Atoms as little galaxies, galaxies as large atoms

Oh, well, I’ll keep going.

What we’re dealing with here
is a fractal- where the form that
is the galaxy is repeated at the level of
the atoms that make up the galaxy.
And then there is going to be the
atoms making up the atoms.

And it goes further. How much further?
Infinitely? Or seven times or somesuch?
Doesn’t matter.

What DOES matter, is that the mini-matter
making up the electron is also radiating- just like our suns.
There is also a whole mini-emr associated with electrons,
with this concept, including mini-neutrinos, which would
be given off by fusion in the mini-suns. So that means,
in addition to all these neutrinos we got going through
us from fusion in suns, we also got a huge flux of these
mini-neutrinos going through us all the time, from
mini-fusion in all the electrons. All the electrons everywhere.
Lots and lots of energy. That energy is absorbed by protons
in equal amount as it is given off by electrons, because the
protons are always using it to recycle burnt-out electron bits.

So it would in this scenario be the flux of mini-radiation from
wherever there are electrons in the universe being absorbed by
the local protons, which must always replace what their
electrons are constantly radiating away, that would produce inertia
and gravitation for our matter.

Fun?

john

The interesting thing immediately when
considering the wave of one rotation/two precessions
is that eight of them make this very cool pattern:
users.accesscomm.ca/john/galaxypattern.GIF

Since two members can share one wave, this means
a maximum of 16 members. What if we compare the
Periodic Table to the completing of 16-member shells?

Then it gets even more interesting:
users.accesscomm.ca/john/periodicpattern.GIF

john

How do you know this?

Okay- I don’t ‘know’ it.
But it is the most attractive choice, since it
contains fewer and less onerous quandaries.

Consider if there is a smallest- a Higgs.
What shape can it have, since it
cannot be made of smaller parts?
It has to be dimensionless, since if you
say a dimension, I can consider a smaller
measurement. But it has to be unique, since it
is “the Higgs”. So how can something that can’t
be measured or given a shape be unique?

On the other hand, if everything, when
looked at from a certain perspective (atom/galaxy),
is made from smaller patterns of itself, then
continuing with that to infinity
seems to me to only have that one sticking point-
infinity.
And calculus deals with infinities all the time.

john

Just checking. Fractals seem to imply infinity in both directions. But the so-called Planck length is the smallest meaningful increment of distance, about 10 to the minus 33 centimeters. Wikipedia says the physical significance of the Planck length is a topic of research and since the Planck length is so many orders of magnitudes smaller than any currently possible measurement, there is no hope of directly probing this length scale in the foreseeable future. Research on the Planck length is therefore mostly theoretical. Calculus may deal with theoretical infinities, that doesn’t mean there are corresponding physical entities, right? So it’s a kewl idea, but who knows, right?

The Planck length is just another event horizon of a particular kind. Conjecture about what happens beyond event horizons is speculative, but to say that nothing happens beyond event horizons seems out of character with respect to scientific research - i.e. it reminds me of the stories about old sailors afraid to sail west of Gibraltor - “the end of the world”.

Another way to look at this is to consider how our concepts ultimately never “match up” with reality. For instance, if you keep travelling half the distance towards a particular location, you can never arrive. Yet we do arrive. There is something deficient, when you stretch concepts as far as they can be stretched, about their usefulness. Our concepts may only make any sense at particular scales. The Planck length is a surprisingly exacting expression of this very notion.

Seems we all agree that whether there is an absolute smallest particle or an infinity of ever smaller particles is a matter of speculation at this point. That’s all I’m saying.

I agree. But I’m taking it a bit further - the very idea of “particles” may correspond to our own limitations rather than to some hypothetical mind-independent reality. Is there even such a thing as a “particle”?

Right…could be just a wave. :greetings-wavegreen:

Or an angel.

:angelic-whiteflying:

A three-dimensional wave.
A three-dimensional wave that somehow feeds off a
bigger three-dimensional wave and is composed of
a gazillion little three-dimensional waves.

What is fun with the atom/galaxy thing, is now
you get to fill in bits of the
puzzle on two boards based on trying to match
what you see.
Like, you can say, “The reason the galaxy has a
double-layered spherical halo with different star
flow in each layer is because each time the
disc precesses through, it is rotating the opposite
direction.” And they would say, “There is no
evidence the galaxy disc precesses.” And you would
know that it has to, if it is to have a spherical
atom-like presence. Plus what about that slight
opposite warping visible in the disc-edges of most
spiral galaxies?
So now you’re looking for stuff in each based on
what you know of the other, and
you gain both ways.

john

Anyway science demands that a theory be testable. When stuff gets really small, it acts like particles under some conditions and like a wave under others. there are limits to our ability to measure position and velocity of really small stuff simultaneously. If you multiply the uncertainty about the position of really small stuff by the uncertainty of its momentum, the result can never be smaller that a certain fixed quantity. Any smaller and it seems either position or momentum falls out. We can’t have a little galaxy the planets of which are nowhere can we? You may say that these apparent limitations are merely conceptual, but unless someone comes up with a conceptual model that works theoretically and is testable aren’t we just whistling in the wind? :-"

I don’t know. What made people sail west of Gibraltar? William Herschel was convinced there were men living on the moon. Some dreams are realized, some aren’t. Some theories are useful, some aren’t. But when the idea of usefulness is used as an argument against dreaming… well, that’s the beginning of the end for science. You just end up with Lysenkoism.

Sounds like you’re taking Rasava’s poetics pretty literally! :slight_smile:

If you figure out a way to sail into the infinitely small or the infinitely large in this life time I salute you. :handgestures-salute:

I can’t walk through walls, either. But that doesn’t mean walls aren’t permeable!

It means they aren’t permeable by you. [ Anon attempting to walk through a wall => ](*,)]

But science is being viewed through us, through a totally arbitrarily designed machine with totally arbitrarily sense organs, and thought processes and circuits and pain/pleasure circuits, etc. We are not some objective reference system measuring the world objectively, we are a slab of quirky Mass Enerrgy interacting in a quirky manner with another slab of quirky Mass Energy and measuring the events and cataloging and memorizing them as repetitive patterns in our “memory”.

We are not “nowhere”, we are a very specifically defined design, one very particular and quirky random design out of trillions of other possible designs (new designs that you can achieve by sticking wild chemicals, wild symbols and wild signals in the ball of meat that is the brain, as in Instant Singularity) interacting with itself, talking to itself basically since the slab of Matter that is outside or inside the other slab is arbitrarily defined, it is just matter talking to itself.

For a hammer, everything is a nail. Thought is like a hammer, for thought everything is just a thought itself, or another thought, or a logical sequence, or a sequence of symbols, or a logical entity or logical event. Everything is decomposed into the identity principle, to distinguish an item from another, same or different, interacting items, something exists as opposed to something different from itself, logic generates logic, a never ending recursion, tied into sensations, events, slabs of Mass Energy colliding with other slabs and creating language, thoughts and meanings all associated with memories, pain/pleasure circuits, past memories defining the present state of reality etc. Thought is our measuring device, we measure everything with our thought - logic - language, and measure our own thought constantly with the only measuring device we have. Any event and interaction is translated in a denotation, a symbol, a thought event, a sequence and process.

Anything can relate to anything, decompose thought itself, outside of your mind, external matter is crystallized thoughts, but thought is just a word anyways, another sequence of symbols, never ending, connections, interactions, events. The rock on the floor is the real mind and thought, your thought is simply a piece of trash on the sidewalk for the rock…

Check out:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=176423

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=176611

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=172275

And all of the other posts by nameta9 and old6598 on ilovephilosophy …

When I heard about QM in school, one of
the things claimed was if you tried to walk through
that wall enough times, there would be one time
when you could- because of the inherently
random nature of matter.

Atom/galaxy fractal universe would say the opposite.

There is detailed structure at every level. There is
order at every level. Magnetism acts to order
charge which acts to order magnetism.
Electrons being accelerated around a disc makes a magnetic
field at right-angles to the acceleration, and this
field wants the disc to precess in tandem with other nearby
fields. There is no way things can be random. Magnets
pushed towards each other will ALWAYS interact- that
wall will NEVER let you walk through it.

All of matter is interconnected and always interconnecting.
Electrons give off neutrino-like energies just like our
sun, so those energies constantly go out from all matter. The protons
absorb that same neutrino-like energy which is
incoming from all the other matter and use it
to constantly re-charge their electrons. So, energy
is always coming in from everywhere and going out to everywhere!
These energies reflect exactly what is happening at
the point of their emanation, so there is always detailed
information flow at every point in space. Now, personally, I think
these smaller-caliber neutrinos would travel FTL, since
they are “finer emanations”, and thus would
be more permeable to space.

But, no, no matter how many times you contest your
head against the wall, the wall wins.

john

Well of course. If you can pass through it, it’s not a wall! :slight_smile:

Not sure if I buy that QM thing though. :-k

I’m totally classical.
A place for everything and everything in its place.
Nothing is for nothing.

john