David Icke's Official Forums Inderdiscipline Synthesis Cosmology
 User Name Remember Me? Password

 25-12-2011, 04:50 PM #2 hkurtrichter Senior Member   Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 100 Likes: 0 (0 Posts) Tachyonics Part 1, Introduction to Tachyons In this discussion, I will normally use the mathematical definitions of the words "real" and "imaginary"; not their usual literary meanings. If the literary meanings are to be taken instead, I will specify in the text that this is the case. The difference is this; in mathematics, to say something is "imaginary" does not signify that it does not exist; it merely indicates that it belongs to a class that simply cannot be labeled as "real". Search phrases are: imaginary number, imaginary unit, complex numbers. For proper understanding, readers must be familiar with the idea of imaginary numbers. So, a brief explanation is given here. Consider: there are some numbers that cannot be included in the set of all real numbers. For instance, there is no real number, x, whose square-root is negative unity; x^(1/2) = -1. However, we can imagine such a number, as follows. Let i = (-1)^(1/2) so that i^2 = -1. Then, for some real number x, we can get the square-root of its negative by writing; (-x)^(1/2) = [(-1)x]^(1/2) = [(-1)^(1/2)][x^(1/2)] = i[x^(1/2)]. Example: (-25)^(1/2) = [(-1)(25)]^(1/2) = [(-1)^(1/2)][(25)^(1/2)] = i5 . Such a number is called an "imaginary number". It happens that the hypothetical particle called the "tachyon" must be described as an imaginary quantity; meaning, variables denoting many of its physical quantities must be multiplied by a negatively-signed imaginary-unit. That said, I introduce the technical concept of faster-than-light (FTL) particles, also referred to as being "superluminal" in nature, and therefore placed in the wider category of superluminal phenomena. According to Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity (SR), the mass M of a moving particle is different than the mass m of the same particle at-rest in the same frame of reference (coordinate system), as given by a formula denoted; M = m/[{1-[(v/c)^2]**^(1/2)] , where v is the particle's velocity, and c is the lightspeed constant (~ 186,000 mi/sec); as viewed from our everyday (standard) frame of reference. (Serway, 1124) Obviously, due to the fact that the denominator on the right involves the square-root of a difference, then there are three solutions with respect to the value of v, relative to the lightspeed constant, c; (1) If v < c, then the above denominator is real and nonzero, which ensures that m is a real quantity; therefore moving mass, M, is positive and real (said to be "bradyonic"). (2) If v = c, then the denominator is infinite, which would be a problem, except that, if we say that the particle has no mass at all, so that m = 0, then the infinity is negated. This, therefore, is the case for massless photons of light (also called "luxons"); described using their energy, momentum, frequency, etc. (without referring to mass). (3) If v > c, then the denominator is an imaginary number (because it is the square-root of a negative number), which makes m an imaginary quantity, in-turn making the moving mass, M, negative and imaginary. This is the case for particles that travel faster-than-light (FTL), called "tachyons". (Lerner, 1246) Tachyons have reversed causality, because they exist with negative time (compared to bradyons, with positive time), and always travel FTL. Named “tachyons” by physicist Gerald Feinberg in 1967 (Feinberg, 69), such a particle would also have negative energy and/or momentum, as calculated from a standard reference-frame. And, according to Einstein's energy equation E = m(c^2) (when you plug different velocity values into the equation for M), it would take an infinite amount of energy to slow a tachyon down to lightspeed, just as it takes infinite energy to accelerate an ordinary mass up to lightspeed. This does not, however, definitively prohibit the existence of tachyons, since it is quite possible that just as many tachyons of various kinds were created in the Big Bang as were the elementary particles we have discovered so far. What is more, since an infinite speed is the tachyon’s zero-energy level, it is not outside the bounds of plausible inference to postulate the generation of very-high-speed tachyons by various bradyonic interactions, because the energy required to do so could be very small. There is also evidence that we exist in a universe that is actually embedded in an infinite multitude of alternative universes; a so-called "multiverse". That is, the known universe abides in a super-dimensionality, which allows that there exists at least one tachyonic analog of the visible universe; complete with tachyonic analogs of all the elementary particles. (Kane, 13) Here, then, is how a tachyon appears to work, in simple terms. Imagine, for a moment, that we have a "magic" gun which shoots imaginary bullets that can travel FTL. That is, the bullets are tachyonic. But we also have a normal gun that we use to shoot a hole in a relatively thin, wooden board which any normal bullet can punch a hole in. Because of impact and friction and other considerations, a normal bullet will impart some of its forward momentum to the wood as it makes a hole in the board, so that a certain amount of its generalized forces are imparted overall to the board in the direction of the bullet's momentum. It pushes the board in its direction of travel, as it makes a hole through the board. A tachyonic bullet, however, would impart its corresponding forces in the opposite direction to its direction of travel, as viewed from a standard frame, should we next shoot an identical board with the magic gun, because tachyons would pull towards their source, rather than push away from their source, as they pass through an ordinary object. And it would appear to a standard observer (assuming we can somehow see a tachyonic bullet) as if the tachyonic bullet came from infinity and landed in the barrel of the magic gun at the instant the trigger was pulled; as if a video of the normal event was run in reverse (though a hole would still be made in the board). What is more, a tachyonic bullet would theoretically be so much more destructive than any ordinary bullet that it could reach unimaginable destructive power, because its superluminal speed would result in an extreme magnitude of forward momentum. Another profound aspect of the tachyon is that it could very well speed-up as it loses energy, which is the opposite of ordinary particles (which slow down if losing energy). Indeed, the rest energy of a tachyon corresponds to infinite speed (theoretically). And this could have major implications for the long-term evolution of the universe, due to the effect on the entropy of the universe at-large. In any event, there has been no emphatic evidence to-date, either for or against the existence of tachyons, so there has been no shortage of scientists who oppose the very suggestion that such particles may actually exist, although there are increasing numbers who are taking the possibility seriously. Admittedly, we do not presently possess the capability of manipulating particles that travel FTL in subatomic regions for useful purposes. Hence, the idea of tachyons remains a mere science-fiction concept (although that should soon change). Nevertheless, there are experimental indications that real particles can be made to go FTL, and there are astronomical observations of objects in the universe that seem to be moving at FTL speeds. What is more, there are no theoretical prohibitions against the existence of tachyons, or against things made of them existing on the other side of the lightspeed barrier. Phenomena involving FTL speeds are referred to as exhibiting "superluminal" (beyond lightspeed) behavior, and experimental investigations into superluminal phenomena include searches for tachyons. So, I take the implications from SR, and the mounting data being collected in the growing trend towards investigating superluminal phenomena, as good enough for me to assume that tachyons exist. The general study of tachyons can be called "Tachyonics", and includes all efforts to understand, detect, and eventually utilize tachyons and tachyonic energies. References: Feinberg, G. “Particles That Go Faster Than Light”, Sci. Am., Feb. ‘70; pp. 69-77. Kane, G.L. “Experimental Evidence for More Dimensions ...”, Physics Today, May, '98; pp. 13-15. Lerner, R.G. & Trigg, G.L. Ency. of Physics, 2nd Ed. VCH Publishers, '91. Serway, R.A. Physics for Scientists and Engineers, 3rd Ed. Harcourt Brace, '92. Last edited by hkurtrichter; 25-12-2011 at 05:02 PM. Reason: Grammer.
 31-12-2011, 05:48 PM #3 hkurtrichter Senior Member   Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 100 Likes: 0 (0 Posts) The Most Accurate View Of Reality Will Be Provided By ISC To correctly understand astrological forces, actual magic, and paranormal phenomena in general, we need the most accurate view of our reality that is humanly possible. But to acquire something like that, we must consider all of human knowledge, and there is an overwhelming amount of information to be learned. It is simply impossible for normal individuals to absorb enough data to come to a wholly complete understanding of reality that involves the knowledge from all of human endeavor. Yet, there is a new natural philosophy that presents itself, to help us solve this dilemma. Called "Interdiscipline Synthesis Cosmology", or "ISC", it is a combination of physical and metaphysical ideas on the nature of the universe, though it is not yet wholly formed. Literally self explanatory, ISC will be gleaned from a synthesis of as many intellectual disciplines as are needed for generalized completeness. That is, ISC is merely a title denoting a description of reality that results from mixing as many avenues of thought as are required to devise the most accurate and comprehensive view of our existence. Because the required conceptualization will depend on a number of diverse areas of investigation, ISC is also considered a natural philosophy, as opposed to a lone scientific theory, religious doctrine, or metaphysical treatise, although it must necessarily take into account large numbers of such theories, doctrines, etc., because it's stated purpose is to arrive at the most plausible view of our existence (simultaneously incorporating physics, metaphysics, theology, and so on, without restrictions on information input). Thus, the complete ISC must summarize all human knowledge, and can leave no precepts out of the whole, regardless of whether one discipline is in conflict with another. And how is this done? The elements that make up the ISC scenario are chosen as the empiricisms from each discipline by consensus among scholars, and all other contributors in each discipline, despite divisions among contributors, or whether an empirical statement in one discipline conflicts with that in another discipline. The criteria is simply that any given idea is to be considered "empirical" in any discipline within which it is held a fundamental concept by at least three contributors in that discipline. What is more, contributors need not be the established authorities in every discipline, but can include anyone with an interest in a given topic, and who submits information for inclusion into the ISC database. For example, in many religions, the statement that "willful murder is an evil act" would be held as an empirical tenet of such religions. And it requires only that at least three contributors submit statements to that effect, for the statement to be accepted into the database from which ISC is constructed. Empiricisms from a sufficiently large number of disciplines (or all, if desired) are then compared to each other, and those which are in conflict can be separated (though not disregarded) and distinguished as the Set of All Contradictions. Whatever is left over after the Contradictions are removed is the basic collection of empirical statements that form the Core of Empirical Statements for the ISC we are attempting to acquire. With that, some logical method of statement resolution can be employed to render as many Contradictions as possible into empirical statements, so the Core can be maximized. Take the difference between evolution theory and fundamentalist creationism. Clearly the statement that "life was an accident of nature" is quite at odds with the statement that "life was given to us by a creator god". However, it is easy enough to introduce qualifiers in each of these statements, to make them empirical. Thus, we merely state: "Numerous scientists hold that life was an accident of nature." And: "Many religious people believe that life was given to us by a creator god." Thus, both sentiments are restated to make them empirical statements, so they can be included in the Core, since no decision need be made about the validity of either opinion. The empirical versions, though only slightly altered from the originals, constitute valid information input to the ISC Database Core. One result of preliminary efforts in this respect is the conclusion that the Arts are the natural synthesis of Physics and Spirituality. This would explain, for instance, why some artistic accomplishments (musical, poetic, etc.) are referred to as being "magical" in the way they can effect us emotionally. ISC may ultimately establish a Theory of Existence (ToE) capable of describing natural processes in both physical and theological terms, as well as explaining all other aspects of our reality. The Grand Unified Field theory sought by physicists, for example, will necessarily be included in such a theory (of course), and will serve as the fundamental conceptualization for that portion of the ToE which explains the visible universe, the current set of elementary particles, and the four basic interaction forces of nature. There is also the added benefit that ISC may offer ways out of a wide array of modern intellectual quagmires. Consider the possibility that scientists relying on ISC may be given means of delving into ordinarily unattainable areas of research in the microcosm and macrocosm, such as supernatural phenomena, while theologians may be supplied with reputable means by which they may demonstrate, at last, the actual nature of spirit entities -- including the nature even of a supreme being (i.e., an alternate-dimensional alien with characteristics identical to a creator god). Indeed, the first inescapable result of ISC will likely be that the hypothetical particle called the tachyon (a particle which always travels faster than light) explains some of the most puzzling questions about reality that we know. Three of these questions are: (1) What are spirit creatures made of? (2) What is quantum gravity? (3) What is thought? And the answers are: (1) Spirit creatures apparently have forms made up of tachyons. (2) Gravity quanta are probably special types of tachyons that travel between lightspeed and infinite speed. (3) Thought likely results from the ability of our physical brains to interact with a ubiquitous but as-yet undetected superluminal energy field. These apparently new explanations of three mysterious aspects of reality seem destined to become undeniable, according to early work in ISC. And the notion of the tachyon can be used to explain many other phenomena, including a far-flung array both of unusual natural and of supernatural phenomena. The inevitable result, of course, as strange as it seems, would be the blurring of lines between physics and metaphysics; the elimination of differences between theoretical physicists and theologians. The eventual end, it appears, of many heated and ongoing debates, but the opening of uncounted directions of research and experiment not yet imagined. Considering what it will take to produce an all-inclusive ISC, therefore, causes us to realize the importance of the tachyon. It is the study of the tachyon (i.e., Tachyonics) that will at-length be the endeavor through which humans are given the most accurate view of our reality -- for it presents the promise of explaining a host of things that are now referred to as "unexplained", including the nature of all paranormal phenomena.
 14-01-2012, 01:42 AM #6 paloem Senior Member   Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,164 Likes: 2 (2 Posts) i agree __________________ after you have worked your whole life in search of a better existence you'll look back and see that the only thing that ever brought happiness was the love you found and the love you gave.