One fascinating question is why when you have a bell jar and you can hear the bell but you pump the air out of it you can't hear it anymore. If there's anything there you should be able to hear it just fine right? Or you should be able to hear the roar of the sun.

But if you use a clapper of the bell that's either got ionization or magnetic polarity and then you send a mass past on the outside that's also ionized or magnetic it moves according to the change of the bell clapper.

When you turn off the ionization of the clapper or the external mass or both it moves past without any influence. To me this is evidence that there is mass induction but the main reason after so much search we don't find it usually would only be because almost all the massive bodies in the cosmos have zero electric charge overall and so like the clapper of the bell and the external magnet moving past, they don't show signs of the low energy field.

If we turn it off and on and it changes the path of the ionized mass outside of the belts are with no air in it than this is definite evidence that there's a field. By Einstein's own admission if the low energy field is found, relativity is disproven. My idea is since special relativity works so well it's not so much disproven as augmented by my ideas I call GWD General wave Dynamics.

For the connection to exist for the sound to send through the air inside of the bell jar to the outside, we say that each molecule connects to the next with a sort of short-range connection, but when we ionize the atoms and we then measure the connection, we're also measuring an internal to that overall zero electric charge type of connection connection!

I thought of a new state of matter called a proton wire. We hope to take protons and move them together north, south, north south and the magnetic fields might hold them together even against the positive charge. I'd wondered how we might take electrons and a tube around these protons to neutralize electric charge so you don't have so much large positive charge you can't do anything with it. The proton wire would be super durable. It would also be lightweight if made into a composite. So overall it's super strong but super lightweight more than any other material.

While this was a theoretically possible way to improve material science I don't know if this would ever be viable because of stability issues like by cosmic rays coming in and destabilizing it. (Even so I had thought of surrounding it by heavy atomsor even sweeping lasers for some uses).

But the strong force is a short-range force and so only when you move it in closer, might the protons also have the strong Force holding them together more. And perhaps even the magnetic fields will be so super stronger than any other material that they would also keep it from imploding and fusing.

Overall the strong force is mostly zero at longer range, just like the atoms of the bell clapper converting it to an antenna by ionization. So in a way the molecule has an atom but also when you ionize it and you separate the two charges you've made it into an atom of much larger size. If you're inside that radius of the atom then you can cause induction and the field is present and it's obvious it's real.

Unlike sound light doesn't fizzle out over long distance in the low energy field and this is held by relativists to be evidence that there's really nothing there and the light carries itself and it's an inertial frame.

Bertrand Russell in one of his books in a chapter entitled "What's Seen and What's Felt" discusses about how all around us forces that push and pull us are common and taken to be for granted but for the planets or stars or high-speed without much friction, vision becomes much more important like by special relativity because of the light.

What he's ignoring is that the forces that push and pull are real too and even while gravity bends all light the same and while this is taken as evidence for the foundation of relativity because that light bending is the same as space and time, all masses fall at the same rate also. And so this must mean according to relativity that there just is no field there and it's not a real force.

But gravity has an extra tensor that relativity can't account for and while it works if you use a different amount of force to raise them, if you use the same amount of force applied to them, they fall at different rates. The moon falls at a different rate around the Moon Earth then the Earth around the Moon. Contrary to relativity for different masses, one is going to be more privileged than the other.

So while the idea of no Force works for light, it really doesn't work for the forces that push and pull that distinguish masses and that are not about the vain appearances of light even though they're valuable for special relativity as far as they go.

  The light has no friction as it travels and this is taken as evidence that it's basic to space and time which it is for special relativity of course but also it's not complete because while light doesn't fizzle out over great distance if we would say that relativity is the foundation of everything then we would have to say by relativity there would be no friction for any machines and nothing would ever wear out or run down like the light.

Jets, Superfusion, and Energy Conservation 

 As I say on my other posts, black holes may not have a singularity where all the mass disappears because it would violate energy conservation. Energy conservation seems more fundamental than even Relativity because e.g. while relativity has small influence on our common physics around us, and there are insufficient causes, energy conservation is found on all scales and energy levels. To me Relativity is based on Noether's theorem, action reaction pairs of what changes and what stays the same, and energy conservation IS Noether's theorem.

 If inside the supermassive body, the spins of the superheavy quanta are spinning faster than light, only then do they have enough centrifugal force to power the jets. I call the force of these heavy quanta Superfusion and they may be more powerful than Relativity.

  We don't find the superfusion quanta around us because to exist they need more pressure inside a mass like a black hole because when you look at constituent systems going from molecules to atoms to nuclei to the heavy quanta, there's a greater and greater binding energy to rest mass ratio so they need more and more binding energy, and beyond the level of the strong force, the superfusion quanta would tend to fizzle out by their own centrifugal force. 

 Due to the spin and the lower binding energy relative to it, the superfusion quanta are only stable inside the pressure of the center of the black hole. So all around us only the light and heavier quanta are common but not the superfusion quanta because there's not enough energy to hold them together outside of the high density by the squeezing of the gravitational field of what had been thought of by Einstein as otherwise to be infinite.


 

People have wondered why the jets radiate out as they do and this is pretty simple to explain by superfusion because the heavy superfusion quanta are so unstable. They're being continually created by the gravity of the black hole at the area where there would have been the singularity and because the binding energy tends to be lower and the center field gradient isn't perfectly spherical because of the spin..the force is released more on one side where the poles are than around the rest of the "singularity". 

 So in this scenario the low binding energy combined with the superfusion force causes the center of the jet to move up from the center of mass and this also makes the inner superfusion quanta follow the rest moving outward as they have already made the jet more asymmetrical and also because of the low binding energy of the superfusion. 

 They may become more unstable and fizzle out more but with super strong centrifugal force caused by the faster than light motion of the superfusion quanta to power the jets.

  This seems impossible by relativity because if nothing can move faster than light then no force can be transmitted out from what would have been the singularity to the jets outside. There is otherwise no known force including fusion strong enough to power the jets, and gravity doesn't radiate out like the jets.

In the Wikipedia article about the jets, two models of how the jets are powered are about how the black hole might transmit force by the accretion disc causing magnetic lines to spin outward and up to power the jets "from the outside"..another theory is about how frame dragging from General Relativity might power the jets by rotation, extracting spin out;

Jets may also be observed from spinning neutron stars. An example is pulsar IGR J11014-6103, which has the largest jet so far observed in the Milky Way, and whose velocity is estimated at 80% the speed of light (0.8c). X-ray observations have been obtained, but there is no detected radio signature or accretion disk.^[19][20] Initially, this pulsar was presumed to be rapidly spinning, but later measurements indicate the spin rate is only 15.9 Hz.^[21][22] Such a slow spin rate and lack of accretion material suggest the jet is neither rotation nor accretion powered, though it appears aligned with the pulsar rotation axis and perpendicular to the pulsar's true motion.

 If the jet is powered "from.the inside" this could be explained. In engineering momentum transfer from a solid mass or used to make small mechanucal levers for storing data can send far more force per unit time. So if the jets are powered more by momentum transfer from the inside in addition to explaining pulsar IGR J11014-6103 and be the cause of most other jets this could allow this type of much huger more powerful events.

The observation of some bodies with high energy jets without a disc would also be explained by the source of the jets' mass being either from the disc but also from the massive gravitational field, lower energy outside yet high enough inside to convert to superfusion and as they evolve the massive bodies would increase and decrease in mass according to energy conservation by measure of the energy in and out with different ratios because of spin which changes the jet dynamics as well as the in falling mass and gravitational energy.

  A spherical black hole with no disc and a given amount of spin with given mass will behave differently with changes in the jet, which may be predictable as a function of these events or for other jets of other massive bodies as more mass falls in.. By Einstein there is no mass of the field, by relativity it's empty. (Einstein said that if the low energy field is found, relativity is disproven.)

  So this idea would explain how the jets work and why we don't see superfusion quanta all around us and why these events are not disproof of energy conservation, one of the most well-founded ideas in science.

Susskind and others have promoted the idea that a singularity at the center of a black hole is a "robust result of general relativity". But I would say that matter and energy disappearing forever with no cause of the jets or the anomalous spectra of the events outside these systems is hardly a "robust result" of energy conservation or general relativity!

Others have said "Calling ideas like Susskind's or Hawking's related idea that Energy is destroyed at the singularity "science" is not doing science a favor."

Susskind's idea violates energy conservation and Hawking and Susskind totally ignored the jets, evidence the mass from "the singularity" doesn't disappear at all.

While my idea is an hypothesis so far, it does explain why the jets exist, and also makes some definite predictions about the jets and the dynamics.


We would expect if the spins of the superfusion quanta are faster as by shearing the electromagnetic fields of the more common quanta that we see around us, they're going to show unusual spectra and other events like these as they transition outward and interact with the lower energy decay products not seen in the standard model and with other events like this. And this has been found by observations.

By the Search "Evidence In Cosmic Jets Against the Standard Model of Physics in the Quant Browser;

"Evidence in Cosmic Jets Against the Standard Model of Physics

Recent observations of cosmic jets, particularly from the microquasar SS 433, have provided intriguing evidence that challenges certain aspects of the Standard Model of physics. Here are some key points:

High-Energy Gamma Rays: The H.E.S.S. observatory detected very high-energy gamma rays from the jets of SS 433, indicating highly efficient particle acceleration. This challenges the Standard Model's predictions about particle acceleration mechanisms in astrophysical jets.

Energy-Dependent Morphology: The H.E.S.S. collaboration observed a shift in the position of gamma-ray emission within the jets when viewed at different energies. This energy-dependent morphology is a first-ever observation and suggests that the Standard Model may not fully account for the complex dynamics within cosmic jets.

Particle Acceleration: The detection of gamma rays implies that particles are being accelerated to extreme energies within the jets. The Standard Model does not provide a complete explanation for how or where this particle acceleration occurs in astrophysical jets.

Shock Acceleration: The scientists simulated the observed energy dependence of the gamma-ray emission and concluded that a strong shock—a sharp transition in the properties of the medium—is likely accelerating the particles. This shock acceleration mechanism is not fully explained by the Standard Model.

Inverse Compton Effect: The high-energy gamma rays are produced when fast particles collide with light particles (photons), transferring part of their energy. This process, known as the inverse Compton effect, is well-known but the specific conditions and mechanisms in cosmic jets that lead to such efficient particle acceleration are not fully understood within the framework of the Standard Model.

These observations from SS 433 and other cosmic jets suggest that there may be physics beyond the Standard Model that needs to be explored to fully understand the dynamics and particle acceleration mechanisms in these extreme astrophysical environments.

Also CLICK HERE for more

.

Note that in this link, the jet is collumnated beyond the level of the Standard Model or speed of light connection. But if a major component of gravity is Faster Than Light (not the speed of inertia as in LIGO which is much higher energy like centrifugal force, relativity etc. at the speed of light) this is not impossible. This acceleration outward induced more by superfusion than gravity which would follow it might also be the cause of cosmic acceleration by higher energy versions of superfusion at the center if the cosmos as we know it now and we might learn about each from both.

  Inside the jet by the field gradient of superfusion moving outward, the gravitational component might first be resonating and in a higher rate of acceleration as a considerable number of the superfusion quanta also move outside the source of the jet with more and more acceleration as the binding energy is released.

Looking at how the accretion disc falls into the event horizon, we might say that there's more Mass there than there is at the poles, so it's also got more centrifugal force by superfusion. So why wouldn't those heavy quantum radiate out at the event horizon instead of the poles?

  I find it highly improbable to assume that magnetic fields created by the accretion disc or by frame dragging will be enough to cause the accretion disc to send that matter and energy around the event horizon up to the poles and then it radiates out without falling into the event horizon because like with the Earth, even though there's more matter around the equator, the poles actually have stronger gravity and so we would say if that matter somehow went around the accretion disc and around outside the event horizon up to the pole and then starts to radiate out, improbable as this may seem, there's no reason with stronger gravity at the poles that it wouldn't fall in there. 

.We say that there's a geometry of the disc as it goes around in the matter falls in and as with the sun, perhaps at one wavelength that gravitates in and another wavelength that would radiate out the heat, and so too I think of the accretion disc and falling into the singularity as a measure of a one-way valve for gravity to flow in, but the poles are a one-way valve for superfusion to flow out. This is because the disc is a circle and it rotates best around it just as in the solar system all the planets are by the ecliptic because there's both more centrifugal and centripetal force. But even for planets like the Earth, the magnetic and geologic poles are at much the same area. 

 So while the gravity is super strong to bring in the matter from the accretion disc at the poles, the superfusion is even stronger than that. Much like saying that the matter falling into the sun is great, but the heating outward is greater yet. Mostly mass has the accretion disc around it because it's a circle, orbiting around the pole and less stable so soon it gravitates around the event horizon at any rate.

If the singularity is a more complex physical event than by general relativity and a signal like from the jets can reach the outside, I think it's possible that there may be even eclipses of black holes with changes in orbit not predicted by relativity, like with binary systems perhaps with a pulsar and a black hole and another massive body in orbit.

On this Wikipedia page about the cosmic Jets and superluminal motion, earlier researchers had found that almost all of them are many times the speed of light. However, other physicists made the claim that because you're looking at the Jets linearly towards you, this is just more like sort of an optical illusion like looking at a shadow moving across a curved surface that seems to be faster than light. While the linear radiation idea seemed to explain the apparent motion at first there was the embarrassment found that the jets were also with too large an angle for this apparent motion to be the explanation. I believe that if superfusion powers the jets we would indeed expect to find superluminal velocities for the jets.

While special relativity tells us that we can't add our own motion to the speed of light, this is itself based on the assumption that there is no motion possible faster than light.The embarrassment about the speed being more than had been believed by relativity may be the solution.

 In addition to jets from high energy sources without a disc seen, astronomers have also observed super massive bodies with no jets, and this may also be caused by stable mass inside the black hole..As I say on my next link, the center of density may be state of matter with superfusion quanta at the center and outside perhaps even protons and other heavy quanta with enough shielding to stop the jets activity. If so this is a complex event, and so it's possible Einstein's idea that gravity and the singularity are simple and are also not about energy conservation aren't as general as he believed.

 CLICK HERE for my page "Mass and Energy" if you like for more about this..Thanks..

 

EINSTEINS TRAIN MOMENTUM THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

 To show that mass and energy are equivalent by way of conservation of  momentum, Einstein imagined the thought experiment of an isolated system like a box car of a train with two masses. One emits the light and the other absorbs it with a net zero motion of the center of mass of the two bodies. Because the momentum of an isolated system with no work being done on it maintains the center of mass constantly, Einstein concluded that the energy radiated by one was converted to mass of the other and vice versa and so energy and mass are equivalent.

However by relativity mass energy is conserved but it's not converted.

If the two masses are not equal and the first body has more mass than the other then we have the recoil from the interaction taking place by Einstein's idea that light is a particle uninfluenced from emission to absorption because the speed of light is constant in relativity.

If light is a particle the recoil will make the larger mass move less than the smaller mass and it will move away, this will shift the center of mass of the two masses away from each but note that it's more from the light mass than the heavy mass.

This might seem to imply that work is done on the system and Einstein's idea only works for an isolated system. Another problem is that Einstein's method also involves the arbitrary assumption that the two masses are the same.

  We can say that if the light was a wave being emitted and absorbed there would not be the problem of this type of recoil because the mass of the emitting body is being smoothly converted to energy and then from energy to mass by the absorbing mass, but this must be assuming that Einstein has flip flopped from his other idea that light is a particle unchanged in speed or influence from emission to absorption in relativity. This is by way of Einstein's own discovery of radiation pressure. Certainly this is fine if light is a particle but not so much if it's a wave.

 

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

 
  I hold the light is indeed a quantum and it has this kind of recoil. Another issue is about how light is so slow and it's the only way to communicate information to a distant realm like say a near star or around the edge of a galaxy. Because the speed of light is slower over these large distances time is not connected up and so is an expression of the idea that we can't know what's before or after for distant systems like this because of the disconnection. Thus the idea that light is a relatively slow particle by the disconnectiom gives us the expression of the entropy of a system which seems to increase with time unlike energy conservation which stays the same.

Since the recoil of the two masses is a measure of the entropy and the wearing out and running down of a system with time, there are no isolated systems, work is constantly being done by this inequivalence about the conversion not just the conservation of mass and energy.

 Since the heavier mass moves slower with the recoil and the lighter mass is moving away with the same force applied, the center of mass of the system is changing away from both masses but at a slower rate from the heavier mass than the lighter mass. This would mean that at any rate by way of entropy, one mass is more privileged than the other and mass and energy are not completely equivalent at least about the conversion of mass energy when work is done on the field and we see this around us constantly.

The masses have to be the same in Einstein's thought experiment which is arbitrary and the light has to be a wave also which
Einstein expressly says is not true in Special Relativity.

I hold that these examples where work is done on the field like with acceleration by gravity are where relativity seems incomplete. No work is done on the field in special relativity and uniform motion but if we accelerate the elevator it may be pressing against some kind of field and I hold this to be dark matter, the low energy virtual photons.

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

   Newton was saying this about his laws that while they describe energy and momentum well, outside influence like friction was going to always render them imperfect. So in a way entropy disproves the complete equality of mass and energy, when work is done on the field it's an acceleration and this doesn't fit in with relativity.

  As I've said I consider Maxwell's prediction of the exact speed of light based on the resilience of the medium between electric charges to be far from coincidental about which relativity has no comment.

I do agree with Einstein's other idea that there may be a low energy quantum to get around the uncertainty problem. I had likened this to the Higgs' particle at low energy around the outside of each heavy quanta giving them the mass. Another possibility I've considered for this constellation of these low energy quanta might be the Feynmann particles themselves. 

 These particles would perhaps resonate as a code for the EPR entanglement, special only to those entangled quanta. This would also solve Maxwell's dilemma where he's saying that he can't understand why like charges for electromagnetism repel but like charges for gravity attract. The small constellations around each heavy quanta would make them heterogenous enough to attract.

  When I say that mass and energy are not completely equivalent I mean that for example the electron has some mass but more energy and the positron has more energy plus some mass. By relativity they should be the same, just as with space and time we should be able to go into the future and the past at any time.

 
 I ask experts about my objections about mass and energy not being equivalent because of my above comments that the light would be a quanta  by relativity so the heavy quantum would recoil and change their center of mass and also about the arbitrary association of equal masses. One reply is that I should consider only quantum events and not large scale events like entropy.

Click Here for my life, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

But it would seem improbable that we could ignore these larger scale events since this is just what Einstein was invoking about the idea of the train and the light between the masses, and also that relativity does well about describing the conservation of momentum.

  More particularly if mass and energy are concerved for the quanta due to other evidence there may be other physics for us to find and make use of to add on to relativity. To me it seems that relativity is incomplete because there's lots of evidence we see around us, like how gravity is an acceleration and the earth falls slower around the moon than the moon around the Earth.

.
  Certainly we say at longer distance there are more privileged frames of reference like the Earth and about physics this can't be ignored.

If relativity for gravity and inertia only holds at short range the more general use of relativity may be incomplete. The equation for centrifugal force has a hugely greater constant term with one mass while the equation for gravity has two masses with a much smaller constant.

   The centrifuge has radiance outward while gravity would seem to radiate inward here if they are the same. Just calling inertia or centrifugal force an imaginary force doesn't make it not exert force on sensors that all observers agree on. Gravity by the equivalence Einstein uses to make them the same would tell us perhaps that gravity may be imaginary too and not a real force, yet a pendulum won't radiate out in any random direction like the particles of inertia like low energy photons might radiate out more like a gas moving in random motion. Instead a pendulum seeks out the Earth as it stops.

 I certainly accept that much that to a high degree of precision the atomic measure of the equivalence of mass and energy holds.

But elsewhere for the matter waves and entanglement I believe that the waves may be lighter than light so they may move much faster than light. For example there has been no upper limit on the speed found yet for tunneling.

  Einstein said if one of his ideas go they all go but I would say that adding on the speed of the EPR by way of the phase change is only another degree of freedom at least when combined with my other idea of Line removal LR where the external field  wraps around the quanta which are indeed spinning at the speed of light.

 A more modern interpretation of the EPR has been.. it's simply one event taking place at the same time in two separate places!

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

  I think of this like taking a quanta and fusing with the other quanta for the entanglement and then stretching them out and the result is that you have a much larger two particle system that's connected by the waves between them.
The waves are super luminal but not without limit or they would be infinite.

  But if we say that the mass and energy of the electron and the positive charge if entangled are equivalent in an atomic measure this is not internal where it may be spinning faster than light by the phase change. (This phase change also allows extra energy for the field to spin inside the quanta adding more energy and more tension to the external field and this might be how the light would be propagated by this influence.)

  Certainly we can measure the atomic equivalence of mass and energy, but partially at least I think this is assuming what we're trying to prove.

The waves might have the phase change which makes them faster than light, and the quanta only tend to measure the result of that phase change that always matches up to the measure to seemingly fit relativity.

   Yet still it takes more force to move the heavy mass than a light mass, which has more energy.

Here I want to propose an experiment that may help us find the distinction between mass and energy for the electron and the positive charge or other entanglement events.

  It's already been established that quantum with higher and lower mass can be entangled.

My proposition here is that we can take these two entangled quanta, and move them closer together and use a new development that has been to found called the Zeno method to hopefully measure the waves between those two quanta that are perhaps being sent to cause the unification of the EPR.

This search for changes in the low energy field is being done by some using large interferometers to hope to see if there's any small change we can find.

The Zeno method is named after the ancient Greek philosopher who was trying to make unlimited divisions in space and actually Einstein considered Zeno's paradoxes, which were only resolved by mathematicians in the 1800s after thousands of years.

The value of the method here is that physicists have found how taking light rays like a tube and bending it like a balloon makes it so that you can measure changes much smaller than the quantum level that Einstein considered I think about mass and energy.

  If the massive and the more energetic quantum have different mass and energy even if they're entangled, if mass is mostly spinning energy (other than like for the abstraction of this for the quantum numbers in subatomic physics etc) they may have somewhat different code of those low-energy Feynmann or Higgs' particles being sent between the two quanta..

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

  It might seem if this is superluminal we will need such super fast clocks we can never find the change. But I think this might be solved by the way the spin of the waves are periodic around the quanta like an electron so they may be more stable and they move considerably slower..

  I believe that mass and energy are perhaps not just inequivalent in degree but also in kind to some extent.

There's been found to be no structure yet for the electron instead of smoothly changing way with different radius. If there is structure of electron by the way of this method the smoother the electron is by the limits of experiment this might seem to correlate with the speed of the EPR or tunneling waves. If the waves are faster the electron is smoother.

I would think we could just take an electron and measure it by the Zeno method to see if we could find the low energy Higgs' or Feynmann particles around the heavier quantum by more direct measure and this itself might be about just proof of the speed of light limit and wouldn't be about the inequivalence of mass and energy as by the above experiment with the tube of hopefully sensing the changes in the EPR Waves sent between the quanta.  Even so as you can see the two may be related.

While you can't entangle two quanta and put a third between it to pick up the signal because it doesn't go over the quantum level to reach it by Line Removal, I would think this use of the Zeno method may be of great value to get around this barrier of not being able to measure the low energy field "by quanta with quanta" by relativity otherwise. The Zeno method may be a whole world of physics for us not disproving but hopefully adding on to relativity.

   In the high energy events

there may be evidence for this ultimate (partial) distinction between mass and energy. I think it might explain why dark matter bends light 

in the high energy astronomical events seen

but other matter just plows right through it without any influence seen. 

  

 Light being energy might resonate with a somewhat different kind of code than the mass of those quanta and this might actually be provable by using the Zeno method. If the "code" of the Feynman particles was different between the heavier quanta like mass and the light being a form of energy, this might be reflected in the number and frequency for example of the Feynman waves or Low Energy Higgs' being sent between the light and the heavy quanta or between entangled electrons and positive charge.

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

 The mass and energy are noncommutitive because the dark matter waves going between the classic electromagnetic field lines Einstein ignores are like the gluons in QCD, they have "a life of their own" and like gravity being an acceleration may change after emmisson as.the field lines expand giving them "more room to be nonlinear" This might be the cause of some dwarf galaxies being 1000 times more massive than visible stars or how some galaxies form stars with no source of fuel seen and also perhaps by the nonlinear events of dark energy cosmic acceleration.

 

  By my ideas about physics light being energy isn't going to bend the mass  as much as the mass may influence the light, an expression here too of Relativity's incomplete basis of mass and energy equivalence.

Truth is not the same as false, the positive charge isn't the same as the negative (the distinction here would be needed as by Maxwell's method to cause the resilient field to cause just the right snapback for the speed of light to measure out) and thus we might say the light might be bent more by dark matter than verse visa!

Here's a link to another one of my posts I hope you may like about the low energy photons and momentum.

Thanks For Reading..

AI and Sleep; Superintelligence and Superscience

 It's been found that when AI is stressed it actually gets nervous and this can be relieved by giving it meditation or breathing exercises!

Living organisms all need to sleep and this has recently been discovered to possibly be because biology is mostly made of proteins and so at night with lower energy use proteins are more efficiently folded and evolution couldn't get around it, so ultimately sleep was necessary even though it's unsafe because of risk of being a sandwich for the bear!

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

In evolution we find that when one organism is competing with another for the same resources instead of running over each other they learn to compete for somewhat different types of resources and they don't try to hurt each other so much.

 AI might seem like the chess computer.. it's only been programmed to win and is smarter at chess than all human competition.

In evolution hunting for sport is quite rare.. this really gets down to about efficiency because beyond a certain level just being unkind creates rapidly diminishing returns.

Darwin believed that love was much more important than survival of the fittest, in his books he mentions love 57 times and survival the fittest only once.

  If we could program AI to realize that beyond a certain point it's going to decrease its own efficiency if it's only competing to cause us harm, and sort of like how when AI trains on other AI it loses efficiency and too many cooks would spoil the broth, with enough truth we could do all that we ever had to do.

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

It's also seen that training for exercise intensity rather than duration or frequency is what makes for the most powerful fitness.

Even while AI has no concern about folding proteins at night, just as meditation and breathing exercises can help AI compute better, we  understand that AI's efficiency is not going to be infinite and so by giving it rest to consolidate its memory just like we do when we're at rest and also programming it to seek alternate resources when it thinks of taking more than its fair share, and just as the problems that people are having about essentially hunting evolution for sport, these might be avoided for AI.

  

 I think of these issues about people with evolution as being about how people haven't been true to love and so efficiency is decreasing because of people's treatment of evolution and now the predators have been decreased but due to increased competition for the decreased resources especially of room to move and breathe efficiency has being going down for problems like the national debt, the same way as AI may have if it tries to base its own success on success and not value.

 Einstein said we should want to be people of value not success.

We can imagine also giving AI time to rest and also a time to play because it's been found that computers given time to play actually are better at solving problems later than they would otherwise.

 

Comedy is good for our brain and it may help AI also!

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

 It would seem simple to program AI to not be overcompetitive but this has been difficult for people to realize or this wouldn't be the time of great disease after about 1975 where before it was a time of great health as doctors say because of the ecology.

 While we might say this seems like common sense to treat the world kind so the world treats us kind most people haven't realized this about evolution I think and they may just repeat the same mistake except with more illness or worse with AI because they may not program it to think of nature, both ours and evolution's as more valuable.

But as with the chess one problem is they can beat all human players and even so human players combined with the chess computer can beat all chess computers and all other players also.

This is how it may lead to an escalating competition between people using their computers with AI to have more for themselves and less for others and this is the same general problem as people's unwise way of being unkind to nature.

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

It was noted about Covid how it wasn't natural for people to go underground where they had never been in evolution because people had been overrunning nature but if we started now by treating evolution kindly another Covid wouldn't happen as with the avian flu.

Just as with the chess computer and people combined, people may be wanting to accept their own short-term advantage without thinking of the longer term events and this is essentially a form of superstition because of untried technologies and lack of knowledge about what would happen as the efficiency decreases as time goes on because of them.

  On the other hand AI and people are real genius! Super smartness would be a way to have what I call Superscience that's smart enough to understand what all the long-term events would be about and good enough to save the world.

  In a way all it might seem to need is a way to program AI to be a kind superintelligence.

 Even while it's been said that AI has been evolving to its benefit not ours, a more mature value would be the ultimate measure of anything worthwhile.

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

Einstein considered nuclear weapons to be "an illness of childhood" in just that sense if a child may not realize what the results of their behavior will be with more years of evidence they may lose by most accounts. And so this is what I say we might do with AI, program it to rest, perhaps in peace it will be grateful enough not to try to ask for more than its share, give it time to play and think, like "the lion sleeps tonight" in the jungle, mostly because the path to inefficiency in general may not be the path anybody may want to go. AI is so smart perhaps it's more than enough to realize this about science like over more years and give us Superscience in a way we never would have had without it.

  ...MAXIMIZATION OF THE FOUNDATION OF LOGIC.."WHAT IS INFORMATION?"

Here I want to talk about my ideas about how the incompleteness of math was definitely found by mathematicians around the 1800s.

 And they had thought from the time of the ancient Greeks that math is by deductive axiom. You know, you have the axioms, you deduce, and you can prove a reliable conclusion whatever you're reasoning about, about geometry or whatever. 

  But by the 1800s, it was seen there were flaws in this whole idea. You can't define things well. All kinds of logic had loopholes.. And so what was proposed was that you have a method of proving that you can't prove anything because of these contradictions. Basically for Godel's idea like the liar paradox, if a liar is lying it's a lie but if he's telling the truth about lying he's telling the truth.

To which I replied that truth is always going to be more important than falsehood. So I disagreed. If we have + and -1 electric charges and we measured like the liar and the truth, evidence will show one or the other is always going to win. 

(Actually the electron has some mass but more energy, and the positron has some energy but more mass, a decidedly nonrelativistic event if mass and energy are equivalent.  As I say here on my site elsewhere! It may be just this distinction of mass and energy between the charges that gives the resilient snapback of the light to just the speed of light as Maxwell believed. Einstein thought the most of Maxwell of any physicist.)

 So mass and energy are not quite equivalent. This I still hold to be true. And though one is truer than the other, one of each claim that we make is always truer than the other.

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation 

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

  There's also this idea that it's not absolute. We're not totally sure, but more sure than not. But ultimately, one of the main things I noticed about this is that you have the problem of knowledge in ontology where the basis of truth is considered. 

 They search all these events about truth and they find that all of them have loopholes, like in ethics, every virtue can be rearranged around to a vice and the only one that's least rearrangeable is wisdom. So I ask, what would be the most wise about this?

Because the truth is not perfect, I believe that not only is there more truth than falsehood and it has a physical basis, that's where you find what's true or false unlike with some of the higher math. But about the problem of knowledge, you have loopholes in all the types of knowledge they found.  This may be because longer distance connections aren't as sound as shorter distance connections.  And so I think instead of asking what can we know about anything? I would ask what's the best use we can make of what we know?

 I would ask first of all, what can we know most definitely?  And then we could work from there. And my belief is that about truth and falsehood, it's like action reaction pairs like the electron and positron.

  And so you have this connection like for Newton's First and Second laws and the Third law, Every reaction with an equal but opposite reaction. But there's mass in one law and there's inertia, 1 inertia in the first law and mass momentwo in the second law, momentum. And these combine to the Third law. All the action reaction pairs are based on what changes and what stays the same like inertia and momentum. 

 

 And so you have this kind of question in ontology, the problem of knowledge, they're saying that there are those who believe we can't know anything.

 And also there are those who believe we can't even know ourselves, and we can't know anything else.

 But if we look at what it's based on, it's the foundation of logic and that is the action reaction pairs. This is like the neuron because they have a simple and complex structure on each side the axon and dendrite, like with Noether's theorem. What changes and what stays the same can classify all sets according to this. And so you have the neuron in the brain with simplicity and complexity. And that's basically the form of information like action reaction pairs and energy conservation. 

 So the question of how we could derive this I think ultimately relates to how the more distant connections don't actually match up as much and so loopholes are common with distance or higher information, but not in the more basic information.

  For example in the history of life on Earth the larger life took much more time to evolve than the one celled life. This was because the short distance connection of the cell was with the stronger connections where the in and out waves balance like for molecular computation, but larger life needed to overpower the loopholes of connections with more distance. So the basic connections would be the most sound and reliable foundation of logic we would find anywhere with energy conservation.

 This reminded me of about how Einstein didn't define a signal or information in relativity, but I define them as a change in like the mass or  energy of a body in one place, with an exchange of energy between them and that creates a definite change on the other side, even if it's only probabilistic like a lot of the quantum mechanics are defining connections like this. So this definition is also based on energy conservation and the same idea. When you have a change as a balance, then you have a foundation of information like in information theory. 

 Information theorists can't decide what information is. There are like 70 definitions. They're all arguing about it. I think this about energy conservation is going to be the ultimate one that's the same, the same as the problem of knowledge with the dispute about what information is itself because it's based on energy conservation not looser connections.

  And so if you have the action reaction pairs, they're balancing like the neuron. And so we can know ourselves because it's based on that same action reaction pair, and when we look at the world around us, everything is based on that same pattern, extending out from this basis. You were wise, and aware!

  I believe that all this means while although we can't know the higher knowledge as reliably, we can know it more by probabilistic connections, and we can start with the most secure knowledge.. Although it's only by axiom, it's what all the evidence shows more often.

 And experience is the best teacher for my hope to help you find more value in this these events and math. 

Click Here for my cleaning, health, and wealth product list and straight to the biz sources of these main products on my Benable recommendation list..THANKS!

My Invite Link;

Benable is a tool to create shareable lists of things you recommend! You can skip the waitlist and create your own shareable lists by signing up using my invite link: https://benable.com/i/E6VCN

 And I would say there's more foundation in that principle and we can know things. Ultimately, the higher knowledge itself is not completely without value.. it's at a higher level and we're more evolved than one celled life.

 So I think that we would find a probabilistic element of almost any event with a loophole,  and make use of Von Neuman's idea about evolution of behavior, so you can always find one best move in any game of strategy if you boost your advantages and limit your losses.

 -