Thursday, August 25, 2011

Physics Issues, that raise eyebrows…

Physics Issues, that raise eyebrows…

By Russ Otter
August 2011

There is a broad and engaging article on "Existentialism (July 23-29) in New Scientist Magazine. It is a well put together series of articles. However, I would like to make a few points, that seem to elude conversation, almost as if we have assumed what we really cannot know to be true, save intuition.

I want to identify in the next few items below some physics issues that could use some further review and commitment too, as we look for the Holy Grail of Physics… Knowledge that will propel us into a future whereby we are enabled to treat each other much better. These issues are often by passed, but are important to move closer to the truth of existence.

Number 1 Issue: In an article: [Ref[1] Alan Guth, makes a statement that is brilliant:

Paraphrasing: "Maybe Something is Nothing." This is the balance of the Cosmos, which will continue to stand the test of time, but never find its final proof, as Infinity will always curtail that reality. Please additionally read my article “Everything is Nothing and Nothing is Everything”, as in truth, the Big Bang Universe is no more than a mere spec in the scheme of space and time, even smaller than a planck’s smallest known size. Just as “Entanglement” and “Superposition’s” trump all Space and Time, and the Classical Physics hails as ultimate truth. Ref [2]

Number 2 Issue: Note: Most writers, and thinkers involved with physics or philosophy, tend to discount, or assume that "Time and Space" were somehow "None-Existent" before the Big Bang. That seems a novel or naive perspective, as no one really knows, coupled with an implicit fact, that “Infinity” by definition has no beginning or no end. I personally sense Time and Space to have been the whipping boys and girls of assumptive physics for far too long, such as assuming space and time curve, and so on. Only relative to mass does Space or its particles move or so-called curve, as anything so-called curves, relative to gravity. NOTE: From this assumption we have created all forms of novel thinking, such as time travel “Back to the Past”. Good Luck on that assumption from a sentient perspective.

Number 3 Issue: Inflation, is assumed to have happened, all but justified because it fits our needs to understand the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background), etc. But just as Alan Guth poignantly pointed out "Perhaps something is nothing". So perhaps Entanglement, which violates Time and Space and the Speed of Light, was the beginning trigger, not simply a so-called singularity? It is a question worth examination.

Number 4 Issue: Gravity is always called the weakest force, relative to its counter-parts. Gravity is Relative or in other words always variable dependent upon its environment. For instance: Gravity Trumps all forces at the realm of a Black Hole, but acts like near massless quarks, next to one another in a micro environment, and is no-doubt impacted by other dark energy and dark matter along with its other 3 forces at a quantum level. Therefore gravity at the quantum level is weak, but not non-existent. So the 4 forces we know of are unified, as they are relative to the environment they reside in, therefore electrons do not eventually collapse into the nuclei.

However, I do not believe that Classical Physics and Quantum Physics are unified, only the four-forces. Please review my own personal Blog on this subject: Ref [2] @ this site: “Everything is Nothing and Nothing is Everything”, or also Search for “Russ Otter” to find the article and others. This prime article is: "Everything is Nothing and Nothing is Everything." The thoughts I have in this article is why Alan Guth a cosmologist from MIT, really caught my eye in an article: Ref [1]

Number 5 Issue: Smart Energy Now: This is part of another article I have written at the website:, titled: “Our Universe, Science and Energy Potentials in Review”. Please look for the section called “Smart Energy Now.” This is the greatest potential for the human race to build unity, that I can currently envision. This article in brief explores the development of “Continuous Motion”, not “Perpetual Motion”, as all things atrophy, using our natural forces: Electrostatics, Gravity and Magnetism, versus the need for fossil fuels. This is the area I have several working models in mind, and would like to work with a physicist, with the mathematical language of science to optimize its development. This is implicitly doable, but most physicists will evoke the 2 law of thermodynamics to derail the effort. Make no mistake this is an area the world is headed towards, as even the 2 law is not sacrosanct, and uses variables that are myopic. See Ref [3] for some further thoughts about this issue:

Russ Otter

NOTE: I am looking to engage anyone on any of these issues, and better yet work with you to advance the knowledge related to any of these subjects…
Ref [1] Comment by: Alan Guth, Cosmologist @ MIT, Magazine Article: pg: 28 “Why is there something rather than nothing?, July 23-29, New Scientist.

Ref [2] Author: Russ Otter, Title: “Everything is Nothing and Nothing is Everything”

Ref [3] Author: J. Miguel Rubin, Article: The Long Arm of the Second Law”, Magazine: Scientific American, October 2008, Pgs: 63-67

No comments:

Post a Comment