all, and in a position to control
every process.
The new, cosmic consciousness-centered scientific paradigm will
offer a more humbling yet simultaneously more exciting persperctive.
And, in the bargain, we will acknowledge our Distant Cousins, who
have actually been around to assist us for many aeons.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Richard Boylan<hr noshade size="1">
<hr noshade size="1">
www.calphysics.org/articles/merc2000b.html
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Swimming in the Zero-Point Sea
An oscillating pendulum, like the one in a grandfather clock but without recovery mechanism, will eventually come to rest. But a microscopic pendulum governed by quantum laws can never come to a complete stop. The famous Heisenberg uncertainty relation forbids removing all the energy from such an oscillator. In fact, there is a well defined minimum average energy, hf/2, where h is Planck’s constant and f is the oscillation frequency.
Propagating electromagnetic fields—such as radio waves, visible light, x rays, gamma rays—behave like oscillators. All of them may be considered waves moving at the speed of light. A specific manner of field oscillation with a characteristic frequency, direction, and polarization state of a propagating field is called a propagating mode (there are also stationary modes). Each mode is like an oscillator and has the same minimum average energy as the quantum pendulum, hf/2. If you sum up all the modes, you get the electromagnetic zero-point field. It is called the zero-point field because it corresponds to the equilibrium radiation left as the temperature goes to absolute zero (T=0). It is the lowest energy state, but, in fact, the zero-point field contains a vast amount of energy. All the light we see and radio waves we pick up are like tiny ripples atop the vast electromagnetic zero-point radiation field. You could say that we spend our lives surfing on top of a zero-point sea, experiencing the waves on the surface while oblivious to the vast depths below. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Corraboration
www.calphysics.org/articles/wesson.pdf
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">In recent years, it has been suggested that the electromagnetic zero-point field (zpf) is not merely an artefact of quantum mechanics, but a real entity with major implications for gravity, astrophysics and technology. This view is shared by a number of researchers, including Boyer (1980), McCrea (1986), Putho® (1987) and Rueda and Haisch (1998a). The present work is a report on research into the zpf during the last decade, with recommendations about where investigations should be directed in the future. The theoretical basis for believing in a real zpf is simple. A onedimensional harmonic oscillator has states which can be raised or lowered in units n of ¹h! where ¹h is Planck's constant divided by 2¼ and ! is the frequency. In terms of the momentum operator ^p and the position operator ^q, the hamiltonian (energy) of the system is ^H = (^p2 +!2^q2)=2. The excited
states have energy En = (n+ 1=2) ¹h!, a relation which is known to lead to acceptable results in quantum-mechanical calculations for n ¸ 0. However, if the kinetic energy of the system (or alternatively the temperature) goes to zero, there remains a zero-point energy of ¹h!=2. This, summed over frequencies, represents a zero-point ¯eld with a large energy density.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
kjmaclean.com/ZeroPointEnergy.html#_Toc493648629
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Everything for Nothing
By Dr Hal Puthoff
Classical physics tells us that if we think of an atom as a miniature solar system with electronic planets orbiting a nuclear sun, then it should not exist. The circling electrons SHOULD RADIATE AWAY their energy like microscopic radio antennas and spiral into the nucleus. To resolve this problem, physicists had to introduce a set of mathematical rules, called quantum mechanics, to describe what happens. Quantum theory endows matter and energy with both wave and particle-like characteristics. It also restrains electrons to particular orbits, or energy levels, so they cannot radiate energy unless they jump from one orbit to another.
Measuring the spectral lines of atoms verifies that quantum theory is correct. Atoms appear to emit or absorb packets of light, or photons, with a wavelength that exactly coincides with the difference between its energy levels as predicted by quantum theory. As a result, the majority of physicists are content simply to use quantum rules that describe so accurately what happens in their experiments.
Nevertheless, when we repeat the question: "But why doesn't the electron radiate away its energy?", the answer is: "Well, in quantum theory it JUST DOESN'T". It is at this point that not only the layman but also some physicists begin to feel that someone is not playing fair. Indeed, much of modern physics is based on theories couched in a form that works but they do not answer the fundamental questions of what gravity is, why the Universe is the way it is, or how it got started anyway. Surprisingly, there may be answers to these seemingly unanswerable questions. Perhaps even more surprising, the answers seem to be emerging from empty space, the vacuum, the void.
In fact, according to quantum theory, the vacuum, the space between particles of matter as well as between the stars, is not empty, it is filled with vast amounts of fluctuating energy.
To understand this extraordinary idea, we will have to take a detour into the phenomenon of "fluctuations" with which quantum theory abounds. Fluctuations arise as one of the most fundamental concepts to come out of the mathematics of quantum theory. This is the uncertainty principle enunciated by Werner Heisenberg in 1927, which says that it is impossible to know everything about a system because of what would seem to be inherent fluctuations in the very fabric of nature itself. Indeed, quantum mechanics is a statistical theory that deals with probabilities and it has some profound consequences for our understanding of reality. For instance, we cannot know the position and the momentum of an electron at the same time. If we know its momentum, or energy, accurately, then we can determine its position only probabilistically.
This "fuzziness" of positions described in terms of probability waves gives a measure of the size and shape over which an electronic orbit fluctuates in an atom. It also means that the energy of a particle or system is "fuzzy" and thus there is a slight probability of it changing, or fluctuating, to another value. In fact, a system can actually, by fluctuation, "tunnel" through an energy barrier because there is a small but finite probability of the system existing on the other side of the barrier. I shall discuss later a possible cause for such fluctuation phenomena.
The basic fuzziness of quantum theory means that there are fundamental phenomena which classical physics does not predict. For example, according to classical physics, any simple oscillator, such as a pendulum, when set in motion, comes to rest because of fiction. But quantum theory predicts that such an oscillator would not completely come to rest, but instead, would continue to jiggle randomly about its resting point with a small amount of residual energy, the so-called zero-point energy.
The adjective zero-point denotes that such motion exists even at a temperature of absolute zero where no thermal agitation effects remain. Although we cannot observe the zero-point energy on, say, the pendulum of a grandfather clock because it is so minute, it is nonetheless real. In many physical systems this has important consequences. One example is the presence of a certain amount of "noise" in a microwave receiver that can NEVER be removed, no matter how perfect the technology.
This zero-point energy is the result of the unpredictable random fluctuations of the vacuum energy, as predicted by the uncertainty principle, which is zero in classical theory. In fact, these fluctuations can be intense enough TO CAUSE PARTICLES TO FORM from the vacuum SPONTANEOUSLY, provided they disappear again before violating the uncertainty principle. This temporary formation of "virtual" particles is somewhat akin to the spray that forms near a turbulent waterfall.
Of all the zero-point fluctuation phenomena, the zero-point fluctuations of electromagnetic energy are the most easy to detect. Electromagnetic waves have standing, or travelling modes, that are a bit like the various modes of waves going along a rope that is shaken. Each set of waves has its own characteristic set of nodes and crests. It turns out that even though the zero-point energy in any particular mode of an electromagnetic field is minute (equivalent to half a photon's worth), there are nearly an infinite number of possible modes of propagation, that is frequencies and directions. The zero-point energy ADDED UP OVER ALL POSSIBLE MODES, therefore, is QUITE ENORMOUS. As hard as it is to believe, it is greater than the energy density in the atomic nucleus. And this in all of the so-called "empty" space around us.
Because the zero-point energy of the electromagnetic fields is so large, you might expect to see its effects easily, but this is not the case because its density is very uniform. Just as a vase standing in a true void is not likely to fall over spontaneously, so a vase bombarded UNIFORMLY on all sides by packets of zero-point energy would not do likewise because of the BALANCED CONDITIONS of the uniform bombardment. The only evidence of such a barrage of energy might be minute jiggling of the vase. Such a mechanism is thought to be involved in the quantum JIGGLE of zero-point motions.
There are situations, however, where the uniformity of the electromagnetic zero-point energy is slightly disturbed and this leads to effects you can ACTUALLY MEASURE. One situation is when the zero-point energy perturbs slightly the spectra of lines from transitions between quantum levels in atoms. This perturbation is known as the LAMB SHIFT, named after the American physicist, Willis Lamb. This work carried out in the late 1940's, using techniques developed for wartime radar, showed that the effect of zero-point fluctuations of the electromagnetic field was to jiggle the electrons slightly in their atomic orbits, leading to a shift in frequency of transitions of about 1000 MEGAHERTZ.
Another, also named after its discoverer, is the CASIMIR EFFECT -- which predicts that two metal plates close together ATTRACT EACH OTHER. Consider plates set at a certain distance apart. In the space between the plates, only those vacuum fluctuations for which a whole number of half-waves just spans the distance can exist, just like waves formed by shaking a rope tied at both ends. Outside the plates, the fluctuations can have many more values because there is more space. The number of modes outside the plates, all of which carry energy and momentum, is greater than those inside. This imbalance PUSHES THE PLATES TOGETHER.
_ _
| | | |
| | | |
\\ | | | | //
\\ | | | | //
ZPE ___________\\| | | |//__________ ZPE
Push
//| | | |\\
Push
// | | | | \\
// | | | | \\
| | | |
| | | |
|_| |_|
Metal Plates
The Casimir Effect : An imbalance in the quantum fluctuations of empty space can PUSH two metal plates together
What does this have to do with our basic question of why the electron in a simple hydrogen atom does not radiate as it circles the protons in its lowest-energy orbit? I have considered this point by taking into account what other physicists have learned over the years about the effects of zero-point energy. I discovered that you can consider the electron as continually radiating away its energy as predicted by classical theory, but SIMULTANEOUSLY ABSORBING a COMPENSATING AMOUNT of energy from the ever-present sea of zero-point energy in which the atom is immersed. An equilibrium between these two processes leads to the correct values for the parameters that define the lowest energy, or ground-state orbit (see "Why atoms don't collapse," NEW SCIENTIST, July 1987). Thus there is a DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM in which the zero-point energy stabilizes the electron in a set ground-state orbit. It seems that the very stability of matter itself appears to depend on an underlying sea of electromagnetic zero-point energy.
Gravity as a Long-Range Casimir Force
As well as providing new insights into quantum theory, zero-point fluctuations also give us some insight into gravity. Einstein's general theory of relativity describes gravity well but we still do not know its fundamental nature very well. The theory is basically descriptive without revealing the underlying dynamics for that description. As a result, attempts to unify gravity with the other forces (electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces) or to develop a quantum theory of gravity have foundered again and again on difficulties that can be traced back to a lack of understanding at a fundamental level. To rectify these difficulties, theorists have resorted to ever-increasing levels of mathematical sophistication and abstraction, as in the recent development of supergravity and superstring theories.
The well-known Soviet physicist Andrei Sakharov took a completely different tack to explain such difficulties. He suggested that gravity might not be a fundamental interaction at all, but rather a secondary or RESIDUAL effect associated with other, non-gravitational fields. Gravity might be an effect brought about by changes in the zero-point energy of the vacuum, due to the presence of matter ("A key to understanding gravity", NEW SCIENTIST, April 1981). If correct, you could then consider gravity as a variation on the Casimir theme, in which the pressures of background zero-point energy were again responsible. Although Sakharov did not develop the concept much further, he did outline certain criteria such a theory would have to meet - for example, predicting the value of the gravitational constant G in terms of the parameters given by zero-point energy theory.
I have studied Sakharov's approach to gravity in detail with some positive results. A particle sitting in the sea of electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations develops a "jitter" motion, or ZITTERBEWEGUNG as German physicists have named it. When there are two or more particles, they are each influenced not only by the fluctuating background field, but also by the fields generated by the other particles, all similarly undergoing Zitterbewegung motion. The coupling between particles due to these fields produces the attractive gravitational force. Gravity can, therefore, be understood as a sort of LONG-RANGE Casimir force.
Because of its electromagnetic underpinning, gravitational theory in this form constitutes what is known as an "already-unified" theory. The main benefit of the new approach is that it helps us to understand characteristics of the way gravity works that were previously unexplained. These include why gravity is so weak; why positive but not negative mass exists; and the fact that gravity cannot be shielded because zero-point fluctuations pervade space and so cannot be shielded.
So, if we have an explanation for non-radiating atomic ground states and for gravity, do we know where the electromagnetic zero-point energy comes from in the first place? There are two schools of thought. One is that it is just simply a part of the boundary conditions of our Universe like, for example, the background radiation left over from the big bang. The other is that the zero-point energy is generated by quantum-fluctuation motion of the charged particles of the latter. I assumed that zero-point fields drive the motion throughout the Universe, in turn, generate the zero-point fields in the form of a self-regenerating feedback cycle, not unlike a cat chasing its own tail.
This self-consistent approach yielded the correct values for the zero-point field. Thus, the zero-point fields observed at any given point are due to random radiation arriving from particles throughout the Universe that are themselves undergoing zero-point motion ("Where does the zero-point energy come from?", NEW SCIENTIST, December 2, 1989). These self-regenerating zero-point fields also produce the familiar properties of quantum theory, such as fluctuation phenomena and the uncertainty principle, for example. This means that it might be possible to model many aspects of quantum theory on the basis of self-consistent, random interactions between particles and the zero-point fluctuation fields they generate.
Although a knowledge of zero-point fields emerged from quantum physics as that subject matured, Timothy Boyer at City College in New York took a contrary view. In the late 1960's, he began asking what would happen if we took classical physics as it was and introduced a background of random, classical fluctuating zero-point fields. Such fields would presumably have originated in the initial random processes of the big bang and then by regeneration as I have just described. Could such an all-classical model reproduce quantum theory in its entirety, and might this possibility have been overlooked by the founders of quantum theory who were not aware of the existence of such a fluctuating background field?
Boyer began by tackling the problems that led to quantum theory being introduced in the first place, such as the blackbody radiation curve and the photoelectric effect. His upstart, neoclassical approach reproduced the known quantum results one by one. This approach is called STOCHASTIC ELECTRODYNMAICS (SED), in contrast to QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS (QED). Indeed, Peter Milonni at the Los Alamos National Labroratory in the US noted in a review of the Boyer work that if physicists in 1900 had thought of taking this route, they would probably have been more comfortable with this classical approach than with Max Planck's hypothesis of the quantum. One can only speculate as to the direction that physics would have taken them.
The list of topics successfully analysed using the SED approach, which produce THE SAME RESULTS as when the QED approach is used, has now been extended to include the harmonic oscillator, Casimir and van der Waals forces and the thermal effects of acceleration through the vacuum. Out of this work emerged the reasons for such phenomena as the uncertainty principle, the fluctuating motion of particles, the existence of van der Waals forces even at zero temperature, and so forth, all show to be due to the influence of the unceasing activity of the random background fields.
There are also some notable gaps in the development of SED; for example, deriving Schrodinger's equation, as yet turns out to be an intractable problem. Several researchers are confident, however, that this obstacle can be overcome. Until theory as we have come to know it will be entirely replaced by a refurbished classical theory in the near future. But regardless of the final outcome, the successes to date of the SED approach, by its highlighting of the role of background zero-point fluctuations, means that when the final chapter is written on quantum theory, field fluctuations in empty space will be accorded an honoured position.
And now to the biggest question of all, where did the Universe come from? Or, in modern terminology, what started the big bang? Could quantum fluctuations of empty space have something to do with this as well? Edward Tyron of the City University of New York thought so in 1973 when he proposed that our Universe may have originated as a fluctuation of the vacuum on a large scale, as "simply one of those things which happen from time to time". This idea was later refined and updated within the context of inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, who proposed that the universe is created by quantum tunnelling from literally nothing into the something we call the Universe. Although highly speculative, these models indicate that physicists find themselves turning again and again to the void and fluctuations therein for their answers.
Those with a practical bent of mind may be left with yet one more unanswered question. Can you find mundane applications for this emerging Rosetta Stone of physics? Will it be possible to extract electrical energy from the vacuum? Robert Forward at Hughes Research Laboratories in Malibu, California has considered this possibility. Could the engineer of the future specialise in "vacuum engineering" as the Nobel laureate Tsun-Dao Lee has put it? Could the energy crises be solved by harnessing the energies of the zero-point "sea"? After all, the basic form of zero-point energy is highly random and tends to cancel itself out, so if a way could be found to bring order out of chaos, then, because of the highly energetic nature of the vacuum fluctuations, relatively large effects could be produced.
Given our relative ignorance at this point, we must fall back on a quote given by the Soviet science historian Roman Poldolny when contemplating this issue. "It would be just as presumptuous to deny the feasibility of useful application as it would be irresponsible to guarantee such application." Only the future can reveal the ultimate use to which humans will put this remaining fire of the gods, the quantum fluctuations of empty space. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Harold Puthoff is a theoretical physicist at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin in Texas. He specializes in Quantum Electrodynamics.
Here's a link A magazine article by Hal Puthoff
www.earthtech.org/publications/fusion_facts.pdf
www.earthtech.org/publications/spec_sci_tech.pdf
www.fixall.org/Puthoff.htm
So, you can see there is more going on in this Universe than meets the eye. If the ZPE exists, and there is nobody claiming that it doesn't, then it is not a wild guess to surmise that light travels in the ZPE and not in our ordinary outside space. In fact, in view of the INSIDE of space perspective, it is obvious that is where it is all happening.
And this is a good place to restate my original thought, all of science should be re-examined to take into account the INSIDE of everything.
Also
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
and yet nowhere in all of this did see any mention of Cosmic Plasmas and/or plasmas.
when i wrote to the Chandra telescope and asked could not the ring of dark matter be caused by Cosmic Plasmas and electric currents? they asked if i could explain my theory in more detail!!! my theory for crying out loud!! it was obvious they had never heard of it or if they had ignored it. but i think they just never heard of it before.
my point being is that, those who are suppose to be in the know,even those that run a multi-million dollar telescope have not heard of Cosmic Plasmas.
for me awhile ago i brought forth the idea that, within each atom lies plasma. and i still think so and it seems the rest perhaps are starting to finding this out. so there findings are not much of surprise to me.
just to add Cosmic Plasma at temps., lower that liquid hydrogen,become a crystal!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 9 months ago #12400
by north
Tommy
supplemental; also many years ago i read a book by Wilhelm Reich in it he found an energy that he called Orgon energy.
now i just happened to go to his web site(he's dead now but research into his theories continues to this day) the other day, and one experiment they did if i got it right, is that they sterilized a soil sample left it for some time and when they came back they found that it glowed blue, not obviously, i can't remember what they used to show this blue glow but it did. it showed this Orgon energy or life energy, the point is that this energy is always there!! the ghost DNA? DNA is imprinted on this energy? maybe, just a thought.
Replied by north on topic Reply from
Tommy
supplemental; also many years ago i read a book by Wilhelm Reich in it he found an energy that he called Orgon energy.
now i just happened to go to his web site(he's dead now but research into his theories continues to this day) the other day, and one experiment they did if i got it right, is that they sterilized a soil sample left it for some time and when they came back they found that it glowed blue, not obviously, i can't remember what they used to show this blue glow but it did. it showed this Orgon energy or life energy, the point is that this energy is always there!! the ghost DNA? DNA is imprinted on this energy? maybe, just a thought.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
19 years 9 months ago #12316
by north
Tommy
supplement2; also, if you go to www.infinite-energy.com some where there you should find reference to Dr.Paulo & Alexandra Correa's works and there, they work with this, i think Orgon energy,(i have their CD, the title is, "From Pulsed Plasma Power to The Aether Motor" and this energy, glows blue!!!
Replied by north on topic Reply from
Tommy
supplement2; also, if you go to www.infinite-energy.com some where there you should find reference to Dr.Paulo & Alexandra Correa's works and there, they work with this, i think Orgon energy,(i have their CD, the title is, "From Pulsed Plasma Power to The Aether Motor" and this energy, glows blue!!!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.357 seconds