Posted on 12/13/2020 11:55:02 AM PST by grey_whiskers
Embrace the flow, says a duo of mechanical engineers at North Carolina State University—the flow of energy, that is. The mantra you might normally hear from your yoga instructor could be an entirely new way of looking at the universe.
🌌The universe is badass. Let's explore it together.
The two theorists, Larry Silverberg and Jeffrey Eischen, suggest that fragments of energy, rather than waves or particles, may be the fundamental building blocks of the universe.
The bedrock of their theory is the foundational idea that energy is always flowing through space and time. The authors suggest thinking of energy as lines that enter and exit a region of space, never crossing each other, and with no beginning or end point.
This content is imported from {embed-name}. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.
(Excerpt) Read more at popularmechanics.com ...
*PING* to a weird science-y thing. Who runs the Electric Universe Pinglist please, this is right up their alley.
Author is Tim Childers, not Tim Collins. PINGING ADMIN MOD TO CORRECT, PLEASE?
No matter what weird thing they find out I am confident in my knowledge that all of this world and any other is held together by the Word of His power (Hebrews 1:3).
Bfl
Okay, so how, why, and where does this energy appear from? Guess I don’t understand the definition of energy. BTW, is gravity an energy or a separate force in itself? Wish I had studied physics.
I am a physicist. This is HS but as a scientist I cannot call someone else’s theory BS even if it is without an experimental or theoretical refutation. Therefore cold fusion and climate change stand because you can’t prove them wrong even though they are BS.
“New Theory Casually Upends Space and Time”
Hypothesis ...
!!AMEN!!
“Working from the idea of a universe of flowing energy lines, we looked for a single building block for the flowing energy,” Silverberg, a professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, writes in The Conversation. “If we could find and define such a thing, we hoped we could use it to accurately make predictions about the universe at the largest and tiniest scales.”
What’s the Matter?
In the 4th century B.C., the ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, formulated the idea that the universe was composed of five building blocks of matter: earth, water, air, fire, and the heavenly aether. This idea persisted for more than 2,000 years, and plagued the countless alchemists who tried to strike it rich by transmuting earth into gold.
Coincidentally, it was also an alchemist who unseated the ideas of Aristotle from their throne. Robert Boyle, the famed “father” of chemistry, abandoned the classic elements in favor of the idea that all matter was composed of particles. This revolutionary idea led to one of the most explosive periods in the history of science, including Sir Isaac Newton’s formulation of classical mechanics.
The particle was now the king of the scientific universe, and it would reign for another 150 years until Scottish scientist James Clerk Maxwell introduced electromagnetic waves to the equation.
Together, particles and waves became the known building blocks of all matter. Particles served as the individual bricks, as matter existing at a single point in space. Electromagnetic waves made up the mortar holding it all together, as energy dissipating everywhere in space as waves.
Separating matter into both particles and waves made predictions easier for physicists because they could easily describe the behavior of particles and waves. But nothing comes easy in physics, and the theory was quickly flipped on its head.
Early in the 20th century, the famous double-slit experiment showed that particles and waves weren’t nearly as distinct as we previously thought. The experiment revealed that particles, at times, could act like waves, and light could sometimes act like particles.
Around the same time minds were exploding over the wave-particle duality of matter, Albert Einstein was formulating his theory of general relativity, which describes how warping the fabric of space and time causes gravity. Together, the discoveries shaped the course of modern physics, but the connections between the two phenomena remain unclear.
The Fragment of Energy
“Using newer mathematical tools, my colleague and I have demonstrated a new theory that may accurately describe the universe. Instead of basing the theory on the warping of space and time, we considered that there could be a building block that is more fundamental than the particle and the wave,” Silverberg writes.
He and Eischen looked for a solution that had features of both particles and waves. They wanted to find a building block that was both concentrated like a particle and spread out like a wave. Their answer is what they call a fragment of energy.
The fragment of energy is a lot like stars in a distant galaxy. From afar, a galaxy looks like a bright glow of light radiating outwards. But on closer inspection, astronomers can resolve individual stars making up the galaxy. In the same sense, the fragment of energy represents a concentration of energy that flows and dissipates outward, away from the center.
With their new building block, the scientists formulated a new set of equations to solve physics problems. They tested their theory on two problems solved by Einstein more than a century ago.
Einstein’s theory of general relativity was confirmed by two observations made by astronomers. The first was a tiny annual shift in the orbit of Mercury. Einstein accurately predicted that the curvature of spacetime caused by the mass of the sun would cause Mercury’s orbit to wobble over time. The second was the bending of light as it passes across warped space and time near to the sun.
“If our new theory was to have a chance at replacing the particle and the wave with the presumably more fundamental fragment, we would have to be able to solve these problems with our theory, too,” Silverberg writes.
To solve the Mercury problem, Silverberg and Eischen modeled the sun as a massive fragment of energy, with Mercury as a smaller fragment of energy orbiting around it. In the bending of light problem, the sun was modeled identically, but the light was modeled as a massless point traveling at the speed of light (a photon). After calculating the paths of the moving fragments of energy, the researchers got the same answers as Einstein.
The solutions show how effective their new building block can be at modeling the behavior of matter from the micro to macroscopic scale. Although their formulation may not exactly change physics like the discoveries of Maxwell and Einstein, the theory could make the wave-particle duality of matter more intuitive, and give a new way of thinking about the universe.
I am a physicist. This is HS but as a scientist I cannot call someone else’s theory BS even if it is without an experimental or theoretical refutation. Therefore cold fusion and climate change stand because you can’t prove them wrong even though they are BS.
+++++
Well said AJ, well said. Easily worth repeating.
“Therefore cold fusion and climate change stand because you can’t prove them wrong even though they are BS.”
With climate change they keep changing the model. Hardly what would be called settled science.
Fragments of energy; His spoken word; words hurling through space and time.
Just as I was getting comfortable with string and quantum, they throw this at us?
God gives glimpses but not the complete picture.
Gravity isnt really a force, it just feels like one.
Acceleration by thrust, like in a car or F22 or Falcon9, IS a force.
But gravity is just space “flowing” toward matter. If something is blocking you from going with the flow, that blocking feels like a force.
All of space is always flowing toward all the matter in the universe, moderated by 1/distance(squared). If apple A is twice as far away as apple B, the gravitational attraction (flow) is 1/4th as strong.
And gravity “waves” as detected by LIGO from orbiting colliding black holes really are waves in the flow.
Crazy universe this is.
.....
Gravity.
It’s not just a good idea...
It’s the law!
IMHO...
I am a physicist. This is HS but as a scientist I cannot call someone else’s theory BS even if it is without an experimental or theoretical refutation. Therefore cold fusion and climate change stand because you can’t prove them wrong even though they are BS.
+++++
Well said AJ, well said. Easily worth repeating.
...
Agreed...as dumb as the “Punctuated Equilibrium Theory” by Steven J Gould...bottom line is when you don’t understand something, and you can’t explain it, make something up to fill the gap and leave the elephant in the room, God, out of it.
More interesting how can there be anything? Even worse is where would nothing exist?
Since I was just a small tyke I always wondered how something could never end yet if something has an end it must have a limiting barrier which would necessitate another side.
Time for us is a measure we use to regulate our day and seasons but wouldn't time exist whether we measured it or not? How could there be no time? If as we are told the universe once was compressed into a mass smaller than a period on a paper, it still had to occupy a space even if that small, something still had to enclose it. Which means there had to be a space outside the small spec we define as the universe.
Lot of questions with answers that I suspect are unknowable at least in our human domain.
Once again P.M. demonstrates it’s spiral down the moron’s black hole towards the idiocy singularity...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.