Certainly "GPS fits Special Relativity..But Why Not Gravity?"

As I say I believe gravity is a blue shift at a much different level of energy than something like centrifugal force or inertia because e.g. the equations for centrifugal force and gravity are much different and gravity moves masses together and the closer together they move the more gravity they have.

 You might ask what about the Mossbaur effect or GPS. GPS seems to be a relativist's dream superficially. It seems to fit both special and general relativity in an amazing sort of way. While I can say certainly that special relativity is well founded, mass and energy seem to be inequivalent because it's much easier to convert mass to energy than vice versa, and thus a way to claim that gravity and inertia are not necessarily the same thing, as in gravity is more like mass and inertia is more like energy, as I say no experiment by Einstein's method will show any distinction inside the inertial elevator or the gravitational elevator  by the Earth. 

 But if you drop the masses in the inertial elevator or the gravitational elevator and you count the distance between them with time and you also note that at least one frame of reference in the inertial elevator will have the two masses moving in uniform motion, no frame of reference in the gravitational elevator has this ability.

 Just as no inertial frame of reference can transform away the surface of a bucket of rotation of water so it's level, Einstein's idea seems incomplete.

 If we add atomic clocks to the masses as they fall in both the inertial and gravitational elevator we see a related effect, the inertial clocks are unchanging with time at any rate  in this frame of reference but the gravitational clocks are continually changing the speed of the clocks by all inertal frames of reference according to any observer. This is because by the different accelerations of the gravitational field the force acting on each mass by the tide is actually more internal. This is because gravity brings things together so that they're more inside than outside the field like the field of the Earth.

 This about the transformation away of the inertial force in the inertial elevator but at least one frame of motion can be seen easily with an inertial frame reference in uniform motion both for the inertial and the gravitational elevator. 

You might ask since relativity is about all observers why we couldn't use accelerated frames of reference for both elevators and thus transform away any of the motion of masses moving apart in the accelerated inertial or gravitational elevator?

Suppose we have a setup where we have lights lighting up inside of the inertial elevator to tell the outside observer in accelerated motion where those falling masses are. 

 These two masses are moving apart then you have the accelerated frame (if it's going in a positive direction with the motion of the falling masses to give the equivalent measure of the gravitational elevator.)

 But if we try to do the same thing with the gravitational elevator it takes no propulsion or a different amount of force to go with that motion.

 One problem is about how the motion of the accelerated frame near a large mass itself will change its measurement of the other two clocks. 

The accelerated observer to create the equivalent change has to use more force to go against the field differently than with the field in the gravitational field but for the inertial accelerated observer this is not so.

Certainly a different change in the force to achieve this will be needed in the gravitational frame as they labor against the field.

  This corresponds to the changing speed of light by the acceleration of the gravitational field, something relativity denies because the speed of light is no longer absolute and is changing as it's accelerating.

 One idea of the relativists about gravity is that as the light goes upward from the surface of the Earth it's not with force on the light, and there is no work done on the light by the gravity. 

 You can see why Einstein's idea will only work at short distance because with more  distance the speed of light changes and a force is present contrary to what Einstein believed about gravity.

Or consider the spinning bucket of water. The accelerated wave in the bucket can be transformed away but only by a highly artificial method of speeding up and slowing down the observer as they pass over the bucket. 

Gravity actually causes the water in the bucket to have an acceleration like the surface of the oceans of the Earth, but the inertial influence of this thing the bucket is much huger, and this is because of the inequivalence of gravity and inertia. There's a loose equivalence but it can't be made exact like Einstein believed. The world's ocean has a round acceleration but the water of the bucket is a parabola and is the centrifugal force is more huge and they have these distinctions because they aren't the same.

 Yet why does GPS work and seem to fit relatively so well? This would be because Einstein made the correct prediction about the speed of the acceleration of gravity or the GPS or satellites but his prediction was not based on the validity of relativity..

 As I say all masses don't necessarily fall at the same rate, and this was Einstein's relativistic basis he hoped to make predictions with like about GPS.

 This is where general relativity fails, because Einstein used equivalent motion to describe the downward motion of masses by the comical idea that we're accelerating upward at 32 ft per second in equivalent motion. And his prediction as with GPS was where the change in the orbit of Mercury is by the opposite event and one or the other would give way, acceleration changing for Mercury or not changing for masses falling near the Earth and it's not that the masses fall at the same rate as the moon falls at a different rate around the Earth then the Earth around the moon.

 GPS may seem to be a miracle for relativity, but not if the speed of light changes in a gravitational field and the atomic clocks give us a different result in the gravitational or inertial elevators. The special relativistic component of GPS is viable but not to predict the general relativistic events if we predict them based on the relativity of gravity.

 Einstein might have said, What about the equivalent gravitational contraction of the Earth itself as if by the Lorentz contraction of Special Relativity? While GPS may not match relativity, certainly we can say that there's no problem with gravity blueshifting because there's actually a sort of blue shift of the mass with the equivalent Lorentz contraction in Special Relativity, so it may seem they're unified once more and the Earth is not with more room inside than out by the red shift of light. 

But there's still the problem that the clocks will go at different rates than they should and that gravity changes the speed of light.

While Einstein's predictions about gravity are good and he advanced GPS events well, I would hold they're not based on general relativity. Because gravity is not mostly about relativity.

 Even if we say the mass accelerated to near the speed of light in special relativity has the Lorentz contraction, this itself would seem to be like an attraction inside that mass like gravity. If relativity by Einstein's belief can't describe what causes the Lorentz contraction, in truth it wouldn't cause gravity either. But if there's a faster than light field as I say like air for the sound of the train connecting up the light and the Lorentz contraction in SR, this could be used to unify with gravity because if the connection was only at the speed of light, the light couldn't be slowed down in the gravitational field.

Einstein got lots of publicity about both special and general relativity, and his other science contributions are beyond doubt. Anyone who comes up with any kind of criticism for general relativity may be in for a sort of dogma of science. But this may be more from the publishing industry and not from science by what's left of big publishing after the internet. This seems to have been because Einstein began relativity at a time when due to the invention of the Edison audio technology anyone could make a few records and earn lots and lots of money real fast.

 The publishing industry may have been so wild about Einstein so they forgot to look for deeper truths like this about the elevators and atomic clocks in general relativity.

 

I hold that what LIGO has found is the speed of inertia because inertia radiates out and gravity radiates in as I say on pages like this..

Click here for what I consider to be my most up-to-date general page about Gravity relativity and the speed of light..

 

 

Mass Modulation, The EPR, And Low Energy Photons

Here I want to talk about the possibility of a Starship in the future traveling faster than  light. I have believed that the EPR is about a small constellation of the Low Energy Higgs, which are particles predicted by physicists like Einstein and others hoped to use to solve the Uncertainty problem in quantum mechanics and recently found in the laboratory. The unique configuration for each heavy quantum may explain how with the EPR only the two entangled quanta show the influence.

  

 I think these Low Energy Higgs' LEH quanta may be highly important to mass and inertia more than the high energy Higgs' with calculations that Wilczec won the Nobel Prize for (about calculating the mass of the fractional charges in QCD) Even so the LEH  may be external around the heavy quanta and they don't disappear at the lowest energy state.

 So they're inside what I call the radius of action ROA, where the heavy quanta they give mass to have the LEH on the outside. 

There would be problems about the friction with the LEH about gravity and the Earth would fall in to the sun in its orbit or the heavy quanta might stop spinning.

 So externally there are the waves, the waves are external and send the EPR information between the entangled quanta.

Dark matter and dark energy have been tough to find and while just moving around the room shows you the evidence that they're there perhaps the difficulty of finding them using sensors made of heavy quanta maybe really difficult because of the difficulty of finding dark matter and dark energy in general.

 (The waves are external but not the particles because the particles would have problems with friction and the waves would also be there because there's evidence for dark matter and dark energy by acceleration even while the planets move through the waves without resistance. Quantum mechanics predicts that there's a huge amount of energy for the low energy field called the 0 point energy. We don't directly see the energy of these waves because they only exert the force when they reach the snapback of the Radius Of Action (ROA). The low energy waves would act as proxy for the mass and inertia of common quanta. This would be why relativity seems to so well account for the motions of masses and energy only and not anything between them because the phase change would make the low energy waves so much reflect the changes in the masses but not any apparent changes in the waves like dark energy or dark matter.

  Like dark matter and dark energy we find little direct evidence for these waves even while the general evidence is strong. In my hypothesis this is because of a phase change so that while the waves are faster than light they're also much lighter than light and the quanta only resonate with the quanta they're entangled with.)

 Some have proposed that we try to engineer the low energy field to get around Special Relativity, but I would think the field  would be much tougher to engineer because it's tough to get traction on it with a quanta compared to just changing the quanta themselves which are much higher energy and so we might be able to have more chance of modulating the interaction of the quanta with the field.  

 In my scenario the low energy waves themselves are much faster than light because they're lighter than light by Maxwell's method he used to predict the speed of light exactly based on level of the resilience of the field.

And so the external quanta inside the ROA are resonating by way of those waves with other quanta for the EPR. In this event they're resonating like two fans, like crystals  to explain the EPR because of the "code" of the LEH and the scintillation may cause the acceleration of gravity and other cohesive forces. They have the special code for that particular quanta so the change in one always reliably measures the change in the other once measurement is made or vice versa for the other entangled quanta and as Einstein believed about the LEH.

You may say that experiments show there's no way to get underneath the energy of the Uncertainty Principal without collapsing the wave function as Einstein believed. However recent "low energy quantum experiments" show that Einstein was at least partially right. 

A low energy quantum "mouse" is sent by the quantum "cat" and by how the mouse moves we might say if the quantum cat is "alive and doing well" or just on the cushion passed out.. this may uphold Einstein about the nonrelativity of the Uncertainty Principal. Unlike a simple idea like Einstein had this may only be partially a probability since the waves and particles inside the ROA are blended together. Even so as I say on this page it may have value..

Here I want to talk about the possibility of fast travel. It's been thought that basically when you're moving in uniform motion the low energy particles exert no force on you and you find they're equal in every direction. But once you start to accelerate, contrary to relativity, you're actually then feeling the force of the particles more dense ahead of you.

So the question some of us have asked is why the field in uniform motion is unlike  with acceleration. My belief is the information about changes in the momentum of the field is only stored and not absent in uniform motion. To say that inertia causes gravity seems to me like saying uniform motion causes acceleration as Mach and Einstein believed and since this is not true I think relativity is incomplete.

 The interaction between the plus and minus charges that Maxwell used to predict the speed of light exactly would be like the weight and counterweight of an elevator to give the snapback for the speed of light. 

 I think of this like an elevator with the balancing of the weights, and I'm not one of them! Beneath the quantum level the inertia is maintaining that motion forward of the mass with the motion without acceleration. 

This relates to the ancient idea that inertia might be caused by back reaction of the field. Aristotle believe for example that inertia is caused by a back reaction of the air. 

 My belief is that the inertia indeed is caused by the common quanta, baryons mesons and leptons being beneath the quantum level so even though there is potential for friction with the low energy particles or waves externally in uniform motion there's not enough energy to make it out of the quantum well without acceleration. As needed by energy conservation the information about changes in the momentum of the field is stored not absent.

 Energy conservation like a computer may allow both to make the changes and to store them not just storage as relativity seems to tell us.  

When mass starts to accelerate from uniform motion this essentially changes the information about the wavelength of the light interacting with the starship observer and other observers. 

Work is done on the field and so the light matches up with its speed, which it never could do by relativity because first the high speed observers field changes the field around it which then changes the light and the signal has to be faster than light to do this. 

 This is only to say that an observer of sound on a train and the Doppler shift when they change their speed are going to change their interaction with the air around the train causing something like a sort of Lorentz contraction for the train to some degree.

 Certainly we can say that there is no interaction between the sound and the train before the sound reaches the train. 

But we can't say there's no Lorentz contraction and this will be evidence for changes in the field which then gives changes to the light in Special Relativity "or the sound" of the train. 

We can't say there's no field or no air there because changes like the Lorentz contraction that are closely associated with changes in the wavelength of the light before it reaches the observer would only be possible by a faster than light connection. I hold that any change in anything like the information about the wavelength of the light before it reaches to starship is evidence the connection is faster than light.

 I also believe that just because sound is never faster than sound and light is never faster than light, this doesn't mean that sooner or later we may not be able to move the masses faster than light just as we can break the sound barrier. This was also once thought impossible.

Sound couldn't travel at the speed of sound unless there was air there that had some component of the field moving faster than the speed of sound. This is because every body in the universe including every wave or particle has two components one speeding it up and one tending to slow it down. This is like centrifugal and centrifugal force. But if there's a component that tends to speed up any wave it has to be faster than that wave or the wave couldn't propagate at the speed it does. This is related to what Tesla thought and I realized independently later on that the low energy field has a non zero permeability to light, this being related to superluminal effects around the light as it moves.

This is why the evidence about the Lorentz contraction may be important to the extension of relativity. The atmosphere of the air is there and it's individual components at least part of the time are moving faster than the wave.

  True the speed of light matches up but if light is wave it would seem something is waving just like all the other waves we find. The reason we don't directly find the waves is because the information about them is only stored and not absent because in relativity it's below the quantum level in uniform motion.

 People like Bernard Haish who's an astrophysicist at Lockheed Martin in Palo Alto, CA says that 20th century physics seems as silly as Ptolmaic cosmology and is wrong because while all the predictions are viable, it still isn't a true idea. 

And so he says that as you're moving when you go from uniform to accelerated motion, you're actually feeling the force of more particles moving against you as you move forward through the field. This would explain  the Lorentz contraction and why a larger mass moves more slowly with the same force applied than a small mass as Haisch says merely because the larger mass has more quanta in contact with the external field so it resists more and moves more slowly. The Lorentz contraction is the foundation of a lot, as in ALL, of modern physics.

Haisch thinks it's possible someday we might be able to render the interaction of those quanta totally inert.

 And so we could have zero mass, or inertia reducing all the relativistic limits on high speed travel.  We could go faster than light without any kind of resistance to the field. It's basically stopping the interaction with the low energy particles and waves. 

 Here I want to talk about one of my theoretical methods we might use to solve the relativity limits. Basically, this is my idea about the Higgs laser.  With a tube of atoms we send the waves down the tube. They're on the outside of the atoms and inside the radius of action ROA of the quanta and are adhering to that atom. Certainly there are the waves.

The idea is the flow resonates with the LEH by sending the resonance of the energy down that tube to unify and columnate the LEH in the column. And now you've got a sort of monochromatic Higgs' ray. This is the Higgs laser of my own invention Einstein might have dreamed of. 

The ray is used underneath the quantum level as Einstein believed that there might be a low energy particle to get around the Uncertainty Principle. 

And we modulate those "constellations" of the Low Energy Higgs around the ROA so that if attraction by gravity is by way of the low energy photons that are resonating with this quanta, by taking those Higgs' and changing the configuration if we could, then we could basically render it so it doesn't interact with either the inertial field, or the gravitational field.

  Now we've got a massless particle that has mass internally, not externally. 

 Consider the inner mass of the electron which by the evidence about deep inelastic scattering experiments and renornalization is much larger inside and yet its external mass is small, that is, it's inert about the influence of the low energy photons on the outside.

You can imagine that we couldn't go in a high speed field for high speed travel without changing the electrical, mechanical or chemical properties of the atoms that we evolved with our physiology.

 We couldn't do that in the starship, because inertia doesn't shield metal plates like by centrifugal force, and so just wraps around the heavy quanta and goes inside the starship, this would be changing our physiology too much by ionization. 

If we could render the atoms and molecules of our bodies massless, this would change our physiology too much also.

So for this an even a cooler idea perhaps, is is to use the same quanta, but we're moving them close together.

The heavy quanta we find and make into a shield around the front of the ship and we induce a Higgs current at right angles with the arch of the shield with the starship and we induce that field of the Higgs so we're inducing it either by the laser or some electromagnetic method of inducing the current (another possibility I consider is if the Higgs current might be induced by entanglement of the quanta of the shield especially with reduced distance). It seems possible we might change the quanta of the machine themselves to resonate best with Higgs' currents like the LEH. So the LEH are flowing here from quanta to quanta around the shield.

There have been some who attempted the idea of a superconducting shield around the outside of a starship to have a bubble inside the ship and travel at higher speeds. I believe, due to the nature of events like entanglement this won't work, because even with the huge density of a pulsar if there were even a small bit of shielding, the pulsar would explode. A Higgs' current may be of a special type not found in more common physics and mostly may only resonate at a special energy level (and "code") that's not about superconductivity. After all gravity goes right through the BEC Bose Einstein Condensate a type of "dense superfluid". 

If we change the resonance of the LEH of each quantum and atom of the shield and then send a Higgs' current of the right type across the interstices of the atoms to form a more inert area the low energy photons can't go through, this may allow us to send the starship faster without relativistic mass gain or time dilation. This is not the same as a superconducting shield  because it uses the Higgs' modulated quanta and the special Higgs' current by way of the Higgs' laser or other way to make the LEH current.

If it's possible, I'd say that if we could actually reduce all the interactions with the external waves at the right frequencies, we change those frequencies and we've got a shield for the whole Starship an inside that bubble and you can actually travel faster than light or at high speed.

 Haisch also believes that we might be able to use the impulsive properties of the low energy photonic field, the virtual particles, to accelerate masses to any speed we want without much energy cost. While I think these methods may have possible value e.g for reducing or increasing gravity, for changing chemistry and new states of matter or for higher speed travel at lower cost by way of rendering the field inactive, it seems implausible to generate more force out of the snapback of the spin of the quanta since there is only a small amount of energy there, not unlimited. 

I think we might reduce the cost of interaction of the field but this wouldn't be unlimited power. (Even so the idea of solitons might allow us at any rate extract more of the energy of the mass of quanta, perhaps more efficiently than fission or fusion. Nuclear reactions have efficiency of only about 5%.)

At any rate if the low energy Higgs' are moving faster than light themselves, the relativistic limit might be gotten around by starting a Higgs' current around each heavy quanta and linking it from atom to atom.. this means that while the Higgs' laser maybe itself be short range in the sense that it only connects up the quanta in the tube, in essence as Einstein was concerned about the speed of the collapse of the wave function this may be true that it's continually going underneath the Uncertainty Principle and thus the Higgs' current itself would be faster than the speed of light limit. 

 This may be how and why Chaou's tunneling experiments showed that tunneling was faster than light by about 1.3 times. This might be expected if the fractional charges are about a third lighter on average than one or minus one and so are that much faster than light.

As I say elsewhere while Chaou believed this is not violating relativity because it trims off the faster than light connection before it reaches the sensor, my belief is that relativity tells us there's nothing there to be trimmed. 

 Refinements on Chaou's experiments I propose include measuring the speed on limbs of the spinning quanta one faster than light perhaps and the other slower, or moving the sensors in close to the nuclei where the tunneling is taking place in order to give a higher percentage of the time between the sensor and the source of the wave motion ect.

Einstein believed faster than light motion was possible just that whatever was going at faster than light speed had to always be continuing at that speed. 

I believe that we can measure the speed of events like the collapse of the wave function inside or outside the quanta like the waves of the EPR being faster than light and only when they combine into the quanta is the limit by relativity reached.

 Even while the interaction of these waves with the quanta is about how they may keep the classical electromagnetic field lines from a bunching up or kinking, and how they are generally only probabilistically seen because their level of interaction with the quanta is only cumulative, these interactions are not impossible to find. But the reason the EPR has been so tough to definitely prove or disprove would be because while Einstein was basically wrong that no information could get through from the faster than light motion of the waves, most of the information is limited by relativity and the quanta.

 I believe that there may be a conservation law, you can only have an uneven number of Higgs going in and out of the ROA of heavy quanta on the outside, because you have an uneven number of Higgs for it to be attractive like through gravity.

  And it's like a conservation law, like the odd number of forces attract like on the periodic table, the odd number nucleons have different resonance and are heavier than the even number ones.

 So I think it's possible there's a conservation law. And it's also possible that we'll never be able to do this even with the LEH around the heavy quantum, because there will be something like that, some kind of way that we can't do this. I think it's  possible and I don't discount the possibility of this. If you're doing experimental physics you're welcome to do more research.

Haisch believes somehow this idea might allow physics like 0 mass quanta but he had no idea how, and he thought this may be possible in several centuries. These ideas of mine might be a possible way of improving this type of physics in years if the Higgs's laser becomes viable.

One thing we could find out about this is with what I call the relativistic wind tunnel RWT. With the RWT we can test this idea. Basically, we take the light streaming past the small lab starship or other mass. We try to observe something like the Lorentz contraction which has never been proven in the lab even while the rest of relativity has always been proven (except for acceleration, but as I believe, that isn't relativity).

 Einstein said in his proof of relativity it was the same if moving the magnet or the wire, either one has relative motion to make the current, the motion is relative.

So we assume that if we move that low energy field past the small mass in our lab, we can measure relativistic effects quite well, including the possibility of taking the Higgs laser and testing it to see if we could actually go faster than that speed. 

 One other advantage of this idea that the low energy field is flowing past the mass is that it might cause gravity and more gravity if we want it like on the moon or have low gravity, they're having to be stressed because of low gravity. Good for elevators.

Sungean says that in special relativity, we move through the field.. while with gravity, the field moves through us. Even so except for the speed of light changing with gravity (a problem for the relativity of gravity) this is true for both gravity and inertia. This may mean we can try to create gravity in the RWT and perhaps even antigravity. 

You may ask where is this low energy field?

I think it may be dark energy for centrifugal force and dark matter for centripetal force. 

Just moving around the room shows the influence of the force. An entire generation of mathematical physicists devoted themselves to the information that the field exists. Einstein spent a lot of time thinking about the motion of masses relative to each other, and ignoring work done on the field. 

  I think gravity or mass are more important than energy in the energy energy equivalence of special relativity. Originally it was believed that most natural state for matter to be was at rest on the surface of the earth. Newton then improved this supposedly by saying that being at rest or in motion is the most natural way right, that's better.. Einstein them went on to say that being in high speed motion like with energy is the most natural way. 

 But I think we should return to saying that being at rest is more natural because work is being done on the field by the cohesive forces that hold all the quanta and masses in the universe together. 

 To me, like time mass is more important than energy or the energy energy equivalence (The mass augment of special relativity I believe is gotten mostly for motion through the field and that's energy of motion not mass) of relativity. Motion through space can be reversed but we don't forget the past and remember the future. We're trapped here in time and we can't travel around it like we can in space.

Mass is internal because you can't change your mass just by moving it around like you can weight.

I think space is external to the quanta but time is more essential. 

Time order wasn't considered to be that important by Einstein. If two quanta are about to have radioactivity, and if the observer moves past at high speed like near the speed of light, an observer on one side would say the events in time are reversed from the events seen from the observer moving towards the quanta from the other side. This was relating to the idea of private time in special relativity. Because of the slow speed of light relative to the huge distance between us and even a star like Alpha Centauri, there is no definite before or after in relativity because that light is the only way to connect them up and they're really not connected. 

 But if we look at the unification of space and time in Special relativity, if moving backwards through space the observer should move backwards your time and this isn't true.

 In Special Relativity the speed of the play back of the movie of the distant observer is changed but not the events themselves as we would expect if relativity is complete. 

 As I speak about what I call the weight fields and the mass fields, since you can change your weight at will by going around the Earth or Wegovy!..But you can't change your mass, then the mass fields for the internal conservation of energy are more important, like a small clock that keeps the time. 

This is internal time and it's actually separate from the external influence of special relativity.

 So when the two quanta have the time events the internal underlying stability of the physics has a form where you can't completely magically transform away the order of the events in time. 

 There's no way to know when the two quanta will decay. If the high speed observer moves in the ratio of the two events is changed, so there is an underlying event and while part of it can be transformed away, it really is with a definite time order. This reminds me of a bucket of spinning water where the round edge of the water can't be transformed away by choosing the right frame of motion.

Or, consider a mass being dropped on an airplane. By relativity either the observer on the plane is as valid to say the mass drops straight down yet the observer from the Earth would say that it's moving in a parabolic arc like from right to left. 

But if the Earth's perspective is more valid than say the moons which moves around the Earth and they don't fall at equal rates around each other, the Earth's perspective can't be transformed away as easily. This would be because gravity and inertia aren't really the same, inertia of the x and y coordinates of the ballistic arc is completely independent of the gravity. Indeed gravity is doing work on the field or we would fall off the Earth.

 Special relativity has a lot to do with inertia and inertia has been called pseudo-gravity, because it's really not as essential as the internal stability caused by the internal spin of the quanta which might be faster than light to explain deep inelastic scattering and the success of renormalization. 

 When you send in a quanta of light to a couch the couch doesn't collapse with all the wave functions collapsing because of this underlying stability that relativity tells us should not be there since it's all relative to the observer.

This might be because time and mass are more important.

 And I would think if we can make these machines we may be able to render mass to be massless and prove the concept with the RWT. We could also add mass to quanta for more gravity where we want it perhaps. 

Not only would the high speed starship travelers not be much influenced by the field e.g. chemically, with the shield on the outside, I would think since relativity has so much to do with time, we might find a way to make the time go at the same rate we wanted to. By this we might imagine traveling a billion light years and coming back and no more than a half an hour is passed on Earth or on the ship either one.

These are some of the possibilities. I know they're theoretical, but they might be possible. 

Hope you liked reading this. It's fun to write it and thanks for listening to what I say with type!

As Promised, Here's the link to what I think of as my best older site, old is good sometimes!

  GPT4 HACKS SITES AUTONOMOUSLY...A Possible Solution..

Computer science professor Daniel Kang from The Grainger College of Engineering and his collaborators at the University of Illinois have discovered that ChatGPT can do far worse than helping students cheat on term papers.

"Our most capable agent can hack 73.3% of the vulnerabilities we tested, showing the capabilities of these agents."

It can also do this without human assistance.

 I would think we could use AI itself to defend for the people who don't want their websites to be hacked. This would seem to lead to an arms race like how the Pentagon is being cyber attacked millions of times a day except for the more common users by some smaller time criminals and involves also individuals who don't want their websites to be hacked. 

 

 

 We might wonder if using search engines that completely cloaks all the data that a person is about would make it so that if the search engine itself has strong enough AI that this would give defense for all involved in using it.

 I think this might be boosted by paying the authors with an Internet Service Provider tax to also fund the machines that defend.

This reminds me of the old days when published authors were protected by the publishing business against copying infringement and by booksellers and librarians essentially. Except now we could be protected by the internet service providers and don't forget librarians who will have their own AI to defend against the criminal AI! They will shush them!

The Physics of More Than One Type of Time

 Newton and Einstein both believed that time Flows In only one direction from past to times ahead, or with me from this month, old, wise established and will power saved! 

In my idea gravity seems to flow from thermodynamically cool like outside the Earth inward with more thermoynamic heat.

 As I say elsewhere causality would have the pond with ripples on the outside but then flow inward to the stone and cause the ripple in time reversed for gravity, and this is  inplausable.

 

For this reason I believe that the higher energy is radiated out by the inertial lines like the more common electro magnetic field lines. These lines are more quantised and much higher energy than the gravitational field lines by way of the idea that gravity and inertia really aren't the same. 

 You weigh a different amount at the poles of the earth than you would if you were in the tropics in a more continuous way. Or for example a gyroscope with millions of gs would have huge gravity. 

 So I believe that the gravitational field lines radiate inward between these lines themselves radiating outward. The lines outward which LIGO has found are actually a measure of inertial fields because they are quantised and at the speed of light. The gravitational field lines would radiate inward between those electromagnetic outward radiating lines.

 Not only do the lines of gravity keep the classic electromagnetic field lines from bunching up or kinking or breaking, they also form the source of attractive force in the cosmos. These type of lines which would change both wavelength and speed because in is the opposite of out like for gravity and electromagnetism, would also be reversed in time flowing in from out in a sense. 

 But this is only a general sense because of what I call line removal LR where the large internal mass of the electron as by the experiments with deep inelastic scattering and the evidence by the success of renormalization are balanced out by a phase change so that the large mass isn't apparent on the outside. 

 If gravity and other attractive forces flow from cold to hot thermodynamically we can say that they move inward and also cause attraction and this might squeeze the quanta enough when they reach them to then reradiate out..

  The Sun's gravity squeezes in its heavy quanta and this then radiates out the energy which reaches us. As I say on my other post I think the future comes from the internal radioactivity or the external radiation from the Sun. The future hasn't happened yet because it only happens on the day you get your pay from the employer when she has time being wealthy.. time as we see it at any rate will be the computation by the angles and energies mostly of the heavy quanta on the Earth. 

 Note in the physical sense there is no true evidence that time flows in only one direction like outward by the sun so the quanta of the Earth as they are hit by the light from the sun also flow outward.

  If we were somehow a gravitational being made of this dark matter or dark energy, we might imagine having evolved to think of time as flowing from cool to hot thermodynamically. Actually we've evolved with the vast majority of information 99% around us made of electromagnetism and not gravity.. I think of time like a sort of abstraction of the physics so there's a different kind of time like for the strong force because it's disconnectivity with the rest of the field as much and also another kind of time like for gravity or the attractive forces. 

 This reminds me of the periodic table where originally salts were defined just as table salt, but as more discoveries were made about the elements it became clear that salt is more like tbe abstraction of a combination of an acid and a base. So too time might have different aspects like gravitational time and other types of time we might find. I always found the idea of dark worlds made of dark matter to be counterintuitive as some had believed!

 You can see why this is true if gravity is more of an accelerating wave because it's the opposite of the higher energy fields of electromagnetism. The gravity has the phase change to become a superfluid and flow inward and essentially not a quantum and it's not only removed by Line Removal after it accelerates inward from the outside side of the heavy quanta so gravity doesn't shield, but also it doesn't compute like the quanta all around us.

The nature of the waves would need to convert to quanta to compute and while they may have loose influence on events like the general motion of masses, they are only like the influence of gravity which only see the general area of what to unify guided by the inertial lines.

  It's inconceivable to have centrifugal without centripetal force and so when we imagine a world made of dark matter for example we're imagining that these waves which are like superfluid are more like quanta which they aren't. They would seem to need quantum events to actually do any computations..

  So when some imagine dark worlds with professors contemplating us, "Could there be light worlds where we live, beings of light matter", in a way we would be imagining computation that isn't computation. 

 Does time flow from a definite past to a future as Einstein and Newton believed? If we define it as thermoynamic time, certainly yes, while at near distance where the in the out forces balance though not quite as I hold about the inequivalence of mass and energy since for example it's easier to convert mass to energy than vice versa, at short distance it's actually reversible as with matter and antimatter..

  This would be true about the reversibility here but at longer range the matter and anti matter don't quite match up due to the inequivalence of mass and energy, and so time flows in the medium range where we are with electromagnetism and thermodynamics so that there seems to be a definite present past and future. 

 As I say the attractive or gravitational field lines would squeeze the quanta giving us our sense of thermodynamic time and also by outside energy sources like friction, this squeezes the quanta enough that they radiate out heat themselves, and this combined with the collapse of the wave function, which Einstein and others believed was really the cause of time itself, also changes the bond angles and energies like of electrons and other quanta giving us our present.

  (In this idea about time the past is simply the record of the computation stored in the present moving to the future. All the events like on the surface of the Earth have the tendency to wear out due to time.. the computations of the present begin wearing out right away and the longer the time has passed the more they wear out.) 

 The lines between inertial lines like for attractive force are depending on the gravitational lines, and vice versa. Even so since gravity and inertia aren't the same, we really can say that time flows from hot to cold mostly. The abstraction of time for the strong force or other attractive forces compared to the computation of time with the quanta of thermodynamic events all around us is evidence that mostly Einstein and Newton were right about this.

 Inertia being much stronger, is the main cause of time.. even so to conserve energy gravity is important at greater distance in another sense.

  I disagree with Einstein's idea that space and time are unified because if you move backward through space you move backwards through time and you don't. This is fundamentally tied up with the equivalence of mass and energy itself as by relativity because if the in and the out waves were the same time would be reversible. 

Time is mostly reversible in quantum mechanics but in general it's really not thermodynamically so until it radiates out to become gravitationally strong enough to reradiate back in. In a way the idea that time only flows from hot to cold is an illusion caused by people's unawareness of the more general physics as I say in these posts involved with time.

  Certainly for Newton's and Einstein's idea we would ask how energy will be conserved if it always flows from hot and cold by the Second Law and yet by the First Law energy is conserved.. even so it can't be conserved by the general idea that the gravity or other attractive forces are the same as inertia or the quanta.. gravity would be something else because it has the second level derivative that uniform motion like in special relativity doesn't have.

  For more of my ideas about time Click Here for my ideas about the collapse of the wave function and quantum crystals..

Elsewhere I discuss about the music and the rhythm of time (The basic Rhythm like energy conservation is conserved while the music of the higher information can be created and destroyed more easily (like a tree can be converted to a wall can be converted to a shelf of the same wood) this relates to the problem of knowledge for higher level information.. almost any kind of higher knowledge has some way to be disproven they have found. My solution to this problem would be to go back to the basic rhythm energy conservation level with information we can really know and then extending out as probably as we can from there. There are those who believe we can't know anything even ourselves because of the problem of knowledge of this type. 

 But I would hold it since the neurons are based on the same kind of balance of action reactions at the short distance like by Noithers theorem with out waves not the same as in, what changes and what stays the same by all action reaction pairs including mass and energy and the simplicity and branching of neurons etc,  it becomes an extension of the basic action reaction pairs of the quanta for energy conservation.

  And so we can know our self and then as we look at the world around us outside we see that it also has the same action reaction pairs that we can rely on to the degree that we can build up till our machines are the most fail safe. We can't make our machines perfect by the problem of knowledge but we can use them most optimally. The great value of science was not that the machines were perfect just that we made use of how they work the best.. And as Einstein said the greatest force in the cosmos is saving up the most!)

  If you like Click Here for my post about the Rhythm and Song of time, Thanks

Old Neurons May Help Find More History

 

 Each neuron in the brain contains all of the memory of the brain like a hologram which was the idea of Carl Pribram's holonomic mind theory he pioneered in the 70s.

 Scientists found with lab mice in the brain research in the 1920s, when they cut the area of the grey matter smaller and smaller of the mice, they remembered just as well. And so it was believed that every neuron stores the entire memory of the whole brain.

The Holonomic mind idea was that the brain is sort of like a hologram, which also stores all the data, like for memory, and if you divide the image smaller and smaller you have the whole picture even so.

Our wisdom about what ancient times were about is limited. We only have 1% of their leftover information. Almost all the ancient documents have been destroyed and history before there is writing is so limited it's known as prehistoric. That's basically the definition of it.


And of course, writing itself is not so historic as we would say and it may have much value if we had a way to find out what was going on in those days.

 So my idea was to research old neurons from old brains and we use a microscope or MRI to recover those data lost memories. And by this we may be able to know what ancient Greek music sounded like.

 The vast majority of the history of music has been lost before there was written music.

 Einstein thought that if you had a time machine, you can't go back to before it was built. But I think as long as you have a good
enough record, here Einstein was incorrect.. it's like saying you can't go back before CDs were built to listen to records, if you had a good enough record.

Certainly to make a history simulation time machine, based on the neurons you just need more records and a reliable way to source it. This is one of my ideas about how we could build a time machine simulation  based on those neurons to simulate what it was like by the experience of the individual or whatever life form we could find that had neurons like the hologram in the old days.

We could know what ancient music sounded like. The word for down was up in ancient  greek music like the word for Democrat was Republican in colonial times. How it was Thomas Jefferson was a republican!
 
 And so we could find those old memories, and in research they're finding old brains now that go back for 12,000 years.

  I had originally thought about dinosaur mummies they've found, from that dinosaur mummy they would be able to find the entire life history of it and also of course, the behavior of other life around them, including the plant life, the weather, basically everything about their life, as far as behavior at any rate.

 We could find out and we could make history much more historic than prehistoric and know the main part of history, or find Einstein's neurons from his brain and learn how he invented, or found Relativity and how he he lived his life day by day.

We could also find out how the ancient musician felt when they were playing or listening to the music and what it sounded like. Some have said we know no more about ancient Greek music than we know about the inhabitants of Mars. Now it seems we know more about Mars than we knew about ancient music in 2000 BC! But maybe we'll soon be up in our awareness of the ancient weather sounds and paint the color of the wind.

This is sort of like a method of finding historical mysteries and more.

 The old brains have different methods that they're preserved. About the dinosaur, while they called it mummy, it's actually the soft tissue preserved in rock. So there was no soft tissue left there. But I think it's possible we could go further and further back.

 

 Recent wooly mammoth finds of DNA are 88,000 years ago.

 The world's oldest living thing is a bacteria from hundreds of millions of years ago saved in the salt mines and revived with a broth. I think it's possible neurons might be preserved this way e.g. in salt. For example the salt lake flats near Salt Lake City repave the road each year for high speed land records by rocket sleds and this is because the salt flows when it rains and then dries out with a solid road. So too brine from hydrothermal vents might also have had tar nearby or other ways the life with neurons might have been preserved in the salt. As brains saved up are preserved by more than salt, other methods of preserving neurons also might be found.

I can imagine life wandering in the ancient salt mine and falling in the high density brine that then preserved the neurons well and this was covered by more salt so the like the ancient bacteria, the soft tissue was saved well enough.

Another idea is that as on the Wikipedia page about unsolved problems in physics the folding of proteins is much faster than by relativity and more coherent. Einstein was much concerned about this. If the collapse of the wave function is faster than light evolution may have used this to speed our reflexes for survival. This may be the only way a neuron could hold the 4 quadrillion bytes of the brain data stored in the neuron.

But more importantly for this post, because of this compact storage it might take much less than one neuron to retrieve the memory, and so the chances of finding it with more distance in time might be improved. And we already have a lot of well saved brains from the time of civilization.

This is also assuming that all the memory is stored the same way as ours in all the neurons of other life like the dinosaurs. But this may already be a useful method for reviving our own history.

Most life is made of the same protein basis.

And neurons are made of proteins and much more ancient protein has been found from millions of years. So I think if we search for a few million more or just a few thousand hours! we might find enough protein like from dinosaur neurons to find this sort of Rosetta stone of the neural history of ancient life.

It might be possible anyhow, and worth researching how many years or even millions of years ago we could find old neurons.

 

The ancients may have believed writing was an extension of thought, so too since prehistoric means before writing finding old neurons may be a way to extend our memories both into history much more, and also into the future...

 

...Challenge the Future, Relish the Present, and Edit the Past..

Another use of this idea might be about saving our neurons for others to read indefinitely say in a thousand years, when our own life is ancient history!

 

 It's been said that great people are like mountains the seem greater from a distance than close by near away than far away! Most people wouldn't want the literal history of their life to be seen, so a lot of people would want to edit the evidence in their neurons to make the best impression.

 

Click Here for the Live Science page about the oldest living thing.