Newtonian and Einstein models are still useful tools.

The Einstein and Newtonian gravitational principles are still “hard stuff”. And today, we can say that all gravitational models are suitable. If they are used with a certain scale. The Newtonian models are suitable for calculating interactions between large-scale objects, like planets. The quantum gravitational models are suitable for calculating the interactions of the smallest particles in the universe. 

The fact is that. Those models are hard to connect. So, we can say that the Newtonian gravity, the Theory of Relativity, and quantum mechanical models would make the GUT (Grand Unified Theory) and the TOE (Theory of Everything) possible. The problem is that. We don’t know. If it's the gravity. Only one force. Or is it a collection of many forces? When we think about the structure of the planets, there are multi-trillion atoms. Each atom has an electron shell. And core with protons and neutrons. Those protons and neutrons involve quarks. So why can't we connect quantum gravitation with the Newtonian model? 

The reason for that is simple. We don’t know every part of complex material structures. The quarks and electrons are the only elementary particles on the planet. But then. We must realize that the bonds that connect quarks into protons and neutrons. And bonds between protons and neutrons can also act as part of the gravity effect. Those bonds between those baryons are like quantum tornadoes. Those quantum tornadoes bind energy into them. Another thing that we forget is the centrifugal force. That force pushes objects out of the surface of the spinning objects. But there is more about that thing at the end of the text. 

The fact is that we should find out. The existence of a graviton. There is a model of the graviton. It is that graviton, it's the quantum-sized black hole. The elementary particles are quantum fields around those gravitons. So, the matter is the halo around those quantum-scale back holes. And maybe those quantum-sized black holes can form the bonds between quarks. Those bonds are the quantum tornadoes between elementary particles. This means that those bonds are. A little bit like the mythical wormholes. Channels through space and time. 

The wormhole was introduced by Albert Einstein and Nathan Rosen. The theoretical wormhole is the channel, or a tornado, across space and time. The wormhole can form between superpositioned and enangled black holes. But. The structure would be similar to the bonds that connect. Those quarks together into protons and neutrons, or bonds that form between baryons. And then, similar, but larger quantum tornadoes form chemical bonds. So, the wormhole would be the long-distance bond between two black holes. 

“A wormhole visualized as a two-dimensional surface. Route (a) is the shortest path through normal space between points 1 and 2; route (b) is a shorter path through a wormhole.” (Wikipedia, Wormhole)

“In particle physics, the electroweak interaction or electroweak force is the unified description of two of the fundamental interactions of nature: electromagnetism (electromagnetic interaction) and the weak interaction. Although these two forces appear very different at everyday low energies. The theory.  Models them as two different aspects of the same force. Above the unification energy, on the order of 246 GeV, they would merge into a single force. Thus, if the temperature is high enough – approximately 1015 K – then the electromagnetic force and weak force merge into a combined electroweak force.” (Wikipedia, Electroweak interaction)

So could all fundamental interactions be the same force? That affects only in different-sized areas. 

From electroweak to strong interaction that interacts with electroweak through the Z boson. The reaction goes like this. Gluon>Z boson>W boson> and gravity. But then we miss the graviton. That existence is not proven.  

And maybe the same structures can form those bonds between protons and neutrons. In models, the bonds between protons and neutrons form when some structure (like a free quark, or some kind of black hole) forms the quantum low-pressure between neutrons and protons. This thing forms the W and Z bosons that orbit that structure between protons and neutrons. And that forms the quantum low-pressure that keeps those particles in the one structure. 

The W boson. It can transmit energy between electromagnetism and weak nuclear interaction. So, could the Z-boson have an ability to transmit energy between the W boson and gluons, which transport strong nuclear interaction? The reason for. Why. Electromagnetic interaction. Seems stronger than strong interaction is this. The effective area of electromagnetic interaction is larger. The strong interaction forms a wave movement that affects very small structures. This means that the radiation that affects a small area can tunnel through even an elementary particle. 

Is it possible? That's when we try to create TOE and GUT theories? We simply forget that things like bonds between particles also bind energy. That means those bonds have an effect on the gravity. The idea is that the gravitation forms when some structure binds energy or quantum fields. Quantum field. It is a common name for gravitational, electromagnetic, weak, and strong nuclear interactions. 

Another thing that we sometimes forget is that electrons orbit the atom’s core. During that process, the electrons sometimes send a photon. That forms a lower energy point on the electron. In that case, the quantum field tries to fill that point. And in models, the gravitation. Forms when some structure binds some quantum field. The outcome field tries to fill that point. And particles ride with those fields. 

So when those superstrings or quantum tornadoes pull quarks together, that thing can cause a situation where those things pull energy from around them. The bond, or string. That pulls quarks and hadrons together. When those strings spin, they act like tornadoes. They form the electromagnetic (”quantum”) low-pressure inside them. The tornado aims energy at the quantum field that surrounds quarks. And forms protons and neutrons. The “low-pressure” in those tornadoes pulls those particles together. 

So. That means that part of gravitation should form in those strings. In the same way. Larger-scale molecular structures. Pull energy into them. And that is the thing that forms the gravitational effect. The idea in those models is that. Something binds energy. And because that forms the lower energy area. Outcoming energy “tries” to fill that point. The term quantum field is the common name for all four fundamental interactions: gravity and electromagnetism. And weak and strong nuclear forces. 

Then we must realize that things. Like centrifugal force. Has some kind of effect on gravity. The fact is that it's possible that centrifugal force has a quantum twin. The quantum version of this force could form because the whisk-shape structure that forms the shell of the particle forms quantum-low-pressure around the fast-spinning particle. Those small (Quantum) voids pull photons out from the particle. That thing pushes things out of the particles. The particle forms a quantum tornado in its axle. That tornado pulls energy to that particle. And the particle’s structure transports that energy into its equator. 

https://interestingengineering.com/space/gravity-dark-matter-act-cosmic-study

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroweak_interaction

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W_and_Z_bosons

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

Is it safe to stand on a giant's shoulders?

If we want to be prime movers we must dare to think independently. The man named Sir Isaac Newton was the man who created the first gravitational theory. Newton also explained that light had two forms particle and wave motion. But we forget one thing. 

When Newton started his career, there were no gravitational theories and Newtonian mechanics. Being a prime mover makes it possible that a person makes mistakes. But if the person is successful. That brings gold and glory to that person. And guess how many errors Newton made before he published some of his theories?

The key element in philosophy is just to learn to ask "why?".  We can always copy texts written by Popper or Aristotle. But when we try to create something new. We must dare to write something. That some famous philosophers did not write earlier. There is one thing that we must understand. Even the most famous philosophers once wrote their first text. 

Sir Isaac Newton said he made great things because he stood on the giant's shoulders. Then we might ask how safe is to stand on a giant's shoulder. Should we rather follow other people? Should we always follow other people's thoughts? 

Or repeat other people's ideas rather than make our ideas? So if we want to make something great, like some new theory we must dare to stand on the giant's shoulder. Maybe our ideas are sometimes unpractical. Or maybe, they are far away from possible. 

And that means people are telling us that our idea is not working. Or our new idea is not suitable for mass production. But otherwise, those ideas were ours. They were and are something that came to my mind. When we think about safe models like writing some other people's ideas some other people like my own teachers could or some other philosophers might ask, "should I loan Plato's book, or should I read your thoughts?". 

The fact is that I was in the philosophy course, and if I wanted to pass that course, I must write my ideas. I know that everybody can copy texts made by Aristotle, Newton, or Voltaire. But fewer people can write their own opinions and justify them by using accepted rhetoric. This is the idea of philosophy. What if Newton thought that he must follow other people's texts? And what if that man just summarized them? 

The fact is that nobody ever heard of Sir Isaac Newton, the man who invented Newton's telescope, gravitation, and derivative-integral calculations. Nobody ever heard the idea that the universe is like a clock and God would not willingly intervene in what's going on here. Without being willing to make their texts, men and women like Newton would be the only man on earth. 

When we are thinking about people who sympathize with the Russian attack on Ukraine. And their connection with vaccine resistance, we can say that vaccines can protect people against biological weapons. But that's only my own opinion. The thing is that the philosophical way to think is different than everyday thinking. philosophical thinking is deeper than regular thinking. And the key question is: does something has some kind of thing that is not open to us? 

The classic example of a philosophical way to think is this. When our professor comes to the class there is a glass of water on his table. Then we must ask a question: is that liquid water? And if there is water, why that glass is on the table? 

When we look at people, who are against their benefit, we must ask about the motive for that kind of behavior. Why did somebody do something? Whose benefit do the anti-vaccine attitudes serve? 

Why that thing causes so big polemics? Why do those things raise so strong opinions? Those things are interesting. 

https://bigthink.com/thinking/shoulders-of-qiants/

Mietelmä suuresta teologisesta paradoksista: voiko Jumala luoda kiven, jota hän ei jaksa nostaa?

Kun puhutaan Jumalasta kaikkivaltiaana hahmona, niin silloin aina välillä tulee teologeille esiin valtava paradoksi, jota kuvataan usein tähtitieteen kirjoissa, missä kysytään että "voiko Jumala luoda kiven jota hän ei jaksa nostaa? Kun puhutaan kaikkivaltiudesta, niin silloin pitää muistaa se, että jos Jumala luo kiven, jota hän ei jaksa nostaa, niin silloin hän ei olisi kaikkivaltias tätä kiveä kohtaan. Toki hän voisi silloin pienentää kiveä tai muuttaa sitä niin, että hän voisi sen siirtää, mutta silloinkaan hän ei olisi kaikkivaltias, tai ainakin hän tekisi vilppiä tuossa tehtävässä.

Näet Jumala ei tuon paradoksin mukaan voisi luoda kiveä, mitä hän ei voisi siirtää. Tällaisten ajatusten ajattelemisesta tietenkin maksetaan palkkaa ihmisille, joita kutsutaan teologeiksi. Jumalan asemaa kaikkivaltiaana korostetaan Raamatussa, ja se on yhteistä kaikille monoteistisille uskonnoille, joissa uskotaan että on olemassa vain yksi kaikkivaltias olento, joka päättää kaikesta mitä maan päällä tapahtuu.

Eli me ihmiset ikään kuin olisimme Jumalan suojeluksessa kaiken aikaa, ja tästä sitten on seurannut pieniä väärinkäsityksiä. Noita väärinkäsityksiä tuli ennen silloin, kun vaikkapa tulevaa hallitsijaa alettiin kouluttaa, koska kukaan ei hänelle tohtinut sanoa vastaa. Ja esimerkiksi koulua saatettiin käydä niin, kuin nuorelle majesteetille sattui sopimaan. Se tarkoitti sitä, että opettajat pelkäsivät sitä, että hän katkaisisi heidän kaulansa, jos he eivät häntä miellyttäisi.

Kuitenkaan näin ei useinkaan tapahtunut, koska tuo korkeasti koulutettu opetuspedagogi sitten sai usein nuoren majesteetin tajuamaan, että hänen piti saada jonkinlaista koulutusta esimerkiksi äidinkielessä sekä muissa aineissa kuten matematiikassa ja sen alalajissa, geometriassa jotta hänen ylhäisyytensä voisi sitten opiskella sotaa, mikä tarkoitti pienten tinasta tehtyjen hevospatsaiden siirtelyä jossain kartalla tai diodraamassa, mikä tarkoittaa eräänlaista kipsistä tehtyä 3D- eli topografikarttapintaa. Nykyään nuo pinnat luodaan tutkaskannerien avulla, ja joukkoja siirrellään virtuaaliympäristössä, mikä tekee varsinaisten toimitilojen varaamisen tarpeettomaksi, ja tuo kuva voidaan luoda esimerkiksi diaheittimellä mihin tahansa luentosaliin.

Nämä väärinkäsitykset liittyvät usein esimerkiksi Mannerheimintien yli kävelemiseen, sekä muihin pikku juttuihin, joiden seurauksena on monia kuninkaallisia esimerkiksi hypännyt linnan muureilta. Tämä liittyy erään aikakauden ilmiöön, jossa papit saarnasivat siitä, että kuningas olisi Jumalan erityisessä suojeluksessa, ja mitään pahaa ei kuninkaalliselle päälle voisi tapahtua. Toki tuota kuninkaallista perijää opettava pappi olisi voinut mainita sen, että Raamatussa mainitaan se, että Jumalan nimeä ei saa turhaan sanoa, eli toki taivaanisällä on paljon muutakin tekemistä, kuin juosta jonkun tulevan kruunupään perässä. Ja olisihan tuo pappi voinut ainakin yrittää selittää tuolle tulevalle majesteetille, että maailmassa on monta muutakin kruunupäätä, joiden perässä hänen täytyi juosta.

Ja sitten nuori majesteetti oli mennyt linnan muureille, ajatellen että Jumala tulee ottamaan kopin tästä suurenmoisesta sekä ajan hengen mukaan hyvin voidellusta karitsasta, kun hän hyppää jostain jyrkänteeltä alas. Kun mietitään tuota tilannetta, missä valta periytyy suoraan isältä pojalle, niin totta kai tuota poikaa sitten "voideltiin" eli mielisteltiin vähän kaikessa, jotta hän sitten vallassa ollessaan voisi tovereitaan muistella hyvällä. Tuolloin "vanhaan hyvään keskiaikaan" oli maailmankuva sellainen, että Jumala konkreettisesti käveli maan päällä, ja vaikutti kaikkiin asioihin mitä täällä tapahtui.

Mutta tuo vanha käsitys jumaluudesta alkoi 1700-luvun alussa korvautua Newtonilaiseksi teologiaksi kutsutulla mallilla, jossa maailmankaikkeus ymmärretään eräänlaisena kellona, jonka toimintaan Jumala ei sinällään voi vaikuttaa, eikä hän siis kävele kenenkään vierellä tönimässä autoja pois tieltä, kun tämä henkilö ylittää Mannerheimintietä. Toki esimerkiksi huumeiden käyttö saattaa aiheuttaa sen, että joku narkomaani alkaa oikeasti kuvittelemaan olevansa Jumala, ja että hänellä on jotain taikavoimia, mikä saa autot pysähtymään hänen tahdonvoimastaan, tai ainakin hänen taikavoimansa vaikuttaa isoon siniseen autoon, joka pysähtyy hänen nostaessaan kättään keltaisen tai sinisen, tuon auton kuvalla varustetun kilven kohdalla. Mutta muuten tällaiset uskomukset ihmisten "jedivoimista" ovat kuitenkin pikku hiljaa jääneet menneisyyteen.

elainasiaa.blogspot.fi