The unified field theory

[carlitto]

Thanks coldcreation,
Since I am new around here, I thought your were neglecting what I said. Now, I think that was a misunderstanding. I have brought the subject to learn what people in forum know about it, and how much they know. I am impressed with your interest in the subject.
When it comes to my opinions, I think we need a long time to reach unification. I donot know how long, maybe a century or 20 years. What I know is we need to work on it. Einstein’s theory was not complete.We may pass quantum, and we should. Coldcreation, there are lots of gaps in particle physics. And I think most governments are reluctant to pay more on a blind area, they pay billions on defence projects, but when it comes to science, they do not want to donate in someting which they do not have something solid in return. I accept that it is expensive to work on nuclear5, accelerators, etc. But that is the only way to discover something new.
For god’s sake, there are lots of gaps in todays quantum physics. Mr. Feynman worked on electrons for all his life and came up with his diagram. If we want to exceed the barriers, other than the science fiction, in reality, I cannot imagine any other science else than particle physics, to pave the way. It will newer be possible to rhigh speeds relative to light with todays knowledge. We expain everthing in universe with particle physics. E.g. universe is expanding, explained the observation of red shift, consequence of doppler effect. Black holes, warm holes,… I don’t know if cold fusion will come true or not. But we have to work on it. If we want infinite source of energy. Burnnning petroleum, fuel will compensate our current needs, but won’t take us beyond. And, antihydrogen may be a brick or nail in building a final theory. The word final or ultimate may not exactly be true. Antimatter is another rough subject within this concept. I have a limited knowledge on this field. I mean, It is known to talk about antiparticles, but about anti-hydrogen,or anti-matters?? I would like to learn more about them. How do they behave? What are their properties, eg. I will be grateful if any of you bodies tell me what you know. I wish I could answer my friend coldcreation’s questions. I hope he will teach us what he knows. I have the respect to the knowledge, and science. I may not know everthing about particles, nuclear physics, but I have the ambition. I wish I could work on this field… I will apply for minor in physics this semester. Who knows, where the way of destiny will take me…

So, coldcreation, we are cool? I want to know what you think about me. You are free to say anything…

[coldcreation]

Originally Posted by carlitto

Thanks coldcreation,
So, coldcreation, we are cool? I want to know what you think about me. You are free to say anything…

I have no personal opinion about you. I will say though that I admire your will to understand things that have not yet found solutions.

Yes, we are cool.

What do I think about unification?
I think is is possible to unite gravity into a unified framework, but in order to do so, a radical revision of mainstream cosmology is to take place. No longer should we search in the direction of ultra-high energy physics, at ultra-small scales, and at extremely high energies and densities for the solution. This has been the major drawback from the outset of the search, due to the standards set by the hot big bang cold dark matter model. It is this theory that has been a major stumbling blcok because it assumes all forces were united then, at t = 0, or shortly thereafter the moment of creation.

As implies in my handle, I'm a low energy, ulra-low temperature, quasi-zero density, very close to zero entropy type of guy. And all that, in an infinite spatiotemporal nonexpanding universe.

In short, unification takes place when all parameters and constituents are set at zero, i.e., never, or at minus infinity, if you will.

cc

[carlitto]

Originally Posted by coldcreation

As implies in my handle, I'm a low energy, ulra-low temperature, quasi-zero density, very close to zero entropy type of guy. And all that, in an infinite spatiotemporal nonexpanding universe.
cc

You sure have a different point of view.
Why don't you explain your approach a little bit more detailed. When I look at the things from your perspective, some things that were true have to be wrong. For instance, what about the critical density of universe?

[coldcreation]

Originally Posted by carlitto

You sure have a different point of view.
Why don't you explain your approach a little bit more detailed. When I look at the things from your perspective, some things that were true have to be wrong. For instance, what about the critical density of universe?

You can read about Coldcreation in other threads (see Cosmology section, Material Creation, The Cosmological Constant: A New Law, Redshift z, etc.).

Quickly, in CC theory there is no critical density. Why? Becausethere is no expansion. Redshift is non-Doppler, therefore everything was not crammed into a point at time t = 0. The Universe is infinite in time and spatial extent. Creation of hydrogen occurs in the cold vacuum, etc, etc.

Much of cosmology is based on interpretation of observation. In the final analysis, the theory that best fits the data is called the standard model. The problem is, many observations contradict the standard model. Especially those that deal with the deep universe, high-redshift objects. See thread Redshift z and Material creation for more detail. cc

[HIENVN]

Originally Posted by coldcreation

Hola Carlitto,
No one wrote your thread was usless. The subject is a good one, its not the first time its been discussed, and it won't be the last.

Two questions:
(1) What are your views on unification, if any? (try not to copy paste an answer).
(2) To what extent do you think the CERN creation of antihydrogen is important for science (no copy pasting here either)? Why will you be following that breakthrough? And what implication(s), if any, does it have on unification, the subject of this thread?

cc

Hi, Coldcreation and everybody in this forum of the unified field theory. I am a new member of Hypography and I would like to engage in this discussion that the unified field theory should be a advance theory of the 21st century.
Almost scientists not only know Einstein as is the author of unified field theory, but they also know Einstein rejected the value of quantum theory since 1920, which is a year that he proposed unified field theory. Although I have found out some defeats of quantum theory, but I did not strongly reject quantum theory such as Einstein did.
However, when we play a game we must to obey the rules of this game; therefore, we must to obey the rule of Einstein is reject the value of quantum theory if we want to discuss his unified field theory. Carlitto display a unified field theory in a manner of quantum theory when he using four quantum force numbers that do not in the idea of Einstein in his proposed unified field theory.
I would like to have a question to every body in this forum, which:
"Could somebody or me display a unified field theory that not include any quantum theory?"
I am waiting opinions of everybody in this forum.
Thanks to everyone,

HIENVN