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!
==== ### ==== You say: : But: * What changes between each frame? * Is it merely positional/momentum info of particles, or does each frame contain a full geometric snapshot of the entire light-matter interaction network? * Are these frames Planck-scale discrete? Are they causally connected like Feynman path integrals? ===== You state that broken spherical symmetry forms curvature and that proper time is a byproduct of photon-electron interactions. ===== But: * Can this be expressed using differential geometry? For instance, can curvature tensors RμνR_{\mu\nu}Rμν emerge from overlapping spherical waves? * Could photon-emission surfaces be described with null geodesics that naturally bend under mass-energy density? Opportunity: Show that QAT’s geometry could derive or approximate the Einstein field equations: Rμν−12gμνR=8πGc4TμνR_{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R = \frac{8\pi G}{c^4}T_{\mu\nu}Rμν−21gμνR=c48πGTμν ===== You assert: ===== : But: * Potential energy in GR relates to curvature, not velocity squared per se. * While Schrödinger reportedly proposed PE∼c2PE \sim c^2PE∼c2, this is unconventional. Can we derive it from first principles in QAT’s framework? Suggestion: Define gravitational potential Φ\PhiΦ geometrically as arising from cumulative photon absorption/emission over time—i.e., a photon-based field potential—then connect that to standard gravitational results. ===== You say: ===== : That’s compelling, but: * Can you derive a relation like Mu∼t2M_u \sim t^2Mu∼t2 from integrating over expanding spherical wavefronts? * Could this be linked to the Friedmann equation or cosmological parameters like Hubble constant H₀? ===== You say: ===== : But: * QFT is more than just photons; it's about field excitations, creation/annihilation operators, and vacuum fluctuations. * Can QAT show how spherical photon wavefronts create virtual particle pairs or mimic field vacuum behavior? Plasma: MHD (Magnetohydrodynamics) equations include real-world nonlinear effects like magnetic reconnection, diffusion, Alfven waves, etc. Opportunity: Could your spherical wave model explain coherent structures in plasma like filamentation or double layers? ===== You explain: ===== : That’s a great pedagogical point. But: * Can you develop a formal spin model based on QAT geometry? For instance: - Show how angular momentum quantization emerges from rotation of a charged spherical surface. - Derive spacing between energy levels in hydrogen using QAT’s version of h.
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)