Question Constant motion at the quantum level exists?

[adam]

1. Where does the energy come from to keep constant motion going at a quantum level (even at absolute zero)?

2. Following on from the above - if constant motion exists within quantum physics where do we see these effects in the wider world ?
(The movement of the planets is not quantum?)

3. Why doesnt quantum motion run out or stop ?
(Same question for the motion of planets)

4. How do quantum particles get effected by changes in gravity ? If not why not ?

I hope someone can help with these questions.

We've Finally Narrowed Down The Speed of Gravity And The Numbers Are Insane

In the wake of recent news that astronomers finally detected the space-warping boom of colliding neutron stars, measuring the merging of black holes might seem kind of old hat.

www.sciencealert.com

It seems strange that we can observe the effects of gravity on motion, or local mass on gravity, but do not seem to be able to say what creates gravity generally (only what alters it in a local area).

Vienna University of Technology

It's never too cold for quantum: The peculiar characteristics demonstrated by 'quantum critical points' at absolute zero remain one of the great unsolved mysteries of science

The peculiar characteristics demonstrated by 'quantum critical points' at absolute zero remain one of the great unsolved mysteries of science.

www.sciencedaily.com

"Quantum physics states that it is impossible for a particle to be fully at rest in a specific location," says Alessandro Toschi. "Heisenberg's uncertainty principle tells us that position and momentum cannot be ascertained with total precision. Therefore, a particle's position and momentum can still change at absolute zero, even if classic thermal fluctuations are no longer present. These changes are known as quantum fluctuations."

So, when it is too cold for classic shaking movements, quantum physics ensures that physically interesting things can still happen.

 

[Hayseed]

1. The perpetual motion of a charge comes from self-repulsion. A charge is always trying to explode, at c, like a super nova. As the charge repels apart at c, the electric is aligned in the outward common direction. This common outward electric direction, aligns the magnetic to a common sideways direction. An electron will rotate to the left, a proton will rotate to the right. The magnetic sideways motion has a c velocity also. Thus, the super nova explosion, is confined, to a circumference set when the M velocity equals the E velocity.

The lifetime of this motion is estimated to be 10E+60 years.

2. We sense and measure this confined motion as mass.

3. Because it is lossless.

4. An isolated charged particle is not affected by gravity. Only dipoles affect/effect gravity.

The classical model(Parson's Magneton) for matter is much more actuate than the standard model or the quantum model. If one wants to control mixed plasma in the ring, study Parson. A bonded particle has a constant fixed location and a constant fixed momentum.

 

[adam]

1. The perpetual motion of a charge comes from self-repulsion. A charge is always trying to explode, at c, like a super nova. As the charge repels apart at c, the electric is aligned in the outward common direction. This common outward electric direction, aligns the magnetic to a common sideways direction. An electron will rotate to the left, a proton will rotate to the right. The magnetic sideways motion has a c velocity also. Thus, the super nova explosion, is confined, to a circumference set when the M velocity equals the E velocity.

The lifetime of this motion is estimated to be 10E+60 years.

2. We sense and measure this confined motion as mass.

3. Because it is lossless.

4. An isolated charged particle is not affected by gravity. Only dipoles affect/effect gravity.

The classical model(Parson's Magneton) for matter is much more actuate than the standard model or the quantum model. If one wants to control mixed plasma in the ring, study Parson. A bonded particle has a constant fixed location and a constant fixed momentum.

Thank you !

Follow up questions - sorry i dont know much and I am probably missing something just trying to understand a little more

A. If we sense/measure the quantum motion in particles as mass and mass is affect/effected by gravity - isnt the quantum level also being effected by that gravity ?

B. If light is effected/pulled by gravity why arent quantum particles also pulled by gravity ?

Quantum jolts measured at macro scales in gravity wave detector – Astronomy Now

astronomynow.com

Quantum effects of gravity - Nature

The effects of gravity and quantum mechanics rarely overlap because of the different scales involved. An experiment with ultracold neutrons has now been able to probe both simultaneously.

www.nature.com

Quantum effects of gravity

INSPIRE

inspirehep.net

Neutrons and gravity

Toroidal ring model - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

C. If motion at the quantum level is lossless isnt that perpetual motion ?

I hope to learn more - thank you

 

[Hayseed]

If you are a student and trying to learn and understand quantum theory, and then questions about how and why something is what it is, you have missed the whole point of quantum theory. Quantum theory does not use cause and effect to explain events/motion. It uses intrinsic properties and probability.

Classical science and engineering looks at the world from the other end. We believe in physical cause and effect, which eliminates probability and randomness. We work with sure constant things.

This is not taught in physics today. Study mathematical probability and wave functions for today's particle physics.

There is no physical law against perpetual motion. A light beamed into space has perpetual motion. But there is no perpetual energy source.

Mass is one of the most ill defined things there is. And look at how long they have studied it. It still describes the way that an object reacts, instead of what an object is. Mass is the force or energy needed to move the object. But, why is a force needed? Because of inertia. What is inertia? It's the force that opposes the movement of the object. WOW. see how that works. That's mass.

Classical mass is just angular field momentum. Angular momentum doesn't like to be disturbed, that's inertia. But, there are two modes. Symmetric momentum is without and immune to gravity. And asymmetrical momentum projects and responds to a gravity field.

But modern GRT states gravity is a space-time distortion. Classical science uses omnipresent time and length. With no probability or randomness of course.

I believe that light is even more mis-understood than mass is. Which is strange because it is the most studied. We base every thing else on this concept. And we have to vary time to explain it. Instead of velocity being a result of length per time, length per time are now the result of velocity. That's too easy for me.

 

[adam]

If you are a student and trying to learn and understand quantum theory, and then questions about how and why something is what it is, you have missed the whole point of quantum theory. Quantum theory does not use cause and effect to explain events/motion. It uses intrinsic properties and probability.

Classical science and engineering looks at the world from the other end. We believe in physical cause and effect, which eliminates probability and randomness. We work with sure constant things.

This is not taught in physics today. Study mathematical probability and wave functions for today's particle physics.

There is no physical law against perpetual motion. A light beamed into space has perpetual motion. But there is no perpetual energy source.

Mass is one of the most ill defined things there is. And look at how long they have studied it. It still describes the way that an object reacts, instead of what an object is. Mass is the force or energy needed to move the object. But, why is a force needed? Because of inertia. What is inertia? It's the force that opposes the movement of the object. WOW. see how that works. That's mass.

Classical mass is just angular field momentum. Angular momentum doesn't like to be disturbed, that's inertia. But, there are two modes. Symmetric momentum is without and immune to gravity. And asymmetrical momentum projects and responds to a gravity field.

But modern GRT states gravity is a space-time distortion. Classical science uses omnipresent time and length. With no probability or randomness of course.

I believe that light is even more mis-understood than mass is. Which is strange because it is the most studied. We base every thing else on this concept. And we have to vary time to explain it. Instead of velocity being a result of length per time, length per time are now the result of velocity. That's too easy for me.

Thank you very much. I appreciate your time and effort.

Your last comment about length and time got me thinking about the speed of light being measured in a way that keeps it a fixed velocity

It seems that the understanding of prevailing theories often eventually change confirmed or indentified via observation

I understand the probability idea and randomness which require parameters.

However outside the quantum level or even at the quantum level some things are supposed to be normally constant like the speed of light (unless something effects it).

Mass cannot travel faster than the speed of light unless you can fold space.

I have read that the speed of light has, according to some, varied slightly at previous times. That problem of a varying speed of light was "fixed" by making c constant and allowing changes to F and W to vary. That seems strange and to refer back to your length and time comment.

I quote below.

The problem with current methods of light-speed measurements (mainly laser) is that both wavelengths [W] and frequency [F] are measured to give c as the equation reads [c = FW]. If you have followed the discussion well, you will be aware that, within a quantum interval, wavelengths are invariant with any change in c. This means that it is the frequency of light that varies lock-step with c. Unfortunately, atomic frequencies also vary lock-step with c, so that when laser frequencies are measured with atomic clocks no difference will be found.

It seems like what breaks the law is made to fit or ignored. Probably I have missed something

Thats where I am at.

 

[Hayseed]

Maxwell and everyone since, has believed that EM emission is continuous, like sound from a speaker.

This is why we have fairly tale theories about light. Like local time. It's the only way to explain a continuous constant velocity across frames. But I know that EM emission is instantaneous, discreet, and intermittent. EM in flight does not have frequency, it has duty cycle. This changes the entire dynamic and understanding of light.

A simple high school radio experiment can show this concept with a radio emission.

This leads to some interesting possibilities. For one, we should be able to double the data rate, without increasing bandwidth of a RF channel.

And for two and more important, we should be able to accurately determine the relative velocity of the emitter, and the relative velocity of the absorber by looking at the duty cycle. Once you understand what you are measuring, ALL relative velocity can be measured now. And with a little study, we might be able to measure absolute motion. But for that, we need faster switches and clocks.

 

[adam]

Thank you !