Tesla Chargers
Energetic Forum  

Go Back   Energetic Forum > Energetic Forum Discussion > General Discussion
Homepage Energetic Science Ministries Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

General Discussion Other general discussions on topics not listed above.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-07-2012, 10:05 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Where does the information come from?

Where does the information come from?
/ Quantum Theory as Quantum Information /
===…
#
Does information begin on the quarks level?
No. Quark cannot leave an atom.
Maybe does proton have quant of information?
No. Single proton has no quant of information.
Why?
Because information can be transfered only by
electromagnetic fields. And we don’t have a theory
about protono-magnetic fields.
#
In our earthly world there is only one fundamental
particle - electron who can transfer information.
Can an electron be quant of information?
Maybe at first glance this seems to be a rather senseless questions.
But . . . . .
Energy is electromagnetic waves (em).
In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron
It means the source of these em waves must be an Electron
The electron and the em waves they are physical reality
==============
#
1900, 1905
Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f.
1916
Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c,
it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c.
1928
Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy:
+E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2.
According to QED in interaction with vacuum electron’s
energy is infinite: E= ∞
Questions.
Why does the simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas ?
Why does electron obey five ( 5) Laws ?
a) Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass
b) Maxwell’s equations
c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law
d) Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law
e) Fermi-Dirac statistics
#.
What is an electron ?
Now nobody knows
In the internet we can read hundreds theories about electron
All of them are problematical
We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics.
But how can we trust them if we don’t know what is electron ?
====.
Quote by Heinrich Hertz on Maxwell's equations:

"One cannot escape the feeling that these mathematical formulae
have an independent existence and an intelligence of their own,
that they are wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers,
that we get more out of them than was originally put into them."
====.
Ladies and Gentlemen !
Friends !
Electron is not as simple as we think and, maybe, he is wiser than we are.
==========.
#
We know, there is no information transfer
without energy transfer. More correct: there is no quant
information transfer without quant energy transfer.
And the electron has the least electric charge.
It means it has some quant of the least information.
What can electron do with this information?
Let us look the Mendeleev / Moseley periodic table.
We can see that electron interacts with proton
and creates atom of hydrogen.
This is simplest design, which was created by electron.
And we can see how this information grows and reaches
high informational level. And the most complex design,
which was created by electron is the Man.
The Man is alive essence. Animals, birds, fish are alive essences.
And an atom? And atom is also alive design.
The free atom of hydrogen can live about 1000 seconds.
And someone a long time ago has already said, that if to give
suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he would turn into Man.
Maybe it is better not to search about "dark, virtual particles "
but to understand what the electron is,
because even now nobody knows what electron is.
=======================
In my opinion the Electron is quant of information.
Was I mistaken? No !
Because according to Pauli Exclusion Principle
only one single electron can be in the atom.
This electron reanimates the atom.
This electron manages the atom.
If the atom contains more than one electron
(for example - two), this atom represents " Siamese twins".
Save us, the Great God, of having such atoms, such children!
Each of us has an Electron, but we do not know it.
#
Many years ago man has accustomed some wild
animals (wolf, horse, cat, bull , etc.)
and has made them domestic ones.
But the man understands badly the four-footed friends.
In 1897 J. J. Thomson discovered new particle - electron.
Gradually man has accustomed electron to work for him.
But the man does not understand what an electron is.
By my peasant logic at first it is better to understand
the closest and simplest particle photon /electron and
then to study the far away space and another particles.
==========.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
=====…
P.S.
Robert Milliken, who measured a charge of electron,
in his Nobel speech ( 1923 ) told, that he knew nothing
about the “last essence of electron”.
#
The verse: The world of electron.

But maybe these electrons are World,
where there are five continents:
the art,
knowledge,
wars,
thrones
and the memory of forty centuries.
/ Valery Brusov./
===============…
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-09-2012, 06:22 PM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Book: The Physics of Information
By F. ALEXANDER BAIS AND J. DOYNE FARMER
1
The notion of information as used by Shannon is a generalization
of the notion of entropy, which first appeared in thermodynamics.
In thermodynamics entropy is an abstract quantity depending on
heat and temperature whose interpretation is not obvious.
. . . .
It turns out that the concept of entropy or equivalently information
is useful in many applications that have nothing to do with physics.
3
It also turns out that thinking in these more general terms is useful
for physics. For example, Shannon's work makes it clear that entropy
is in some sense more fundamental than the quantities from which
it was originally derived.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0708.2837v2.pdf

My comment.

The conception of entropy appears in every chapter of this book.

The mathematician John von Neumann said to
"the father of information theory" Claude Shannon:
" Name it "entropy" then in discussions
you will receive solid advantage, because
nobody knows, what "entropy" basically is ".

And the Nobel laureate in chemistry 1909 Wilhelm Ostwald
said that the entropy is only a shadow of energy.

If we don’t know what entropy is, then today’s theory of information
is only a shadow of the future theory of information.
==========..
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2012, 03:52 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
‘Can energy and information be identified ? ‘
ask Carl Friedrich von Weizsacker in his book:
The unity of Nature. Page 282.
Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And on the page 290 – 291 he wrote:
‘ Mass is information.’
And on the page 292 he wrote:
‘ Energy is information.’
=========.
My opinion.
What is information from Quantum’s Theory point of view ?
From Quantum’s Theory point of view ‘information’ must be
some smallest bit / quantum of information. But physicists
in our world ( according to QED ) use only one particle –
electron to transfer information. They don’t use any another
particles ( quark, muon, meson, tau, . . . etc )
Therefore I say: ‘ The smallest bit / quantum of information
is electron with energy: E=h*f. ‘
===.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2012, 04:01 PM
MonsieurM's Avatar
MonsieurM MonsieurM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,058
Send a message via MSN to MonsieurM
you can also add : Srinivasa Ramanujan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
Srīnivāsa Rāmānujan FRS pronunciation (help·info) (22 December 1887 – 26 April 1920) was an Indian mathematician and autodidact who, with almost no formal training in pure mathematics, made extraordinary contributions to mathematical analysis, number theory, infinite series and continued fractions. Ramanujan was said by the English mathematician G.H. Hardy to be in the same league as mathematicians like Euler and Gauss in terms of natural genius
Quote:
In recognition of his contribution to mathematics, the Government of India declared in Dec 2011 to celebrate Ramanujan's birthday as 'National Mathematics Day' every year on 22 December and declared 2012 as the 'National Mathematical Year
Quote:
Personality and spiritual life

Ramanujan has been described as a person with a somewhat shy and quiet disposition, a dignified man with pleasant manners.[79] He lived a rather Spartan life while at Cambridge. Ramanujan's first Indian biographers describe him as rigorously orthodox. Ramanujan credited his acumen to his family Goddess, Namagiri of Namakkal. He looked to her for inspiration in his work,[80] and claimed to dream of blood drops that symbolised her male consort, Narasimha, after which he would receive visions of scrolls of complex mathematical content unfolding before his eyes.[81] He often said, "An equation for me has no meaning, unless it represents a thought of God."[82][83]

Hardy cites Ramanujan as remarking that all religions seemed equally true to him.[84] Hardy further argued that Ramanujan's religiousness had been romanticised by Westerners and overstated—in reference to his belief, not practice—by Indian biographers. At the same time, he remarked on Ramanujan's strict observance of vegetarianism.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2012, 07:41 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Physicists spooked by faster-than-light information transfer.

Physicists spooked by faster-than-light information transfer : Nature News

===.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 10:22 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
DNA – Information - Evolution.

Carl Friedrich von Weizsacker in his book:
‘ The unity of Nature ‘ tried to understand the interaction
between information and DNA. He wrote:
‘ Organisms control their own growth by means of the genetic
information stored in the DNA molecules, . . . ‘ / page 281 /
‘ . . . the amount of information contained in the DNA . . . . is
the information corresponding to the concept ‘ genetic constitution’.
/ page 281 /
DNA is indeed the carrier of the genetic constitution.
/ page 282 /
#
My question.
How does DNA "draw" the shape of a human?
To draw the shape of a child from zygote DNA must know physics,
mathematics, geometry . . . etc.
How is possible to understand that DNA knows all these subjects?
If the child was born intelligent then it means that DNA knows physics,
mathematics, geometry and . . . etc.
#
My question.
Where does DNA fit into the evolution debate?
DNA information is not static information.
DNA information is dealing with ‘ flow of information.’
DNA information is dealing with ‘progressive information.’
DNA information can evolve.
DNA information evolves from zygote to the intelligent child.
#
Our body is a multi-cellular organism made up
of perhaps 100 trillion different cells.
‘ The information content in the nucleus of a single human cell
is comparable to that of a library containing a thousand volumes.’
/ The unity of Nature, page 40. /
Question:
How can 100 trillion different cells (100 trillion libraries with a
thousand volumes in each) create a child ( by the chance )
during 9 months if according to the probability theory
it is impossible?
#
Today scientists think that everything begins from ‘Big Bang’.
And according to ‘big bang’ our Universe exist 13 (+) billion years.
My question :
Is it possible to create a child from cell [ zygote] only in 280 days
according to Probability theory?
If " yes "it will be take time not 280 days but it will be take time
more than our Universe exist and then ,maybe, the pregnancy
woman was before the ‘ big bang’.
If ‘ no’ then the process must have aim.
It means somebody /something must manage this process.
===.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
========.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2012, 02:48 PM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
1
If DNA contains code - instructions - bits, it means that
DNA knows physics, chemistry, mathematics, geometry . . . etc.

2
If the reason of evolution is ' by chance ' ( by the DNA chance )
then before was a pregnant woman who gave life to a child
who invented the ‘ big bang’ theory.

===.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-18-2012, 05:52 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
But still, what you propose is wrong in two completely different
respects, both showing a fundamental lack of understanding.

First,
that there are a lot of cells in the human body, perhaps 100 trillion,
is irrelevant to the information content since the DNA in all of these
is essentially the same.
So 100 trillion libraries is no different from one library if you
choose to use that very unhelpful metaphor for what DNA constitutes.
/ Richard Norman /
the DNA in all of these is essentially the same.
/ Richard Norman /

Maybe ‘the DNA in all of these is essentially the same.’
But cells come in all shapes and sizes .
Socratus
#
Second,
I already said that probability theory in no way says that the
development of a human child in nine months from a single
fertilized egg is impossible.
Therefore the existence of such a child does not at all mean
somebody/something must be managing it.
/ Richard Norman /

It is your opinion or law that probability theory doesn’t work
in biology ( cells ) and in astrophysics ( big bang ).
Socratus


Actually there is something that does manage it:
the workings out of the machinery of biochemistry and
biophysics and molecular biology and developmental biology.
/ Richard Norman /

Cells make copies of themselves,. . .
Different cells make different copies of themselves,. . .
Cells come in all shapes and sizes . . . .
Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves
and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! )
and by chance ( ! ) they change own geometrical form
from zygote to a child.
Cells come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you ( !? )
This is modern biomechanical /chemical point of view.
Socratus
==.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2012, 03:13 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’
But this explanation is not complete.
Cells have an energy / electrical potential.
Cells have an electromagnetic field.
Therefore we need to say:
‘ Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.’
===.
Is this formulation correct?

==.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2012, 10:07 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Cells make copies of themselves.
Different cells make different copies of themselves.
Cells come in all shapes and sizes.
Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves
and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! )
and by chance ( or not by chance ) they change own
geometrical form from zygote to a child.
Cells come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you.
Cells they are you ( !? )
This is modern biomechanical /chemical point of view.
#
Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’
But this explanation is not complete.
Cells have an energy / electrical potential.
Cells have an electromagnetic field.
Therefore we need to say:
‘ Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.’
===.
Is this formulation correct?
Of course it is correct.
Why?
Because:
Bioelectromagnetism (sometimes equated with bioelectricity)
refers to the electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic fields
produced by living cells, tissues or organisms.

Bioelectromagnetism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What does it mean?
It means there isn’t biological cell without electromagnetic fields.
It means that in the cell we have two ( 2 ) substances:
matter and electromagnetic fields.
And in 1985 Richard P. Feynman wrote book:
QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter

The idea of book - the interaction between light
( electromagnetic fields ) and matter is strange.

He wrote: ‘ The theory of quantum electrodynamics
describes Nature as absurd from the point of view
of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment.
So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd. ‘
/ page 10. /
#
Once again:
1.
Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.
2.
We cannot understand their interaction and therefore
we don’t know the answer to the question: ‘ who am I ?’
===.
Socratus.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 04-20-2012, 04:04 PM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Quantum electrodynamics: Who am I ?
==.
Can QED give the answer to the question: ‘ Who am I ? ’
To answer to this question allow me to take one biological cell.
The cell has two ( 2 ) substances: matter and electromagnetic
fields. Then we need to understand :
Where did the matter and electromagnetic fields come from?
Question:
Do we need to search for two sources or enough one source ?
#
Matter and electromagnetic fields are some kind of energy.
But matter and energy were tied in one formula: E=Mc^2.
Therefore I will unite matter, energy and electromagnetic
fields in one simple question:
Where does E=Mc^2 come from ?
We have many sources of E=Mc^2:
F. Hasenohrl, A. Einstein, P. Dirac.
====.
Socratus.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2012, 03:53 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
One postulate says:
In vacuum the speed of quantum of light is constant.
It is correct that ‘a vacuum doesn't have a measurable
rest frame’. Why?
Because in vacuum the speed of quantum of light is maximum
and time is stopped, become infinite, unlimited. It means that the
reference frame of vacuum is also infinite, unlimited.
And infinity we cannot measure.
But this doesn’t mean that infinite vacuum doesn’t exist.
We have theories ( thermodynamics and quantum physics) which
explain us the parameters of infinite vacuum.
#
If we measure the speed of quantum of light in vacuum from
different inertial frames the result will be the *same* - constant.
Why?
Because all different inertial frames ( stars and planets of billions
and billions galaxies ) exist in infinite motionless, stationary,
fixed (rest) reference frame of Vacuum.
Socratus

===
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 04-23-2012, 04:20 AM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Quantum electrodynamics: Who am I ?
==.
We can understand this situation only using Quantum theory.
There isn’t QT without Quantum of Light and Electron.
And what is interaction between Quantum of Light, Electron and brain ?
Nobody knows.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 06-06-2012, 07:25 PM
socratus's Avatar
socratus socratus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Israel
Posts: 171
Biophoton communication:
Biophoton Communication: Can Cells Talk Using Light? - Technology Review

==..
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8
2007 Copyright ? Energetic Forum? A Non Profit Corporation - All Rights Reserved