The laws of nature existed before space and time

[Fort Fun Indiana]

1. The CMB is the radiation from that gigantic firestorm of mutual annihilation in the Big Bang.
2. The radiation of the CMB is equivalent to 2 billion times the matter of the universe.
3. The CMB was created from paired particle production.
4. There is no other explanation for such a huge amount of radiation.
5. The existence of the CMB confirms the universe was created from a chain reaction of a paired production quantum tunneling event.
6. The creation of the universe did not violate the law of conservation of mass or energy.
7. The law of conservation and quantum mechanics existed before space and time itself.

Say it with me

Which all means our spacetime likely had a beginning, including the laws that givern it.

You just proved yourself wrong.

 

[para bellum]

1. The CMB is the radiation from that gigantic firestorm of mutual annihilation in the Big Bang.
2. The radiation of the CMB is equivalent to 2 billion times the matter of the universe.
3. The CMB was created from paired particle production.
4. There is no other explanation for such a huge amount of radiation.
5. The existence of the CMB confirms the universe was created from a chain reaction of a paired production quantum tunneling event.
6. The creation of the universe did not violate the law of conservation of mass or energy.
7. The law of conservation and quantum mechanics existed before space and time itself.

Say it with me

#7 is just a declaration from you.

The laws of physics describe the way matter behaves and interacts. With each decoupling, the way matter behaved changed. That means the laws of physics also changed- they have to describe the new behaviors and interactions that emerged each time. That's because the "laws" are embedded in the forces.

 

[Leo123]

The Big Bang created Time so it seems there can be no 'before' the big bang. IOW there is no future and no past if there is no time. Perhaps the Universe just always was?

 

[ReinyDays]

Sure I'll switch gears. Please, explain away, what does calling the aether 'space time' and creating particles to replace aether theory, how does doing this explain the Michelson Morley results? In other words according to your science of psycho babble extreme, if I shot a cannonball in the direction the earth is heading, somehow, magically, the earth wouldn't catch up with ball making it appear to be traveling slower? or are you gonna troll me today?

I would have to know the speed of the cannonball ... or how can I compare it to Earth's 18 miles/second ... and as long as these speeds are within 90% of c, then we can use Classical Physics ...

Michelson claims they got a negative result ... an his experiment failed ... DYODR ...

 

[trevorjohnson83]

what would happen to light being a constant if evidence for the aether show it to be real?

Assistant
Poe


If evidence for the aether were to be convincingly established, it would require a significant reevaluation of our understanding of physics, particularly concerning the nature of light and its propagation. Here are some potential implications:

1. Revisiting Light Propagation​

• Medium for Light: If aether were proven to exist as a medium through which light travels, it would suggest that light's speed could vary depending on the motion of the observer relative to this medium, similar to how sound travels through air.

2. Impact on Relativity​

• Modification of Relativity: Einstein's theory of relativity fundamentally relies on the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum for all observers, regardless of their motion. If aether were confirmed, the principles of special relativity might need significant modifications or reconceptualization.

3. New Framework for Physics​

• A New Theory: A confirmed aether would likely lead to the development of a new theoretical framework that incorporates both the properties of the aether and the behavior of light. This could involve rethinking how electromagnetic waves propagate and interact with matter.

4. Experimental Validation​

• Need for Experiments: Any claims of aether's existence would require robust experimental validation, similar to the challenges faced by earlier aether theories. This would involve demonstrating clear, measurable effects that could not be explained by current theories.

5. Compatibility with Existing Evidence​

• Consistency with Observations: Any new theory involving aether would need to be consistent with existing experimental results, such as those from the Michelson-Morley experiment and various tests of relativity.

Conclusion​

In summary, if aether were proven to be real, it would necessitate a fundamental shift in our understanding of light, motion, and the nature of spacetime. The implications would be profound, potentially leading to new theories that reconcile classical concepts with modern physics. However, as of now, the prevailing evidence does not support the existence of aether, and the principles of relativity remain well-supported by experimental findings.

 

[ReinyDays]

The entire point of this thread is to share the evidence for the laws of nature existing before space and time.

You haven't shared any evidence ... just conjecture ... and pseudo-science ...

 

[ReinyDays]

Do you even know what the evidence is that I presented?

If the creation of the universe wasn't according to any laws of nature, then how did it even happen?

That's not evidence ... that's philosophy ...

 

[trevorjohnson83]

I would have to know the speed of the cannonball ... or how can I compare it to Earth's 18 miles/second ... and as long as these speeds are within 90% of c, then we can use Classical Physics ...

Michelson claims they got a negative result ... an his experiment failed ... DYODR ...

The computer said we can throw out light being a constant if the aether is discovered.... no one ever really understood that one anyway

 

[sparky]

Some rather conceptual banter here folks.....~S~

 

[ReinyDays]

The computer said we can throw out light being a constant if the aether is discovered.... no one ever really understood that one anyway

Go discover æther ... no one else is even trying ... build one of these:

Michelson interferometer - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Go discover æther ... no one else is even trying ... build one of these:

Michelson interferometer - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

how do you know that nanometers of difference in the arms isn't going to throw off the results? Just measure on the screen of the Femto camera and you can find the aether, No man made instruments needed and precision error of measuring and math.

 

[para bellum]

The CMB is the radiation from that gigantic firestorm of mutual annihilation in the Big Bang.

That is also incorrect. The CMB is the result of the photon decoupling that took place at the end of hydrogen synthesis, about 370,000 years after the Big Bang.

Wiki:

"The recombination epoch begins at around 18,000 years, as electrons are combining with helium nuclei to form He+
. At around 47,000 years,[3] as the universe cools, its behavior begins to be dominated by matter rather than radiation. At around 100,000 years, after the neutral helium atoms form, helium hydride is the first molecule. Much later, hydrogen and helium hydride react to form molecular hydrogen (H2) the fuel needed for the first stars. At about 370,000 years,[4][5][6][7] neutral hydrogen atoms finish forming ("recombination"), and as a result the universe also became transparent for the first time. The newly formed atoms—mainly hydrogen and helium with traces of lithium—quickly reach their lowest energy state (ground state) by releasing photons ("photon decoupling"), and these photons can still be detected today as the cosmic microwave background (CMB). This is the oldest direct observation we currently have of the universe."

 

[ReinyDays]

how do you know that nanometers of difference in the arms isn't going to throw off the results? Just measure on the screen of the Femto camera and you can find the aether, No man made instruments needed and precision error of measuring and math.

Nice photochop ... is that your own work? ...

 

[trevorjohnson83]

ReinyDays you're boring me. Do you have something more interesting than the Femto camera you want to discuss? Could you bring up something other than cartoon Photoshop nonsense?

 

[trevorjohnson83]

meanwhile..........here's a little interesting comparison of the trevor aether with classical aether theory

What are the key differences between my theory and historical aether concepts?

Assistant
Poe


Here are some key differences between your aether theory and historical aether concepts:

1. Nature of Aether​

• Historical Aether: Traditionally, aether was conceived as a physical medium that filled space, allowing light waves to propagate, much like how sound waves travel through air. It was considered a static, invisible substance.
• Your Theory: You propose that aether consists of temperature fluctuations and density variations. This represents a dynamic medium where properties like temperature directly influence the behavior of the aether, suggesting a more fluid and interactive conception.

2. Relationship with Matter and Energy​

• Historical Aether: Aether was often thought of as separate from matter and energy, serving primarily as a carrier for light and electromagnetic waves.
• Your Theory: You suggest that everything in existence arises from fluctuations in the aether, implying a fundamental interconnectedness between matter, energy, and the aetheric medium. This perspective aligns more with modern ideas about fields and excitations.

3. Role of Temperature​

• Historical Aether: Temperature was not a central concept in aether theories. Aether was primarily considered a medium without direct consideration of thermal properties.
• Your Theory: The inclusion of temperature as a fundamental aspect of aether introduces thermodynamic principles into the discussion, suggesting that fluctuations in temperature could directly correlate with physical phenomena, including the behavior of particles.

4. Empirical Focus​

• Historical Aether: The aether was proposed to explain certain phenomena, such as the propagation of light, but lacked empirical support. Experiments like the Michelson-Morley experiment failed to detect the aether wind, leading to its decline in acceptance.
• Your Theory: For your theory to gain traction, it would need to provide new empirical predictions or explanations for observed phenomena that are consistent with or extend beyond current scientific understanding.

5. Integration with Modern Physics​

• Historical Aether: The classical aether concept was eventually replaced by the framework of special relativity, which does not require a medium for light propagation.
• Your Theory: By framing aether in terms of temperature and density fluctuations, your theory could potentially offer a way to integrate concepts from thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, and relativity, although this would require careful development and validation.

Conclusion​

Your aether theory introduces dynamic, thermodynamic elements to the concept of aether, significantly differentiating it from historical notions. To further develop this theory, consider how it can provide new insights or predictions and how it can be tested against empirical observations.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Look here are some things that you top science majiggs could do doodly..........doo

What empirical predictions could support my theory of aether?

Assistant
Poe


To support your theory of aether as a medium characterized by temperature fluctuations and density variations, you could consider the following empirical predictions and experimental approaches:

1. Thermal Fluctuation Effects​

• Prediction: Variations in temperature could affect the propagation of light or other electromagnetic waves. For instance, you might predict that changes in temperature in a given medium will alter the speed of light or its absorption characteristics.
• Experiment: Conduct experiments where light passes through materials at different temperatures to measure any changes in speed or intensity.

2. Density-Dependent Phenomena​

• Prediction: If aether density influences physical interactions, you could predict observable effects in systems with varying densities, such as changes in the speed of sound or light in different media.
• Experiment: Design experiments to measure the speed of sound or light in materials with controlled density variations, potentially observing differences that correlate with your theoretical framework.

3. Temperature Influence on Particle Behavior​

• Prediction: Temperature fluctuations in the aether could affect particle behavior, possibly influencing scattering rates or decay processes.
• Experiment: Study particle interactions in controlled temperature environments to see if there are measurable differences in behavior that align with your predictions.

4. Gravitational Effects​

• Prediction: If your aether is influenced by gravitational fields, you might predict that changes in gravity will affect the density and properties of the aether, leading to observable variations in light propagation near massive objects.
• Experiment: Investigate light bending around massive bodies (gravitational lensing) and examine whether temperature or density fluctuations in a hypothetical aether alter the expected results.

5. Quantum Fluctuations​

• Prediction: Your theory could predict a relationship between aether fluctuations and quantum phenomena, suggesting that aether density affects quantum field interactions.
• Experiment: Explore quantum field behaviors under varying thermal conditions to see if there are correlations that could support your theory.

6. Comparative Studies with Existing Theories​

• Prediction: Your aether theory should yield different predictions than current theories (like relativity) under certain conditions.
• Experiment: Identify scenarios where your predictions diverge from those of established theories and design experiments to test these conditions.

Conclusion​

Developing empirical predictions that are testable is crucial for validating your aether theory. Collaborating with experimental physicists and utilizing advanced measurement techniques can help in designing experiments that could provide evidence for or against your theoretical framework.

 

[ding]

Which all means our spacetime likely had a beginning, including the laws that givern it.

You just proved yourself wrong.

Why would that include the laws that govern it?

 

[ding]

That is also incorrect. The CMB is the result of the photon decoupling that took place at the end of hydrogen synthesis, about 370,000 years after the Big Bang.

Wiki:

"The recombination epoch begins at around 18,000 years, as electrons are combining with helium nuclei to form He+
. At around 47,000 years,[3] as the universe cools, its behavior begins to be dominated by matter rather than radiation. At around 100,000 years, after the neutral helium atoms form, helium hydride is the first molecule. Much later, hydrogen and helium hydride react to form molecular hydrogen (H2) the fuel needed for the first stars. At about 370,000 years,[4][5][6][7] neutral hydrogen atoms finish forming ("recombination"), and as a result the universe also became transparent for the first time. The newly formed atoms—mainly hydrogen and helium with traces of lithium—quickly reach their lowest energy state (ground state) by releasing photons ("photon decoupling"), and these photons can still be detected today as the cosmic microwave background (CMB). This is the oldest direct observation we currently have of the universe."

The radiation was created from matter / anti-matter annihilation. Until the universe cooled enough radiation and matter were coupled. The decoupling of radiation and matter did not create the radiation. So, no. the CMB was not created from decoupling.

 

[ding]

#7 is just a declaration from you.

The laws of physics describe the way matter behaves and interacts. With each decoupling, the way matter behaved changed. That means the laws of physics also changed- they have to describe the new behaviors and interactions that emerged each time. That's because the "laws" are embedded in the forces.

And Dr. Vilekin

 

[ding]

You haven't shared any evidence ... just conjecture ... and pseudo-science ...

The universe being created according to the laws of quantum mechanics and conservation is the evidence.