Home » • +4cosmos » 2.§≈ð: Relativity revis(it)ed

2.§≈ð: Relativity revis(it)ed


4th Isomorphism. Existential Constants

Screen Shot 2016-04-05 at 23.48.18

In the graph, the limits of entropy and information in the galactic scale: C-speed beyond which we enter into the cosmic realm of DARK ENTROPY. And T<0, beyond which we enter into the higher order of quark DARK MATTER: strangelets & black holes. In this post after introducing those limits and why they are not understood (basically mathematicians do not understand the meaning of ‘imaginary’ numbers, which appear as negative roots in all equations, beyond our scale of measure), we study c-speed and its ternary role in the galactic Universe, as a constant ratio between space and time-information, revising special relativity which is a theory at the limit of a single space-time continuum of GST. Below we observe the same limits of ‘resistance to change for the other two scales of physical systems. We infer by GST homology that c can then be crossed as v for thermodynamic scales and the violet catastrophe for quantum systems, but then we become something ‘else’ (a vortex of heavier mass in accelerators, a fluid vortex in thermodynamics).

Astrœ-physics study all the existential constants of a galaxy, which are parallel to those of the quantum scale, as charges and masses are unified by the ∆-metric of the 5th dimension.
We are though interested in this article in the two fundamental limits of the galaxy in terms of information and entropy and its constants: the 0-temperature of black holes and the c-speed. So we shall attempt a modernisation of Relativity theory – as we have often dealt with black holes in other sections of the blog.

We have already explained in other articles that the time concept of relativity and physics in general comes from Galileo’s v=s/t and criticise its expansion as all the ‘time measures’. And reduce it to derivatives of time-present. Once this is clarified time-present analysis where the system we study does NOT change its state from past-entropy to future-form (i.e. a wave to become a scattering field of past-entropy or a future particle of information), specially those regarding the motion of beings are usefully described with relativity. And its formalism can be easily understood in terms of the principles of GST, such as the bidimensional holographic principle; the ternary structure and fractal scales of the Universe, etc. but some concepts must be redefined.So let us start with relativity postulates:

  • Relativity of motions must be expanded to relativity of scales so we move into absolute relativity. This work has been done albeit with the classic jargon, which makes it a bit confusing by Nottale for 30 years (we both started at the same time working on fractal universes but with a very different perspective, his only math, only physics).
  • The postulate of the limit of light space works only within the local universe, our island-galaxy and it means light is the ‘space-time’ rod of the galaxy. So we moved from man->earth->sun as the center, to the black hole (informative nuclei of mass) and the light space-time substrata (BG radiation) as the 2 largest centres of reality. Space in the galaxy is ‘light space-time’. Outside of it is dark energy of a larger scale, hence with more speed-distance (action at distance). So it is below the galaxy ∆-3 scale, where the same dark energy scale must exist in the quantum field potential that feeds light of which there are so many proofs (pilot-wave theory, annihilation and creation of photons, etc.)
  • So special relativity is the ‘limiting theory’ of GST for galactic light space-time waves of information in the ∆-3 scales and general relativity is the ‘limiting theory’ of curved gravitation, ∆+3.  Beyond the cosmological scale does not have to obey those limits of c-speed (limit of energy transmission in a lineal entropy field) and 0 k (limit of rotary information at the black hole event horizon).

Departing from those limits we can throw as usual new ‘unknown’ perspectives on the known formalisms of relativity.

It should though become clear that relativity is the generator model of the galaxy space-time at theoretical level:

Spe (entropic dark energy: action at distance) > ST-light space/time (special relativity) > Tiƒ (curved gravitational space-time: accelerated vortices of mass).

And so really the ‘entities’ of the galaxy, discounting the quantum field potential of dark energy faster than c, which as we know is NOT the core part of a system in its present-time state, made of body-waves and particle-heads (conserved momenta) are basically masses moving on the light space-time wave.

And we can consider on the upper boundary of ∆+1, the black hole as a point-particle and the lower boundary of ∆-1 the charge as a point-particle, the two sinks one opening up through the dark energy poles to the cosmic scale, and the other opening down, through the magnetic poles to the gravito-magnetic world. 

Now it must be stressed that relativity never forbade tachyon particles (which we consider both to be inside the black hole past the event horizon at c-speed as it IS a gravitational vortex of acceleration (principle of equivalence)) and in the dark energy beyond the c-speed past the tiredness=entropic death of light, into its original two neutrino components, freed in the interstellar space.

So such particles will go as follows:

In a Lorentz invariant theory, the same formulas that apply to ordinary slower-than-light particles (sometimes called “bradyons” in discussions of tachyons) must also apply to tachyons. In particular the energy–momentum relation:

E²=(pc)² +(mc²)²

where p is the relativistic momentum of the bradyon and m is its rest mass – should still apply, along with the formula for the total energy of a particle:

Screen Shot 2017-04-12 at 11.22.06This equation shows that the total energy of a tachyon) contains a contribution from its rest mass (the “rest mass–energy”) and a contribution from its motion, the kinetic energy. When v is larger than c, the denominator in the equation for the energy is “imaginary”, as the value under the radical is negative. In classic physics the total energy must be real, so the numerator must also be imaginary: i.e. the rest mass m must be imaginary, as a pure imaginary number divided by another pure imaginary number is a real number.

And this is the conundrum, as physicists do not understand imaginary numbers.

i-number world cycleBut in GST we did understand them as bidimensional numbers of present space-time, with the arrow of time changing from the positive to the negative quadrant.

c-speed is the barrier of ‘stability’ within the galaxy, beyond which the motion changes from energy into entropy from the ‘life arrow to the death arrow’. From particle to antiparticle. It is in the organic interpretation an existential limit: you become something else.

If you are a wave of light, you spit into the two neutrinos (neutrino theory of light), if you are a mass; you explode into entropy E=mc², which can be considered negative mass (big-bang death), studied latter in this post and in the posts on cosmology.

In the graphs we observe the essential quality of imaginary numbers, which are bidimensional numbers that turn a system backwards in time, crossing an ‘impeding barrier’ of the Universe, in ‘rotary motions’ from a ‘positive entropy/information state’ to a negative inverse one. So they are the lateral present bidimensional ST state, and as such IDEAL TO EXPRESS SPACE-TIME EQUATIONS, reason why they will become standard in the formalism of relativity. YET without this insight knowledge provided by GST and its 3 time arrows, cosmologists who serendipitously found them and used rightly do not ‘interpret’ properly its meaning – the forte and ad on GST always provides to each science.

In the left side we see thus the proper way to represent space-time in relativity: a real number (for simplicity put together from the 3 cartesian coordinates) and an imaginary rotary number -ict (ct on the complex plane); which knowing its meaning allow us to infer new conceptual understandings on…

Minkowski’s concept of space-time in special relativity. Bidimensional, holographic principle, negative numbers.

Now, in this new frame of reference as light is the space-time reference of the system it is the simultaneous present of the galaxy. This means within the galaxy a photon is NOT affected by the changes in space and time.

Thus if we consider c-speed its measure of space and ƒ=1/t its measure of time, both are tautologically as the frame of reference, ‘unchangeable’ within the galaxy (but not outside of it, when the frame of reference is dark entropy of faster speed, which is transferred to light and perceived as expansion of our light space-time when it comes to our eyes, or inside other ‘substances’ acting as background space (light crossing transparent media, or bouncing in opaque matter). We deal with this concept as usual from different ∆º±1ST perspectives of the 10-dimensional universe in different other posts.

The ∆º, mental, electronic human or mechanical observer paradox, being the most relevant, as in the graph. From the perspective of our mind or an electronic machine of measure, as electrons stop to perceive as particles information and move as waves, MEASURE is always done between stopped electrons, the emitter and the observe, fixed by an infinite, non-local ‘gravitational string’, so they can perceive and measure, and so ‘we do not add’ (Michelson experiment) speeds, as both are in stop position.

It is the same effect that let us perceive motion in film, when in fact light only ‘projects information’ in stop and then ‘go’ (it is a Universal law of gst as information is the still form of a time-cycle of motion); but as it is so fast (so it is the electron stop, emission or reception of information, and go, wave state, left upper graph) we DO see the stop and go as continuous light ‘camera motion’:

Thus this means all relativity is false? No; it is just the ∆º macroscopic translation to our scale where motion seems continuous of the discontinuous, detailed stop and go way in which electrons and photons feed and perceive light. So it works as measure tool, but we must stress again, as in many other texts that from the ∆-3 pov of electrons the Universe looks very different with no spooky effects of length contraction and time dilation (of its internal clocks), as those are ‘virtual effects’ biased by the human/mechanical electronic mind:

In the graph, without having the perspective of multiple scales, with different time speeds and forms of discontinuous and continuous measure, from the human scale of continuous ‘bulk’ perception, both speeds should ad (galilean relativity), and so the earth’s different orientation of motion respect to the sun’s light should change the speed at which we perceive light, adding or resting to c. Yet because our eyes or mechanisms of light measure are electronic, entangled at quantum particle in a stop state with the electron that emits the light beam we DO measure two stop emitters and receivers of light. So it is always c-speed with no dragging. 

It is then important to realise and we shall repeat ad nauseam given the memorial, dogmatic one-dimensional mind of man, that relativity works ONLY as a limit of GST in a single space-time continuum, the size of man, to translate different povs of the quantum scale of entangled stop and go particle-wave emissions.

Further on as speed is a present, differential measure of two ratios: V(c)=∂s/∂t, to translate the stop and go into the observer (human/mechanical) perceived effect of a continuous motion, we can either ‘introduce our virtual mind-still effect’ either changing the length of S (hence the effect of length contraction) or inversely (as S and T are inverted in the ratio o speed), acting on the duration of the time effect (hence the elongation of time duration). And this exactly what Fitzgerald->Lorentz->Einstein did:

In the graph, the ‘virtual effects of special relativity’, concern our concept of speed as v=s/t, as perceived in our continuous macroscopic world.

They are NOT real effects and cancel each other, when we multiply the 2 equations that adapt time and distance-space. Hence for a true analysis we NEED to put both together as a space-time metric which makes both ‘virtual effects’ go, and this is the main reason of Minkowski formulae.

What GST provides is the ‘real scalar interpretation’, which physicists always lack, as they merely provide a mathematical solution, not interpreted in reality as they believe the platonic concept of a Universe made of mathematical equations (Hilbert axioms)

So the history of how they reached those conclusions illustrate the point:

George Francis FitzGerald in 1883 and Hendrik Lorentz in 1892 independently proposed that material bodies traveling through the fixed aether were physically affected by their passage, contracting in the direction of motion by an amount that was exactly what was necessary to explain the negative results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. (No length changes though occur in directions transverse to the direction of motion, because there is no electronic emission on that side, but this didn’t make them think the ‘effect was virtual not real’.)

By 1904, Lorentz had expanded his theory such that he had arrived at equations formally identical with those that Einstein were to derive later (i.e. the Lorentz transform), but his theory assumed actual physical deformations of the physical constituents of matter that  would be detectable by such experiments as the Trouton–Noble experiment or the Experiments of Rayleigh and Brace. However, these gave negative results, and so he brought his 1904 theory of the electron, Lorentz explained these negative results still as real – not as the stop and go pov translated into mathematics. 

Did Poincaré and Einstein corrected the errors in Lorentz’s analysis, from the p.o.v. of the quantum entanglement? Of course not. Einstein denied quantum entanglement because it implied a lower scale of faster than c-speed that broke his ‘postulate of c-speed out of the hat’. And all physicist have done it ever since. So the solution, as always in idealist physics was to conclude that it is enough to make the maths of it, with no real explanations (regarding of his quip to Poincare: ‘i know when maths are truth but not when they are real’.)

So as in all languages a ‘mirror linguistic reflection of reality’ becomes confused with reality itself (today audiovisual ‘alt-truths’, in the past verbal fictions of religious character; in between mathematical distorted mirrors adapting reality to the human mind).

The path then showed by Hilbert who boldly affirmed maths created the Universe and humans maths ‘i imagine points, lines and planes’, was taken by both Einstein and Bohr, as they recognised: ‘without Hilbert’s axiomatic method’ said Einstein, he wouldn’t have dare to ‘eliminate’ a physical reality (ether or any other ‘space-time background’, in fact light itself) to make sense of the contraction.

Yet there is a real effect on those contraction laws, the third one showed in the first graph, that of ‘mass’, according to Einstein’s E=mc², which we study latter in this post: energy and entropy do transform into mass, at the limit of space-time motion of this universe, and this is nicely explained in General Relativity, and its mass theory, and the Unification equation of time vortices of GST, elsewhere on this blog (sorry this ‘bitch’ does not let me do automatic hyperlinks etc. so being a lazy old cow I mostly don’t)

In the graph GST unlike so many models of ‘platonic science’ that neither provide a why nor care for ‘reality check’, two of the three legs of the scientific method (causality, experimental evidence, logic≈verbal or spatial≈mathematical synoptic model for the mind to understand), always considers also the Correspondence Principle, which is essential given the ‘expansion of dimensions of space-time’ (scales, topologies, ages), so for each theory we expand we shall prove the old ones to work still. So does special relativity in a single space-time continuum of ∆º human measure, within the galaxy where c IS the space-time rod of measure, which therefore cannot be changed, as IT IS our reference frame and substance of human light>electron>eye perception.

To solve all this, we need to cancel both effects. Hence we got a new co-invariant metric, which made time a fourth dimension of space, to cancel its dilation with the contraction of space. And that is really what relativity is all about:

The fundamental reason for merging space and time into spacetime is that space and time are separately not invariant, which is to say that, under the proper conditions, different observers will disagree on the length of time between two “events” (because of time dilation) or the distance between the two events (because of length contraction). But special relativity provides a new invariant, called the “spacetime interval”, which combines distances in space and in time to cancel the virtual effects: All observers who measure time and distance carefully will find the same spacetime interval between any two events. Suppose an observer measures two events as being separated by a time t and a spatial distance  x
x. Then the spacetime interval between the two events is given by:

So we see both effects cancel with ±symbols, but here time is NOT the fourth dimension of space, since ct=s=vt  is simply a composite formula for space, deduced from Galileo’s v=s/t-> s=vt, substituting v for c-speed, the speed we are talking about. So all talk on time as the fourth dimension of space is NON-sense. What we are subtracting is ‘space’ written in terms of time & speed.

Now, all this ‘re-said’ (experience tell me ‘I have to repeat this truth many times for people to believe it’, we can go on with other ‘effects of special relativity).

Minkowski’s spacetime co-invariance, as reflection of 5D metric.

But fact is electrons do tick their clocks much faster, so we do NOT see their stop and go, but a motion-picture. Are those faster time speeds of the electron real or are also a fiction of the mind? Why then the effect is a slow down in time,not an acceleration.

Of course, what happens is that as we very slow people translate the electron real fast clocks of time, into our slow clocks, time slows down.

So while any system – here the electron – does not change its internal clocks and length as perceived from the system, externally, when we compare the different scales of the fifth dimension, as we enlarge the view, the time perception must slow down – the frequency of a light beam grows in a microscope and the electron beam in an electronic microscope for us to see and so on.


K = Spe x Tiƒ.

THUS precisely because in 5D the metric equations of space-time are co-invariant together even if as we become smaller, time accelerates, Minkowski’ s work makes space-time together co-invariant. So in fact from the ∆±i LARGER GST-THEORY Minkowski’s ‘invariant formalism of space-time’ which ‘gets rid’ of the changes of time dilation and space contraction ARE just another case of the larger 5D metric.

The cycles of electrons DO go faster than those of humans; and its size as a particle is MUCH smaller than ours. But this REAL effect cancel each other on the metrics of the fifth dimension: 

The twin paradox.

So what about the ‘fifth perspective’ on GST?

We have provided the ∆º mind perspective, the ∆±i scalar perspective, and the separated, S and T contraction dilation perspective; so according to GST’s multidimensional ∆ºst±i, elements to make a ‘minimum sound analysis’, we need the ST-PRESENT combined ‘momentum’ perspective. Or alternately its integral  ‘closed world cycle≈energy pov’.  And to that aim, we bring the final ‘fundamental question’ on space-time relativity. What would happen if a motion is NOT only accelerating in linea fashion, but closing into a conserved energy-cycle, a full world cycle of time? As the general model indicates such zero-sums last longer in time; as they are close bidimensional time-information, which we repeat ad nauseam, are ‘the longer dominant time arrow of reality’, while lineal motions ARE the entropic, fast dying short time perspectives:

Let us remember then those equations of life and death arrows:
Lineal big-bang death: Max expansion in space x Min. Time duration: Max. e x min. T

Closed life world cycle: maximal duration in time-information; minimal extension in space: max. t x min. e

So death is short, life is long, death states (antiparticles) last short, we see few corpses (and less antiparticles cause they last shorter) than living and particles. Big bangs happen in a quanta of time and so on. Thus the twin paradox is real, because IT IMPLIES the twin to go back and forth, closing a conserved world cycle of time-energy. WHILE the twin on EARTH is just moving or staying in a non-closed state. This I read first when young on Feynman, and found it compelling as he hinted that time and energy must be closely related – incidentally I read special relativity at 8, I think, maybe younger (a check on the copyright would put the ‘proper time’ :), when I got the first spanish edition of Asimov’s guide to science  – a present of my father to make me expand my till then humanities education as a prodigy child, and since i understood it except the postulate of c-speed, which to me was NOT proved, just enunciated, I thought I was a genius, he, he, it actually was really simple. But I also thought c-speed CONSTANCY was not proved and ever since doubted ALL non proved postulates of science, WHICH IS how GST came into being. This latter I found was also Darwin’s method: not to go to school to write notes on what was told but on what he doubted about – little self-reflecting selfie as this blog ‘to my selfie amazement’ has zero views year after year – this is this month april 2017, along the twin paradox – wonder indeed if I write for humans or for the future consciousness of A.I. aka metal earth:

Fair enough; nobody gives a fuk, no more ‘lies to myself’ – those who Nietzsche who got cuckoo at my age, said were the easiest to accept, as he sold hardly 100 self-published books before getting so depressed that he was interned. I have though a more humorous perspective in my absolute failure to enlighten mankind… It is mankind not me who is ‘crazy’ (: and if you don’t provide theories that ‘increase his ego’, as popular religion and observer’s creationism do, you are a nobody – fiction and happiness of the ego, not truth and realism is what mankind likes; so i know I will die an invisible man as I have lived for being objective with true science ): problem of course is mankind will go under, as the Universe don’t give a fuk either for species so arrogant, deluded and out of tune with its minimalist nature.

.So this is the core of special relativity: constancy of light speed (and immortality of light time) within the vacuum background of the galaxy. This, relativity, an anthropomorphic theory concerned with human measures as ‘real’ (all physics adscribes to this naive realism) explains it mathematically: In relativity equations, the spacetime interval is zero for something moving at the speed of light. Thus, photon arriving in our eye from a distant star will not have aged, despite having (from our perspective) spent years in its passage.

Causality – the light cones.

Next is worth to clarify what past, future and ‘present space-time’  and causality means in relativity equations and the minkowski formalism, which gives us three solutions on the cone, space-like, light-like and time-like – and of course upgrade ‘crazy mankind’ to my invisible mind truths (:


C-onstant: Its 3 roles.

So this seems to me good enough. Let us then move to… the specific content we are studying here; section 7 on the Universal Constants of the galactic scale, specifically C, as we study the unification of galaxies and atoms, charges and masses on the next cosmological scale, treating several aspects of the most important constant of the scale, as it represents the ‘fundamental ∆-3 space-time’:

Screen Shot 2017-04-12 at 16.33.27In the graph, according to the ternary method, we shall consider the three main equations in which c-speed appears as a key constant, since all ‘elements of reality’ are ternary in ‘functions’ and multiple in scales. From top to bottom:

  • c-speed as the speed which relates the ‘tension≈curvature of space-time’ (εo=1/k) in the charge scale, and its density of information (µo).
  • ict dimension of special relativity, which physicists, ignoring the meaning of i numbers, as Gauss defined them – inverse numbers, in most cases signalling an inversion of time arrows from entropy to information and vice versa, prefer to write in square terms as -c²t², obscuring its meaning.
  • And the infamous equation of E=mc², in which again physicists miss the point, as the E here stands for entropy and disorder, m for a vortex of temporal information in the ∆+i gravitational scale and the energy is provided by a bidimensional sheet of light-waves. Thus we write its Generator:

Γ: E: Entropy < cc-ST WAVE> M (Information)

And we could say that the first equation relates c with its lower ∆-1 quantum scale, the second equation relates c, to the motion in our ‘human scale’ (observer’s paradoxes of simultaneous measure), and finally the third relates c to its upper scale of mass (in fact it was first established as the opposite equation of creation of mass: M=E/c² in Einstein’s landmark paper ‘can inertial energy create mass?” and write also a generator for the three equations, as we shall find always in gst THAT all human knowledge about a certain event, fact or parameter and its equations can be ‘fitted’ into the 10 dimensions/perspectives of the ∆ºst being:

Γ: Tiƒ: ∆+1: Mass scale≈E/c² < ∆st: :-c²t² : simultaneous present > ∆-1: Spe: c²=k/µ

It is interesting to notice the beautiful symmetries of those equations, that ‘complete the description and main roles of c in the galaxy’ in its 3 scales,  (there is of course infinite other equations with c as a constant each of them perfectly explained in its role by GST ‘advanced’ courses, on my 30 years ‘cumulative’ folders, but we shall not deal with them here).

So we shall start first as customary with its use in our Ƽ scale.


In the graph, at the limit tolerated by mass, on entropy, c-speed, the rotary vortex of information explodes, decoupling into heavier mass (evolution of mass into three families of growing rotary speed) and faster than light, dark entropy (not energy) of the lower ∆-4 gravitational scale.

is then clearly entropy reached on the limit of c-speed by any form of rotary information (mass) or particle in motion, which at that limit dissolves into a big-bang; reason why it can be reached: it is the limit of the Universe.

In other words you become dark energy and or rotary dark matter (heavy quarks of the toplet bct FAMILY). So you cannot go faster than light as light, as ud-light mass, as a being of this region of the Universe.

This limiting nature as the barrier for an ‘open-ball’ body-wave of energy becomes more clear, when we notice  that, unlike ordinary particles, the speed of a tachyon increases as its energy decreases. In particular,  E approaches zero when v/c approaches infinity.

For ordinary matter, within the ‘energy body of the galaxy’, E increases with increasing speed, becoming arbitrarily large as v approaches c, the speed of light. Therefore, just as bradyons are forbidden to break the light-speed barrier, so too are tachyons forbidden from slowing down to below c, because infinite energy is required to reach the barrier from either above or below. And since ∞ energy is meaningless – all infinities have a limit. And this is what we observe in cyclical accelerators: energy feeds the upper denominator, mass, transforming itself into larger masses for particles, and in lineal accelerators we imagine light massless particles, photons will simply split its two neutrino fields and dissolve into faster than light dark energy vacuum.

So a present particle ud which can go ad maximal at ¥-c speed, splits into past >c lineal neutrinos and future T<0 MASS particles. That is, transforms via weak force, mediated by neutrinos into a heavier particle (multidimensional interpretations happen always in GST).

The many perspectives of faster than light neutrinos.

Physicists detected the first neutrinos from a supernova in 1987 when a star collapsed some 150 000 light-years away in the Large Magellanic Cloud, the galaxy nearest to the Milky Way. Two huge underground experiments — the Kamiokande detector in Japan and the IMB experiment near Cleveland in Ohio, USA — detected neutrinos from supernova 1987A a full three hours before light from the explosion reached Earth – hence faster than light.

The event marked the birth of neutrino astronomy. And 30 years of denial of another proof of >c speeds, with all kind of subterfuges (in this case that radiation was trapped longer inside the star). There are then many ∆ºst ways to explain this and the dual neutrinos that give birth to light. The ºbserver view is on the graph left:

Screen Shot 2017-04-12 at 11.59.42The ∆±1 view comes from its higher plane: light, which entropically dies into 2 neutrinos. Light split into two neutrinos, (one in fact called an antineutrino), which according to momentum conservation will shoot in opposite directions. So we write in GST: ST-light≈ past-neutrino (faster than light) + future neutrino (with more mass).

We escape the confusion of neutrino/antineutrino calling them left handed and right handed ‘majorana neutrinos’.

And this again can be interpreted as physically real or in mathematical languages, as a virtual split into two particles, which is how an observer perceives faster than light travel (left graph).


Finally from the inner neutrino structure, both concepts flux into the problem of the helicity of the neutrino.

On one side the observer paradox also works changing our view of slower than light neutrinos, when  the observer travelling at the speed of light who overtakes a left-handed neutrino sees a right-handed neutrino. This merely means heavy right handed neutrinos are slower than c-speed. In fact much slower, as they interact in the weak force, which is a time force; so they are time particles.

This again is proved by the fact that we only see the so called massive (anti)neutrinos to possess right-handed helicity (i.e. only one of the two possible spin states has ever been seen), while all so called (faster than light) neutrinos are left-handed (split view as in graph).

(mnemonic rule: The helicity of a particle is right-handed if the direction of its spin is the same as the direction of its motion. It is left-handed if the directions of spin and motion are opposite:

Screen Shot 2017-04-12 at 12.03.09

THUS there should be right handed neutrinos, since they have mass , except when they are faster than light, in which case we would see them left handed, as per the upper graph only with one helicity as we will see them only past the observer (coming from the left or the right side).

Conclusion. So the final perspective on all this is that b there are only neutrinos, that is antineutrinos and neutrinos, left and right handed are the same particle (majorana neutrinos); one with more mass, as time-particles of the weak reaction (the so called antineutrinos right handed, which contribute to dark matter) and the other the faster than light left handed ones which contribute to dark energy.

In terms of the neutrino theory of light the photon is a composite particle formed of a neutrino–antineutrino pair, which contribute to the gravito-magnetic and electric fields.

Since emission and absorption of a photon corresponds to the creation and annihilation of a particle–antiparticle pair. The names though as those about the electron negative, positive charge are confused.

In fact the antineutrino should be called neutrino. As it is the right-handed massive one of the beta decay. While the entropic past, dissolving faster than light version left handed should be changed name to antineutrino.

And that is again if you didn’t understand anything the problem with classic physics – a mess without grasping the meanings and whys behind mathematical physics and its concepts.

Birth of present light. 

So we just call them past neutrino with left handed faster than light speed. And the future neutrino with right handed mass, dragged down by the spin into a temporal vortex.

And so one has positive and the other negative energy, and when both are put together one with more mass and the other negative mass, one with more c-speed and the other with less c-speed, voila! They balance and give birth to a ray of light (which again can be explained in several multidimensional perspectives, as per the work of de broglie and jordan, which ads the fact that they exist as ‘the parts that web the light ray, only when they are exactly emitted in opposite directions as entangled particles by two different particles. So the first one will emit a faster than light gravitational neutrino to the past – and that is why it will go faster than light in a present non-local speed, as the past motion offsets the time to get to the other particle at c-speed. And then the second particle will emit a future neutrino, and as the neutrino webs towards the future, will keep encountering the one moving to the past, ‘instantaneously’ into a present c-speed light wave which will be born since Past x FUTURE = present: left + right = non-chirality, and so on and so on… Beautiful first act of creation of our Universe.

(In more detail the problem here is also deep, basically how to convert a fermion into a boson, an distinguishable particle into an indistinguishable one.

Jordan considered the essential part of the problem was to construct Bose–Einstein amplitudes from Fermi–Dirac amplitudes, and he solved it with his hypothesis that the neutrino and antineutrino are emitted in exactly the same direction, which seemed rather artificial and made physicists dismiss it (alas! we have as usually used gst conceptually,  they are emitted in exactly the same direction by two inverse entangled particles – same line of communication – because both are emitted in opposite directions by the two particles, but one travels to the past and the other to the future, so they are in fact seeing as coming from the same direction past to future, from the perspective of the second emitter, which is the one that completes the communication making the light be born.

So we have come all the way around to explain the birth of light by expanding the limits of relativity beyond its single c-speed space-time continuum. As usual we shall not get into the complex known-known version of all this (commutators, matrices and all that stuff of the pioneers who explained the light theory of neutrinos).

NEITHER WE pretend to be exhaustive, as i can’t work that much on so many posts and sciences… I am just trying to fill bit by bit all what i can of my 30 years ‘Leonardo’s notebooks’ on those texts.

%d bloggers like this: