My updated model of the universe from a quantum outlook

[showboat]

http://www.sciencene...y_gets_physical

This purification principle requires the quantum phenomenon known as entanglement, which connects the parts to the whole. It also explains why quantum information can’t be copied without destroying it but can be “teleported” — replicated at a distant location after being destroyed at its point of origin.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so mine is a quantum outlook.

As facts the two space time bubbles are the same and atomic matter and energy are perceptional as what we exist in between the two.

Whats the interesting fact is that its not total Symmetry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry

Like a bar magnet with two poles you would expect a paper laid on it and had iron powder it would be a+ and a-.

not the case.

And the universe looks hot dog shaped.

The earth is at 1/6 of the end hotdog shape and a another planet is at the same distance from the other boundarythat looks somewhat earth at the first[hydrogen sulfide gas as chemical energy source at first]

So seeing it from the surface the sky looks yellow and the sun blue due to atmoshere absortion of the sun rays[in outer space all suns are white.

[Tobin Dax]

So seeing it from the surface the sky looks yellow and the sun blue due to atmoshere absortion of the sun rays[in outer space all suns are white.

What is your definition of "sun"?
What is your definition of "white"?
If you are able, please explain with sufficient mathematically detail how "all suns are white" over the possible range of temperatures.

What is your explanation of why, here on Earth, the sky is blue and the sun is yellow?

[tusenfem]

showboat

If you want to discuss your ideas here in ATM, you will have to present them here on the board, and not in a non-functional link to an external website.

And you might want to check the text you write for general readability and understandability.

And BTW, since when is the sun blue and the sky yellow?

[EigenState]

Greetings,

I believe that the link posted by showboat refers to the following paper:

G. Chiribella, G. M. D'Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Informational derivation of Quantum Theory, Phys. Rev. A, 84, 012311 (2011).

Best regards,
EigenState

[showboat]

Greetings,

I believe that the link posted by showboat refers to the following paper:

G. Chiribella, G. M. D'Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Informational derivation of Quantum Theory, Phys. Rev. A, 84, 012311 (2011).

Best regards,
EigenState

Yep, I have to let the math guys find the math.

The field is a probabilty field like a bar magnet, but atoms the iron.

Info and probality transfer between the two time/space poles is definiyly in the realm of math.

So the math guys will find a elegant equation like general theory of relativity with a math lens and data tester for photons and electrons.

So math is a matter of ratios and finding the master equation makes sense when a device collects data.

[showboat]

Yep, I have to let the math guys find the math.

The field is a probabilty field like a bar magnet, but atoms the iron.

Info and probality transfer between the two time/space poles is definiyly in the realm of math.

So the math guys will find a elegant equation like general theory of relativity with a math lens and data tester for photons and electrons.

So math is a matter of ratios and finding the master equation makes sense when a device collects data.

[One possible model has been suggested by Christopher Hill, a theorist at Fermilab who 20 years ago proposed how a top quark and its antiparticle could impart mass to the W and Z bosons, particles that carry the weak nuclear force responsible for radioactive decay. The work, updated in 20032, draws heavily on an analogy with some types of low-temperature superconductors, materials that have no electrical resistance at temperatures just a few degrees above absolute zero.

In some superconductors, electrons pair up, bound by particle-like vibrations in the material. The bound electrons limit the range over which the electromagnetic force can act within the material, an effect that in turn imparts an effective mass to nearby photons — particles of light, which carry the long-range electromagnetic force and are normally weightless.
\


Independent confirmation

The asymmetry observed at DZero is not certain enough to constitute proof of the existence of the top gluon, but it does independently match findings reported4 earlier this year by researchers at the Tevatron's other detector, the Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF).

[showboat]

As a explanation for the planet description] when the observer on the surface looking up into yellow atmosphere[sulfur based] and sees a blue sun fro0m the surface..

[Tensor]

[One possible model has been suggested by Christopher Hill, a theorist at Fermilab who 20 years ago proposed how a top quark and its antiparticle could impart mass to the W and Z bosons, particles that carry the weak nuclear force responsible for radioactive decay. The work, updated in 20032, draws heavily on an analogy with some types of low-temperature superconductors, materials that have no electrical resistance at temperatures just a few degrees above absolute zero.

In some superconductors, electrons pair up, bound by particle-like vibrations in the material. The bound electrons limit the range over which the electromagnetic force can act within the material, an effect that in turn imparts an effective mass to nearby photons — particles of light, which carry the long-range electromagnetic force and are normally weightless.

Ya know, quoting directly from a source, without attributing that source, is considered really, really bad form. It also leaves the impression that you, yourself came up with the ideas and words that are in the post, when you didn't. Be that as it may, Here is the actual source for the quote above. And, interestingly, it was just posted 17 hours ago (at 0412 GMT, as I write this).

Independent confirmation

No it's not. I'll also note that your following two statements are also from the article, with no attribution.

The asymmetry observed at DZero is not certain enough to constitute proof of the existence of the top gluon,

Do you understand why this statement means that there is no independent confirmation?

but it does independently match findings reported4 earlier this year by researchers at the Tevatron's other detector, the Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF).

Yes, and a DZero spokesmand, Dmitri Denisov, says, "The observed top-quark asymmetry is being compared to an imperfect surrogate for the true standard model, so the supposed discrepancy might fall within the uncertainty of the model." He also notes that the results are similar, not that they match, there is a difference.

[EigenState]

Greetings,

I simply must admit that I am completely lost here. Based upon the title of this thread, I was under the impression that we were discussing a quantum-cosmological model. Frankly, I never saw what entanglement had to do with "two space time bubbles" that were somehow like a "bar magnet".

But now we have suddenly jumped to "top quark and its antiparticle could impart mass to the W and Z bosons," superconductors, and gluons. I have intentionally neglected "yellow atmospheres" and "blue suns".

I also must fully admit that I have no intention whatsoever of digging through a 47 page long article in Phys Rev A for this discussion.

Thus, my direct question for showboat:

ES1. What exactly is the hypothesis that you are presenting? Please articulate your proposal explicitly.

Best regards,
EigenState

[Shaula]

And why would a sulphur base atmosphere be yellow? Solid sulphur is. But the most common gaseous form of it (H2S) is clear. Infamously so, in fact.

Edit: So is sulphur dioxide

[tusenfem]

showboat, please state specifically what that ATM is that you want to discuss here.
If not, this thread will be closed.

[Strange]

http://www.sciencene...y_gets_physical

Broken link.

As facts the two space time bubbles are the same and atomic matter and energy are perceptional as what we exist in between the two.

How are these "facts" rather than assertions?
What are these "two space time bubbles"? And if they are the same, why is that not one bubble?
What does "atomic matter and energy are perceptional" mean?
We exist between the two what? Two bubbles? Matter and energy?

And the universe looks hot dog shaped.

What does "hot dog shaped" mean? Cylindrical with rounded ends?
What do you base this assertion on?

The earth is at 1/6 of the end hotdog shape and a another planet is at the same distance from the other boundarythat looks somewhat earth at the first[hydrogen sulfide gas as chemical energy source at first]

Does this mean that the Earth is 1/6th the way from the end of this "hotdog"? How do you know this?
How big is this hotdog? How do you know this?
And how do you know there is this other earth-like planet at the other end of the universe?
And why do you think hydrogen sulphide has anything to with it?

So seeing it from the surface the sky looks yellow and the sun blue due to atmoshere absortion of the sun rays

Seeing what from the surface?
Why doesn't the sky look yellow?
Why doesn't the sun look blue?

in outer space all suns are white

What is the basis for this assertion?

[showboat]

Greetings,

I simply must admit that I am completely lost here. Based upon the title of this thread, I was under the impression that we were discussing a quantum-cosmological model. Frankly, I never saw what entanglement had to do with "two space time bubbles" that were somehow like a "bar magnet".

But now we have suddenly jumped to "top quark and its antiparticle could impart mass to the W and Z bosons," superconductors, and gluons. I have intentionally neglected "yellow atmospheres" and "blue suns".

I also must fully admit that I have no intention whatsoever of digging through a 47 page long article in Phys Rev A for this discussion.

Thus, my direct question for showboat:

ES1. What exactly is the hypothesis that you are presenting? Please articulate your proposal explicitly.

Best regards,
EigenState

Well the two identical space time bubbles might form a type of oscillator
where matter is the antenna for information.

Another way to view it is that matter is a standing wave[combination of multiple waves]

I saw a tv program where the demonstration used water with a ultrasound
A transducer is a device that converts one type of energy to another. Energy types include (but are not limited to) electrical, mechanical,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transducer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humidifier

... like they use in ultrasonic humidifier for ashma, to create standing waves and the a drop silicon oil was added so it stayed as a droplet and see what happened as the slit illustration as where it goes.

[EigenState]

Greetings,

Well the two identical space time bubbles might form a type of oscillator
where matter is the antenna for information.

Another way to view it is that matter is a standing wave[combination of multiple waves]

I saw a tv program where the demonstration used water with a ultrasound
A transducer is a device that converts one type of energy to another. Energy types include (but are not limited to) electrical, mechanical,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transducer

... like they use in ultrasonic humidifier for ashma to create standing waves and the a drop silicon oil was added so it stayed as a droplet and see what happened as the slit illustration as where it goes.

Those responses hardly clarify your intended Against the Mainstream (ATM) hypothesis. So again I ask:

ES1. What exactly is the hypothesis that you are presenting? Please articulate your proposal explicitly.

Best regards,
EigenState

[Geo Kaplan]

Well the two identical space time bubbles might form a type of oscillator
where matter is the antenna for information. {snip}

And it could be nanognomes all the way down, for all the evidence you've offered.

Do you have an actual theory or not? If you just have a series of assertions, you're not going to get too far here. We can assert back and forth until the clock runs out, but what use is that?

[showboat]

And it could be nanognomes all the way down, for all the evidence you've offered.

Do you have an actual theory or not? If you just have a series of assertions, you're not going to get too far here. We can assert back and forth until the clock runs out, but what use is that?

----------------------------------------------------------

Thats the theory which the math guys are going prove out soon.

If you want a quantum telescope go to the [A physicist is a scientist who studies or practices physics. Physicists study a wide range of physical phenomena in many branches of physics spanning all ...]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicist

They are good at making expensive small testing devices at a university.

[pzkpfw]

Ref: post #11.

Showboat, as you are unable to clearly articulate what your idea/claim/theory/hypothesis is, this thread is closed - there's nothing of substance to discuss.

If you can come up with something useful, please include it in a report of this post, to have re-opening this thread considered by the mods.