Wednesday, July 22, 2009
For example, we can observe gravitational lensing from outside from place, where space-time is flat, so you will see the path of light curved and Lorentz symmetry violated (quantum mechanics perspective). Or when we stay inside of gravity lens or in Lagrange point, we will become bended by gravity field together with space-time, so you will see the path of light straight and the space-time curved, instead - this is general relativity perspective. It's evident, these perspectives are mutually exclusive, so we can never reconcile relativity with quantum mechanics by using of formal approach, which combines postulates of both theories (like string theory or quantum gravity) and to save money of tax payers for its development.
The main source of uncertainty here is, with compare to above picture every gravity field / lens has a fuzzy boundary, so we can never see the gravitational lensing from single perspective only and your observation remains fuzzy as well. Only pin-point observer can see all things from exsintric (outer) perspective only. Because every real observer is of finite size and it suffers by quantum delocalization, he can observe the same effect or artifact both from inside, both from outside perspective. The mixture of both these perspectives results into insintric uncertainty of every reality observation.
We can use surface wave analogy here, which is more convenient with Aether concept of particle environment. At the water surface every information always comes in two parallel ways: in form of longitudinal (underwater) waves and surface waves, which are of transversal nature. The pure transversal waves are called capillary waves, these pure longitudinal waves are called gravity waves (do not confuse it with gravitational waves, which are of longitudinal character too, but they're spreading through vacuum).
In real case, the surface waves are always of mixed character, which we are calling Rayleigh or Love waves, depending on whether longitudinal or transversal character of the wave prevails. Despite the weakness of underwater waves, this results in quantum uncertainty of every information, which comes to observer at water surface in two independent ways: via surface and underwater waves.
Despite of their insintric character, we cannot exclude surface wave from observation so easily, because energy is spreading in slowest speed at the inflexion point of (water) density gradient, which is forming water surface, thus defining the largest space-time possible ("a cosmic space") for observer, so he can exists in it. As we can see, uncertainty principle is direct manifestation of Lorentz symmetry violation, hidden dimensions and multiple time arrows. Here's no need to spend another money in expensive, but silly (re)search of these artifacts, until we are convenient with existence of quantum uncertainty and AWT approach. AWT can save a lotta money for tax payers here again - but from the very same reason scientists involved aren't very happy about it, because from their insintric perspective such search still has a good meaning.
We can met with uncertainty principle in many places of everyday reality at the moment, when insintric perspective remains mixed with insintric one, as expressed in many proverbs and fables (Mark Twain: "There are two sides of every coin"). When someone describes an accident in real life, he always describes it from perspective of person, which was involved in it, or from perspective of independent remote observer. At the moment, when some persons was both reason, both victim of this accident, their stance becomes fuzzy undeniably.
For example, Germans or Soviet Union nations were both reasons, both victims of WWW II, so their stance to this even remains fuzzy and controversial. As the result, both Russia, both Germany are claiming, the weakest country involved in conflict, i.e. Poland was the true reason of WWW II, which is simply ridiculous - but it illustrates the way, in which uncertainty principle manifest itself in human society.
Here exists an insintric duality between most general and most exact views of reality. Currently it seems, AWT is most general one - but definitely not the best, when it goes to exact numbers. From the same reason, we don't use quantum mechanics for computation of boiling point of water under reduced pressure, but we are using a more specific extrapolations based on thermodynamics. Not because the quantum mechanics couldn't handle it in ab-initio calculations, but because such calculation would be more tedious and sensitive to introductory parameters. Due the uncertainty principle we cannot expect true "theory of everything" and every theory has it's own applicability scope, corresponding to observable part of Universe.
Principle of uncertainty manifests by duality between quantitative and qualitative understanding of reality. Exact theories (like string theory or LQG theory) are poorly conditioned, so they lead into fuzzy landscapes of althernative solutions, whereas these qualitative ones (like AWT) doesn't suffer internal inconsistencies, but they can predict phenomena with limited exactness at the price.
Aesop: "Every truth has two sides; it is as well to look at both, before we commit ourselves to either".
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
The modeling of vacuum by light spreading through material environment isn't completely new here. For example the recent experimental work demonstrated by sending of ultrashort pulses into foamy structure of optical fibers the blue-shifting of light at a white-hole horizon. Recently whole area of physics named transformation optics was established on analogy of physics of vacuum in gravity field to spreading of waves in media of variable refraction index (which was one of Einstein's "refractive approaches" to gravitational light bending and general relativity, by the way).
Metamaterial character of vacuum was proposed before two years and recent publication described the way, how to model structures like gravitational lensing, strange attractors, streaks of dark matter, photon sphere or event horizons of black holes by infrared waves spreading through porous GaInAsP metamaterial sponge. In context of existing theories these analogies are rather ad-hoced, but they've deep meaning in context of AWT, which describes vacuum as a dense system of particles, composed of nested fluctuations, which are having structure of fractal sponge or foam. Therefore the metamaterial nature of vacuum belongs between significant predictions of AWT.
The understanding the role of foamy structure of vacuum fluctuations (as manifested by CMB radiation, soliton character of gamma bursts or ZP energy) in metamaterial character of vacuum is quite easy, if we consider Aether concept. In inhomogeneous environment so called Rayleigh dispersion occurs, whenever the positive surface curvature of density fluctuations prevails. In such system the waves are dispersed (absorbed and refracted) the more, the shorter is their wavelength, because short waves cannot avoid obstacles so easily. From this reason both the absorption coefficient, both the refracting index of environment increases with increasing frequency of radiation - this is so called normal dispersion.
The materials with negative curvature fluctuations of Emental cheese structure are less common, but in such environment the relation of absorption and refraction curve is exactly as opposite, because in such environment the refraction index decreases with increasing frequency with compare to absorption, so we are talking about "anomalous dispersion" here.
The absorption and dispersion curves are mutually related by Kramers-Kronig relations, by which absorption curve (bulk effect) is the first derivation of dispersion curve (i.e. the surface refraction effect), because in environment modeled by spherical particle fluctuations the surface of sphere is first derivation of sphere volume with respect to radius. In vacuum environment the absorption and dispersion curve of electric and magnetic waves corresponds the real and imaginary portion of complex quantities called permitivity and permeability of vacuum, accordingly.
With respect to space-time definition the negative portion of dispersion curve close to inflection point is most significant (compare the red point on the dispersion curve above), because for such frequency the energy spreads in slowest speed possible, so that the space-time appears most huge from insintric perspective here. Such environment has a structure of foam, where positive curvature of density fluctuations remains balanced by negative curvature of holes, but not quite - from this the symmetry violation of vacuum foam follows and the environment behaves like metamaterial of negative refraction index, whenever the imaginary portion of both permeability, both permitivity remains negative. We can say, vacuum behaves like metamaterial just because it's so huge due the presence of large amount of density fluctuations, so we can model phenomena like dark matter streaks, photons and event horizon of black holes by light spreading through metamaterials of foamy structure (compare the simulation bellow).
With compare to solid state metamaterials vacuum is composed of fractal foam of density fluctuations similar to Perlin octal noise, because Aether is behaving like elastic fluid filled/formed by its vortices and the diameter of vortices is indirectly proportional to frequency of wave perturbations. This leads to metamaterial character of vacuum in broad range of wavelengths, until we use transversal waves of minimal exsintric speed for observation. Because metamaterial focuses wave into solitary wave packets (i.e. bosons), we can see the distant stars like pin-point objects without dispersion in broad range of spectrum from infrared to X-ray range of EM wave spectrum.
From general perspective, the normal and anomalous dispersion should be symmetric phenomena. The usage of word "normal" in this context is anthropocentric, because it's based on the fact, human creatures are formed by density fluctuations of arbitrarily positive curvature (i.e. by particles in common sense), so we can interact with particle fields more often and easily, then with fluctuations of negative curvature. Inside of atom structures the positive and negative curvature of electron orbitals remains balanced, so we can observe both absorbance peaks, both transmittance peaks with the same probability there.