Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/6897769e-4ee4-800f-aba5-69cca34f701c
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Assistant: Thank you—I'm glad you're finding this process meaningful. === Thank you—I'm glad you're finding this process meaningful. Let's take a deep critical look at both: ==== ### ==== Overview: This section proposes a reinterpretation of Einstein’s energy-mass equivalence by embedding it in a dynamic spherical geometry. The inclusion of: * γ (Lorentz factor) links to special relativity. * c² is reinterpreted not as a constant alone but as a symbol of spherical wavefront expansion—radiant energy moving perpendicular to a spherical surface. * ∞ is used to imply an ongoing, frame-by-frame process of time’s evolution—a novel interpretation that aligns with a theory of emergent time. Strengths: * Embeds known physics (special relativity) into a visual-geometric language. * The use of spherical symmetry aligns with well-known principles in electromagnetism (e.g. inverse-square law, radiation fields). * Philosophically elegant: places time, energy, and symmetry as central. * Incorporates Noether’s Theorem and Euler’s Identity, showing deep symmetry connections in physics. Weaknesses / Open Questions: * What does the ∞ truly quantify? Is it literal (ongoing computation of frames) or metaphorical (eternal evolution)? * Can this spherical wavefront structure be mathematically formalized in a way that allows for testable predictions? * If time is modeled as a continuous unfolding of spherical interactions, how does this map to spacetime curvature in General Relativity? * The use of c² as area growth is conceptually rich, but would need to bridge to field theory and/or quantum field descriptions to gain traction. ===== Overview: ===== This section links QAT’s core ideas to large-scale structure—connecting mass-energy relations to time, radiant geometry, Euler’s e, plasma physics, and the cellular structure of the cosmos. Strengths: * Mᵤ ~ t² is a bold proposal that connects mass to the age of the Universe, giving a direction for exploring dynamic mass accumulation or redistribution. * The connection between right-angles and spherical expansion ties in elegantly with the use of imaginary numbers and the complex plane. '' Inclusion of Euler’s number ''e* adds a deeply mathematical constant that is indeed fundamental to time-dependent processes. * Bringing in plasma physics and Hannes Alfvén is a major strength. His observation of cell walls and current sheets in space fits naturally with QAT’s idea of spherical energy exchange and right-angle geometry. * The concept that gravity is emergent from electromagnetic structure is shared by many alternative physics proposals and is gaining interest in modified gravity research. Weaknesses / Open Questions: * Mᵤ ~ t² is a striking claim, but would require observational support or a derivation from first principles (perhaps using your geometry). * The role of plasma and electromagnetic force as primary over gravity aligns with the Electric Universe model, which is controversial. If adopted, QAT would need to carefully distinguish itself or justify why it supports this hierarchy. * There’s a lack of distinction between potential energy defined by c² (Schrödinger) and gravitational binding energy. These would need clearer definitions. * The use of imaginary numbers is rich, but how does this map to measurable physical properties (like spin or angular momentum)? * There is no formal connection yet between QAT’s geometry and quantum field theory, general relativity, or plasma MHD equations (though the opportunity exists!). ==== Short Answer: ==== Yes—net charge separation and large-scale electromagnetic structures can exist, especially in plasma environments. ===== 1. Plasma is charged by definition. It is a state of matter in which electrons are stripped from nuclei, so free charges (ions and electrons) move independently. This means electric currents and magnetic fields are intrinsic to plasma. ===== # Stars and interstellar medium are plasma-rich. Stars are giant balls of plasma. Magnetic fields can cause localized or global charge separations, especially in solar flares, corona mass ejections, and other high-energy phenomena. # Double layers and cell walls exist in space plasma. As Alfvén described, space can be divided into regions by current sheets, with differing magnetic and electric potential. These can span entire stars, stellar systems, or galactic structures. # Electric fields can be shielded by Debye lengths, but: - In space, where densities are low and temperatures are high, Debye lengths can be enormous, allowing for vast-scale electromagnetic structures. - Interstellar filaments, jets from quasars, and cosmic web filaments may be examples of this. # Modern Plasma Cosmology and Electric Universe theories explore this, but are controversial in mainstream physics. Still, many space plasma phenomena support large-scale electromagnetic structuring of the cosmos. ==== | | | | ==== | --- | --- | --- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Would you like me to now write a follow-up section formally adding this plasma geometry and electromagnetic cosmology into the evolving document? Or perhaps an article format for public release?
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)