sci.physics.research Google Group

Re: is zpe = dark energy = higgs ocean = Goldstone Phase

rds...@att.net (Richard D. Saam) — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:51:39 UT

The cosmological constant can be related to zero-point energy from basic
principles.
The inhibiting characteristic of the zero point energy(zpe) is that it
has a contribution of zpe = hb*omega/2 from every point in space,
resulting in a calculation of infinite zero-point energy which is not
observed.

Re: where did the i come from

igor...@gmail.com (Igor Khavkine) — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:41:45 UT

That's not necessarily true. The integral of 1/(z-i0^+) over the real
line is imaginary, i*pi to be precise. The imaginary part appears due to
the prescription that avoids the poles of the integrand.
Glancing at the appendix or 't Hooft and Veltman's paper, he seems to
refer to section 3 for the precise prescription of how the integrals

The Nature of "Now"

jdjo...@ptd.net (James D Jones) — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:41:46 UT

Hello Folks,
I have been monitoring this forum for a while and think this might be
the place to ask for help. I am not a professional physicist but I have
a BS in physics so I know a bit of the language.
I have been thinking about the nature of "now". What happens at that
boundary called "now" between an unknowable future where systems,

Re: Accelerating rocket/light beam question

chalkys...@bleachboys.co.uk (Chalky) — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:41:46 UT

On Jan 7, 11:09 pm, hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.d e (Phillip Helbig---
This would seem to be a theoretical as opposed to practical objection.
(If not, please advise where we too can purchase the clocks and rulers
which are capable of telling the difference between the Earth's g field
and the effects of acceleration, within the boundary walls of a rocket).

Re: Accelerating rocket/light beam question

chalkys...@bleachboys.co.uk (Chalky) — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 19:14:57 UT

On Jan 7, 11:09 pm, hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.d e (Phillip Helbig---
If we are going to be pedantic about this, I think you will find the
most significant source of non uniformity is not in the Earth's
gravitational field, but in the turbulence of the thrust of the rocket
propulsion system.

Re: spooky communication

tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net (Tom Roberts) — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 03:49:54 UT

Energy is also not intrinsic to a photon. Energy and frequency are both
relationships between the photon and an observer's coordinate system.
For example, different observers can observe a given light beam with
different energies and frequencies ("Doppler shift"). The same holds for
the individual photons of such a beam, except that only one observer can

Re: where did the i come from

c...@brannenworks.com (CarlB) — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 03:49:21 UT

I'm no expert, but it sure looks like both sides need to be real. So
I'd
say that the paper has an error. This sort of thing is not uncommon.
Carl

Re: spooky communication

dirk.bru...@gmail.com (Dirk Bruere at NeoPax) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 23:09:43 UT

It's not?
How can that be if it has a specific energy?
E = hf?

Re: Constraints on spatial flatness.

chalkys...@bleachboys.co.uk (Chalky) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 23:09:39 UT

I don't see that this need be a problem in any system of coordinates
constructed around the observer at the (thus defined) spatial origin.
You then only need one clock, the observer's, to describe the dynamism
of the observable universe, relative to that observer. Space at a
fixed time difference from that clock is then space at a fixed light

Re: Accelerating rocket/light beam question

hel...@astro.multiclothesvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 23:09:35 UT

In article <k7KdnZ_Onqb4L__UnZ2dnUVZ_gKdn ...@posted.docknet>, David
In that case, by definition, there is no way to distinguish the two.
No. IIRC, there is NO WAY to produce a uniform gravitational field.
Approximately uniform to some accuracy within a certain region, yes, but
not precisely uniform over a finite region, not even in principle.

Re: Double Slit Experiment

yayasol...@yahoo.com (Ryan Solete) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 21:41:03 UT

---
[[Mod. note -- I have rewrapped the excessively-long-lines in the
author's original submission, and inserted paragraph breaks. -- jt]]
Hi, I read your article on the Double Slit Experiment over and
over (as well as many other articles on the subject) and have several
questions that nobody has been able to successfully answer. Hopefully

Re: Accelerating rocket/light beam question

ralivings...@sbcglobal.net (Rich L.) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 21:33:55 UT

..
You are mistaken here, or else misunderstood the comment. The speed
of light local to an observer is postulated to be constant, "c", for
any observer in any location, in General Relativity. Once you
consider accelerating frames, however, it is easy to show that the
speed of light observed non-locally cannot be a constant. This is a

Re: where did the i come from

mike.ja...@infomaxgroup.co.uk (Mike James) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 21:31:54 UT

I'm still stuck.
Any one?
mikej

Optical Computing: special issue - Natural Computing, Springer

optical.supercomput...@gmail.com (optical supercomputing) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 21:31:22 UT

CALL FOR PAPERS
Special issue on Optical SuperComputing
Natural Computing journal, Springer-Verlag
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------
Scope
Using light, instead of electric power, for performing computations is
an exciting idea whose applications can be already seen on the market.

Question about photon wavefunction

jyab...@nycap.rr.com (Jay R. Yablon) — Wed, 01 Jan 2009 21:29:57 UT

I have often seen an photon field quantum A^u written in terms of a
polarization vector epsilon^u and plane wave exp[ip^.ux_u] as:
A^u = epsilon^u exp[ip^u x_u] (1)
1) Is p^u considered to be the momentum vector of that subject
photon, or an independent variable of integration unconnected to the
photon?