Dear Nuclear and Particle Physics Community,
Given positive discussions surrounding this proposal recently
in G+, I'm sharing this proposal here and in the presentation:
I'd like to offer "banking" as a term for pushing to a side
when "lensing" may deal with fields with a direction, current or drag.
I ask for some tolerance as far as terminology is concerned.
Also, they key element to try and measure to zero for the sake
of trying to falsify the notion, and why it requires a full year.
Is to look for "banking" effects in relation to the sun and the milky-way.
Initially put this in quantum field theory as it may be prudent to discuss
if this concept could include the Higgs-field and be moved together
with zero-point energy and field where force carriers is a special case
with interaction of the proposed mechanism, and former a special case
of space-time interaction.
Given positive discussions surrounding this proposal recently
in G+, I'm sharing this proposal here and in the presentation:
I'd like to offer "banking" as a term for pushing to a side
when "lensing" may deal with fields with a direction, current or drag.
I ask for some tolerance as far as terminology is concerned.
Also, they key element to try and measure to zero for the sake
of trying to falsify the notion, and why it requires a full year.
Is to look for "banking" effects in relation to the sun and the milky-way.
Initially put this in quantum field theory as it may be prudent to discuss
if this concept could include the Higgs-field and be moved together
with zero-point energy and field where force carriers is a special case
with interaction of the proposed mechanism, and former a special case
of space-time interaction.
I'm trying to get CERN to use the LHC for a modern particle physics equivalent of the Michelson-Morley experiment. Sent it to the Council Secretariat earlier this week, haven't heard anything yet so may need the publication route.
And I've been brewing on some ideas concerning black holes for a few years.
Still, it would be great to do something like this at the LHC and some of the reasons are explained below.
I'm going to write this proposal in a more scholarly form for publication.
As it should be of great interest for the philosophy of physics. Not to mention the relevance for philosophy of science and mathematics.
That an agenda with promise of a zero result is a good test
for the integrity and methods -- any unknowns that may be hidden by
bias given the nature of building a system that primarily studies noise. Systematic errors is one thing --- systematic human errors another.
And so is the complications from adhering to working theories with
so much unknown.
There is a myriad of theories that deal with space as a variable.
Any form of direction or a experimental zero-proof would settle
many arguments revolving fundamental premises of particle physics.
By actively saying one should do PbPb for one year, and specifically:
That our orientation around the sun related to milky way is the focus of study to look for any space-time effect on any particle. This is not a narrow search in any one area of interest to physics. PbPb as the best option for the amount of tracks and chances for increasing accuracy with more particles of the same type per event. It should be of interest to look at other physics opportunities that would
fit within these run parameters.
It would requires careful consideration of velocity and distance in an angular trajectory for all types of particles over a long period of time.
The influence could be very faint and the more accurately measured to zero, the better an argument theoreticians have for venues in mathematical physics.
In addition to being a good calibration test for the experiments involved.
Of utmost interest is if force carriers may be influenced, and if it will be an expected zero result or if folds or pockets in space discussed for the very small also applies to the very large as is expected.
I've worked at CERN full time in the past, and part time until Desc. 2016.
Sort of dropped out of cognitive sciences with a desire for a philosophy specialisation in 2010.
And I've been brewing on some ideas concerning black holes for a few years.
Still, it would be great to do something like this at the LHC and some of the reasons are explained below.
I'm going to write this proposal in a more scholarly form for publication.
As it should be of great interest for the philosophy of physics. Not to mention the relevance for philosophy of science and mathematics.
That an agenda with promise of a zero result is a good test
for the integrity and methods -- any unknowns that may be hidden by
bias given the nature of building a system that primarily studies noise. Systematic errors is one thing --- systematic human errors another.
And so is the complications from adhering to working theories with
so much unknown.
There is a myriad of theories that deal with space as a variable.
Any form of direction or a experimental zero-proof would settle
many arguments revolving fundamental premises of particle physics.
By actively saying one should do PbPb for one year, and specifically:
That our orientation around the sun related to milky way is the focus of study to look for any space-time effect on any particle. This is not a narrow search in any one area of interest to physics. PbPb as the best option for the amount of tracks and chances for increasing accuracy with more particles of the same type per event. It should be of interest to look at other physics opportunities that would
fit within these run parameters.
It would requires careful consideration of velocity and distance in an angular trajectory for all types of particles over a long period of time.
The influence could be very faint and the more accurately measured to zero, the better an argument theoreticians have for venues in mathematical physics.
In addition to being a good calibration test for the experiments involved.
Of utmost interest is if force carriers may be influenced, and if it will be an expected zero result or if folds or pockets in space discussed for the very small also applies to the very large as is expected.
I've worked at CERN full time in the past, and part time until Desc. 2016.
Sort of dropped out of cognitive sciences with a desire for a philosophy specialisation in 2010.
Shared publicly
Taking this towards a publication, and stuck between doing this and appealing miscarriage of justice and police brutality and abuse of power.
Relativity is respected in the dark water rotating within a black hole.
There is however a lot of energy consumed in moving space, not matter.
Analogous to moving space and a soup of matter faster than allowed
for matter interacting with it due to the length of the object which must
be seen as a coherent object from the outside and inside.
For particle interaction most likely through force carriers.
There is an energy potential in the difference over the speed of light
by moving the interaction in space-time before collapsing.
Thereof, it is warranted to ask if Higgs-field and particle belong in the standard model. And should rather be moved to a model of space-time and particle interactions over the two respectively.
Edit: If nothing else, useful to write here as to get feedback as to why nobody is interested and what to explain. Bit wasted time however, as It's hard to guess these things, having nothing in common; especially background and training.2d
