Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

[Cerveny]

1) For example, how can a reasonable person seriously works with the idea that a single dimensionless point can give birth to / contains the entire universe (BB) or matter at all (BH)?
Consider please that the matter did not appear in "BB". Only the time / the process of “organizing” matter / the causality was born in "BB". The first seed / germ / tiny crystal / DNA of causality (of physical space) began the crysralisation, the growth of the Universe / of the past (inside the dimensionless, timeless divine Future). The first "word" was spoken, first dice / brick has been formed and laid. God doesn't play (Planck’s:) dice, God builds them… Before "BB" there was only the divine eternal Future. It was the same Future that we face every moment now, in the Present.

So how can disturbances, structural defects - here elemental particles - appear in the rigid, regular structure of the growing crystal - here of the Past (of aether). They may be results of non-uniform growth, the results of fusion/penetration of different crystal zones/grains, their consolidation. It can be the results of immediate surface tension - here the Presence - and also the effect of random, non-causal environmental influences - here the Future…

Personally, I am fascinated by the way screw dislocations (certain cases of structural defects) replicate / prescribe / grow into next, new crystal layers - here, in presented model - into new (Planck) time layers of the Past, into the Presence. Doesn't this mechanism resemble the phenomenon of particle spin?
...spin seem to be an angular momentum perpendicular to the Presence, i.e. parallel to the direction of time…

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/a-S ... _364361215
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpThWs8dWOI

[Cerveny]

One more note about aether. For example, imagine a freely moving electron. Apparently, it has nowhere to store information about the direction and speed held. It has no other "quantum numbers" or any other "asset" capable of storing such information. Note that this information only makes sense in "confrontation" with the surrounding environment. Therefore, the information that "serves" to push a freely moving particle and control its direction must be stored in its surroundings, i.e. in the aether. Such considerations, "spiced up" by the phenomenon of creation/annihilation and only strict values ​​of particle charge and spin, lead me to believe that elementary particles are only local properties, "defects" in an otherwise smooth, regular, rigid super/meta structure, in crystal of aether... What else could so reliably and persistently prevent the formation of elementary particles with other values ​​of spin, charge and mass?

So how to see the relationship between matter and space? If we understand matter as a certain damage to the regular structure of physical space ("dirty" aether crystal), then it is obvious that our space must be partially locally deformed. For example, for simplicity interstitial elements can thicken the physical space, while, for example, vacancies can “dilute” it. It is then “graspable”, I think, that such locally deformed, imperfect physical space can attract other “matter” or e.g. it can repel “(anti)matter” (surface tension?). See pls how e.g. stains and dirt are attracted to each other on the surface of the liquid. Certainly, in 4D physical space it will be more complicated, but it still may give a certain logic that I don’t find elsewhere…

[Cerveny]

… yes, the universe is a condensing, growing (crystallizing) “time” block of ether (of the past). The elementary particles are defects in this "crystal". The past crystallizes from the future, from the (not yet causal) "plasma" of the stem cells of the ether... forget, please, an obscure expansion of nothing.

The speed of this crystallization is in the range of c, which determines that no real speed can exceed c, in other words, nothing can "outrun" time...

As for me, I have a problem with the often used obscure term "wavefunction collapse". I suppose that in a "measurement" (much better: in any quantum interaction) the quantum system (QS) is only forced to manifest itself, to "take a stand". QS is permanently "confronted" with the Past, and its short (Planckian) life (its presence) quickly ends by "sticking" one of its causally permissible states as a new sediment of the Past (as a new local crystalline layer of ether).
In other words, the wave function describing a particular QS is generally not just one. However, all such (independent) functions must satisfy the relevant equation modeling the solved reality. After touching the Past, after becoming infected with the Past (after interaction), the QS is pulled into the History according to one of mentioned functions. QS born in a frivolous Future is attacked and overcome by causality, by the Past:) The ambiguity of the outcome of such a confrontation is the reason for the one-sidedness of the "arrow" of time... QM does not deal with the development, expectations of QS, but generally only provides an enumeration of its permissible ("measurable") states and some probabilities.

[Cerveny]

As for me, I have a problem with the often used obscure term "wavefunction collapse". I suppose that in a "measurement" (much better: in any quantum interaction) the quantum system (QS) is only forced to manifest itself, to "take a stand". QS is permanently "confronted" with the Past, and its short (Planckian) life (its presence) quickly ends by "sticking" one of its causally permissible states as a new sediment of the Past (as a new local crystalline layer of ether).
In other words, the wave function describing a particular QS is generally not just one. However, all such (independent) functions must satisfy the relevant equation modeling the solved reality. After touching the Past, after becoming infected with the Past (after interaction, ignition)
, the QS is pulled into the History according to one of mentioned functions. QS born in a frivolous Future is attacked and overcome by causality, by the Past:) The ambiguity of the outcome of such a confrontation is the reason for the one-sidedness of the "arrow" of time... QM does not deal with the development, expectations of QS, but generally only provides an enumeration of its permissible ("measurable") states and some probabilities.

Speaking of quantum mechanics, the question is why electrons in a 3D atom keep "spinning" at all? What keeps them in waving states? So… simply put, they are spun by the "wind" of the time blowing from the Future. "Raindrops" of the stem elements of aether keep the clockwork of the Past ticking, God is “thinking” of us… In each new Plack's Sediment of Time, the hands of this clockwork are moved forward. Please note the impressive analogy - crystal growth at a place of structural disorder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpThWs8dWOI
And why can't two electrons be in the same state (Pauli principle)? This question makes no sense when we realize that the electron is actually just a specific "waving". … A string can sound less or stronger, but it's still the same note. Two opposite moving of string annihilates both. True, if we gently touch the string in the middle (fladeolet), we can distinguish two different tones (even a higher harmonic), but it works in 1D only…

[Cerveny]

Between us, where is the antimatter anyway? Can we ever meet her? We can. The natural radioactive (beta+) decay of some isotopes of a number of elements (C, O, N, Mg...) directly emits positrons (e+). Or such ("ordinary") mesons consist of a quark and an antiquark, so some can be both particles and antiparticles. Positrons are also massively produced in thermonuclear reactions, e.g. on our Sun, where I would notice the weight balances. If part of the matter is converted into energy during the roeaction, we can also consider this as the annihilations, burning of some hidden fragments of the subnucleon components. I still feel like antimatter is somewhere between us. We can imagine that it does not cluster like matter, e.g. because they gravitationally repel each other. Then perhaps it should be (evenly) dissociated somewhere... Maybe the proton is some manifestation of a bound neutron/positron system or some quarks are actually antiquarks... In this context, I remind you that there is an EPOLA model (brave for its time) - https: //www.epola.co.uk/introduction/introframe.htm which represents physical space (the ether) as a crystal lattice of electrons and positrons (NaCl analogy). So, in a way, it is close to me in its logic, yet it seems quite simple and static to me. And if I return to radioactive decay in general, I think that its randomness is the result of permanent pressure, "raindrops" from the non-causal, frivolous Future on some less stable quantum configurations of (anti)matter that are being “corroded” by them.

[Cerveny]

What might the Universe look like? Please look at the two (extreme) options. I like something about both.

The smooth, elastic bubble of presence (add one dimension, pls) has long attracted me to the possibility of interpreting its surface tension as a kind of "tool" / mechanism ensuring / controlling the conservation of energy and momentum. I would perceive tension in the radial direction, i.e. in the direction of time, as a local energy difference, and I would perceive tangential pressure / tension as a momentum imbalance. I am very fascinated by the idea of ​​surface waves, the undulations of the Present, i.e. of the surface of the Past. It means that the time may be ahead in a certain place compared to another place for a while. It fascinates me so much that I could relate it (certain frequencies) to extrasensory communication (we know, for example, a feeling when someone looks at us in a way that makes us turn at him...)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_bubb ... e_edit.jpg

The second case, the fractal universe, resonates with the idea of ​​extremely layered oscillations and vortices. The "Mandelbrot" presented here (hyper complex), as an example, combines extreme fragmentation and creativity while maintaining connection and continuity (causality). My main idea is that the basic features of the Universe (number of dimensions, types of forces, structure of physical space (of aether) - spectrum of elementary particles, physical constants) are the result of a hyper-Darwinian process. More: viewtopic.php?t=29249 For example, if you know the principle of construction of the Mandelbrot set, then you can understand that some points "remain" during the iteration, during reproduction closed in the set and some fly away, disappear.
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=ht ... 1_RGB8.png

Please take all these considerations as an inspiration only

[Age]

And then, there is the actual way that the Universe, so-called, 'looks like'.

[Cerveny]

Let me summarize my talk a bit. I have been asking myself the following questions: Why is the spectrum of elementary particles so strictly limited and discrete? How annihilation works? What so fundamentally limits the speed to c? Does the Future have the same essence / structure as the Past? How "long" is the future? Was the whole (unlimited) Future also created with BB? Isn't BB and BH complete nonsense? Can reality be infinitely small or infinitely large (time runs too fast for infinity small things and too slowly for infinitely large things)? Does a deterministic Universe make sense?

The theory of relativity, which essentially only provides an extension of "Newton" by the finite velocity of the propagation of gravity, confuses mathematics with physics. It did not understand the calibration reality of the aether, thus creating a fatal obstacle to coming to terms with the effectively discrete (quantum) nature / substance of space, matter and time.

[Age]

Let me summarize my talk a bit.

Okay.

I have been asking myself the following questions: Why is the spectrum of elementary particles so strictly limited and discrete? What so fundamentally limits the speed to c? Does the Future have the same essence / structure as the Past? How "long" is the future? Was the whole (unlimited) Future also created with BB? Isn't BB and BH complete nonsense? Can reality be infinitely small or infinitely large (time runs too fast for infinity small things and too slowly for infinitely large things)? Does a deterministic Universe make sense?

Did you answer any of these?

How do you define the 'time' word, which, supposedly, makes 'time' run 'too fast' and 'too slow'?

Also, the answers to the above are sufficiently answered in the GUTOE

The theory of relativity, which essentially only provides an extension of "Newton" by the finite velocity of the propagation of gravity, confuses mathematics with physics. It did not understand the calibration reality of the aether, thus creating a fatal obstacle to coming to terms with the effectively discrete (quantum) nature / substance of space, matter and time.

How do you define the words 'aether', 'space', 'matter', and 'time'.

[Cerveny]

Let me summarize my talk a bit.

Okay.

I have been asking myself the following questions: Why is the spectrum of elementary particles so strictly limited and discrete? What so fundamentally limits the speed to c? Does the Future have the same essence / structure as the Past? How "long" is the future? Was the whole (unlimited) Future also created with BB? Isn't BB and BH complete nonsense? Can reality be infinitely small or infinitely large (time runs too fast for infinity small things and too slowly for infinitely large things)? Does a deterministic Universe make sense?

Did you answer any of these?

How do you define the 'time' word, which, supposedly, makes 'time' run 'too fast' and 'too slow'?

Also, the answers to the above are sufficiently answered in the GUTOE

The theory of relativity, which essentially only provides an extension of "Newton" by the finite velocity of the propagation of gravity, confuses mathematics with physics. It did not understand the calibration reality of the aether, thus creating a fatal obstacle to coming to terms with the effectively discrete (quantum) nature / substance of space, matter and time.

How do you define the words 'aether', 'space', 'matter', and 'time'.

I'm sorry, but I could only define a unit of stupidity, but I'm not good at English :(

[wtf]

I'm sorry, but I could only define a unit of stupidity, but I'm not good at English

The carrier particle of stupidity is the moron.

[Cerveny]

Let me summarize my talk a bit. I have been asking myself the following questions: Why is the spectrum of elementary particles so strictly limited and discrete? How annihilation works? What so fundamentally limits the speed to c? Does the Future have the same essence / structure as the Past? How "long" is the future? Was the whole (unlimited) Future also created with BB? Isn't BB and BH complete nonsense? Can reality be infinitely small or infinitely large (time runs too fast for infinity small things and too slowly for infinitely large things)? Does a deterministic Universe make sense?

The theory of relativity, which essentially only provides an extension of "Newton" by the finite velocity of the propagation of gravity, confuses mathematics with physics. It did not understand the calibration reality of the aether, thus creating a fatal obstacle to coming to terms with the effectively discrete (quantum) nature / substance of space, matter and time.

Sure, E=mc^2. This formula kneaded with the substantial contribution of Lorentz transformations is very strange. Why? Because it completely unexpectedly combines a property, the potential of general matter, with the properties of the vacuum (aether), even with its electromagnetic properties. The specific value of the speed of light is given by the values ​​of the electric and magnetic polarizability of empty physical space (beware, relativists have a bit of chaos in this, space is like space for them). Personally, to me this formula reeks of kinetic energy of movement (towards the future??). The one half, I don’t mind that much, maybe there is still some orthogonal movement or did antimatter have to be created together with matter? The close relationship between matter and aether is really remarkable here. As I say, matter is an imperfect aether only…

[Cerveny]

Sure, E=mc^2. This formula kneaded with the substantial contribution of Lorentz transformations is very strange. Why? Because it completely unexpectedly combines a property, the potential of general matter, with the properties of the vacuum (aether), even with its electromagnetic properties. The specific value of the speed of light is given by the values ​​of the electric and magnetic polarizability of empty physical space (beware, relativists have a bit of chaos in this, space is like space for them). Personally, to me this formula reeks of kinetic energy of movement (towards the future??). The one half, I don’t mind that much, maybe there is still some orthogonal movement or did antimatter have to be created together with matter? The close relationship between matter and aether is really remarkable here. As I say, matter is an imperfect aether only…

If one cannot come to terms with the strange relationship between matter and aether, one can transfer one's uneasiness towards the Lorentz transformation. But even on closer inspection, not much satisfaction can be found there. I'm afraid its foundations are shaky. Say, to compare the speed of light in two inertial frames, when we don't know about any real one? Here, I have no choice but to think about the kinetics of the condensation of the Universe, more precisely about the dynamics of crystallization of the Past, at a speed of the order of c. Or to think about the Wigner energy (the energy necessary to deform / damage the regular structure) of the aether, i.e. to create matter...

[Cerveny]

You can't believe everything, you can't measure something like that in the laboratory. Physicists have lost their sanity. Physics has been poisoned and paralyzed for a hundred years by Albert Einstein's misunderstanding of space and time, physics has become a faith ... Physical space is grainy and the future has a different structure and content than the past. Quantum mechanics "works" on their thin Planck boundary…

Once again and for the last time (I promise), please allow me to try to clarify my point. Two fundamental errors of relativity: First, physical space is not infinitely fine but granular (crystal of aether). So both BB and BH are completely off. Second, the structure and essence of Past, Present and Future are completely different. The future has neither structure nor time nor matter in our sense. One could say that it is precisely Plato's world of ideas. The Presence is the quantum "fire" burning the Future, allowing Life to live. The past is a frozen crystal of causality, a sediment, a quantum “ash”…

[socrattus]

You can't believe everything, you can't measure something like that in the laboratory. Physicists have lost their sanity. Physics has been poisoned and paralyzed for a hundred years by Albert Einstein's misunderstanding of space and time, physics has become a faith ... Physical space is grainy and the future has a different structure and content than the past. Quantum mechanics "works" on their thin Planck boundary…

Once again and for the last time (I promise), please allow me to try to clarify my point. Two fundamental errors of relativity: First, physical space is not infinitely fine but granular. So both BB and BH are completely off. Second, the structure and essence of Past, Present and Future are completely different. The future has neither structure nor time nor matter in our sense. One could say that it is precisely Plato's world of ideas. The Presence is the quantum "fire" burning the Future, allowing Life to live. The past is a frozen crystal of causality, a sediment, a quantum “ash”…

Esoteric language is not the language of formulas, laws, equations
of mathematical physics that explain Nature.
---