Burning water and water memory

This post is motivated by recent ideas about dissociation of water by radiowaves, presented on Matti Pitkanen's blog, where he explains it by his theory involving "dark phase conjugate photons"(?). In 2007 radio-engineer John Kanzius developed an apparatus for cancer treatment by polarized radiowaves in 13 MHz frequency range. During desalination tests of his device with tube filled by marine watter (~ 3% solution of NaCl) he observed an evolution of hydrogen, which can be ignited by lighter (video 1, 2). Experiments were confirmed and replicated (1, 2) by Rustum Roy, a materials scientist at Pennsylvania State University.



In my opinion the origin of this phenomena is more trivial and it's closely related to memory properties of water, which manifests by number of anomalies, like water autothixotropy(1), Mpemba effect, homeopathic activity of various drugs and chemicals in minute concentration etc. which are based on oligomerisation of water into form of rigid water clusters of icosahedral symmetry. The water cluster formation is based on the finding of X-ray spectroscopy, there exists only two hydrogen bridges available per molecule, so that the formation of chained flat structures simmilar to sponge or foam is preffered. Some observations indicate, the salt ions dissolved may increase surface energy during water clusters and foam formation.



Note the close connection of icosahedral water clusters to sacred geometry of five elements, where the icosahedron shape is assigned just to water element, which could mean, vedic authors have general information about five-fold structure of fluids, the structure of glass and water clusters in particular.



Interesting aspect of quantum behavior of water clusters is their shape memory, which originates from quantum mirage phenomena. The conformal change of shape in particular place of cluster surface is followed by redistribution of charge density, so that the molecules of water are attached/removed to cluster from opposite side in such a way, the original cluster shape is retained like of piece plasticine, although it undergoes rapid Brownian motion as a whole. In AWT analogous mechanism keeps the shape of particles during their travel through vacuum foam.



From the above reasons, each water cluster propagates through density fluctuations of water like solid body of much large effective mass, then the single water molecule - so it can absorb energy in radiowave frequency energy density range (13 MHz, i.e. 5.10E-8 eV). During mutual collisions of such larger clusters the cavitation and splitting of water molecules may occur as a result of anti-Stokes scattering and various resonance phenomena. As a macroscopic demonstration of anti-Stokes scattering can serve famous Astroblaster toy and/or jet formation during water splash, explosion of cumulative warheads (bazooka) and/or collapse of black holes and supernovae (compare the recent simulations of "super rebound" effect during cluster collisions). The main trick here is, the energy of cluster surface waves affects the total bilance of translation energy during collision. Such resonance can have it's analogy in explanation of cold fusion for clusters of deuterons dissolved in palladium lattice.

The electrolysis of salty water by radiowaves is interesting from practical purposes, because it leads to thermodynamically metastable mixture of hydrogen peroxide and hydrogen gas and it doesn't require cooling, diaphragms and metal electrodes affected by corrosion and surface reactions, which decrease yield during classical electrolysis. In polar organic solvents we can expect analogous reaction mechanism, interesting from preparative perspective. Furthermore we can expect a strong isotope effect here, which may become significant for heavy water production. Therefore the electrodeless electrolysis by radiowaves can have a great future and it's definitely worth of further research - despite it doesn't enable to produce fuel from watter in cheaper way, then classical thermodynamics allows.

Aether and graphene behavior

Aether concept streamlines the intuitive understanding of many aspects of solid phase physics, for example the unusual quantum mechanic and transport properties of isolated sheets of graphite, so called graphene. Recently we discussed, how electrons orbitals can be modeled by adhering droplets of high surface tension fluid, so we can even build an unique mechanical analogy of PN junction in semiconductors. The mechanism of ballistic transport in single sheet graphene is analogous to metallic state of high temperature semiconductors: it's a result of high compression of electrons from delocalized p-orbitals of carbon atoms by their own surface tension, so we can model both phenomena by single theory.

We can illustrate the graphite lattice by model of stacked sieves composed of wire mesh, which are vetted by water surface, analogous to Fermi surface of electrons inside of graphite. In such way, stacked pile of meshes can hold a significant amount of water between its wires. But when we remove one layer of mesh, the amount of watter attached on it would decrease significantly because of higher surface/volume ratio. In AWT such ratio is driving force for virtually all phenomena from elementary particles to black holes.


Due the higher pressure inside of graphene orbitals the electrons behave like chaotic superfluid inside of hole stripes in HT superconductors in over-doped state. With compare to superconductors, the pressure of free orbital surface on graphene layer isn't still sufficient for formation of fully chaotic system of electrons, but low energy excitations would propagate here in much higher speed, then electrons inside of common metals, because electrons are forced to move as a single body through delocalized orbitals and their charge is propagated in waves of collective surface plasmon excitations, i.e. like bosons.

We can understand this behavior by motion of wagons in train with compare to motion of string of cars. Free cars on the street are forced to accelerate and brake to avoid obstacles and mutual collisions under significant lost of energy. Wagons in train doesn't suffer such problem, because they're compacted, so that whole train is moving like single body and the lost of energy due the acceleration/deceleration of individual wagons is limited here significantly. While loose electrons in metals are forced to avoid mutually, they radiate energy during their mutual collisions via electromagnetic waves. Inside of graphene orbitals such mechanism is limited the more, the more electrons are collapsed. Inside of hole stripes of HT superconductors electrons are compressed in such a way, the radiative lost of energy is decreased to nearly zero here.

This week's hype of string theory - or just another evidence of Aether model?

String theory (ST) is believed to provide description of particles by model of 1D stringy loops. While this model has worked only for bosons inside of atom nuclei (for which it was proposed originally at the beginning of 70's), it was extended later for N-dimensional strings, so called branes and the number of string theories increased significantly, but without larger success, measured in number of testable predictions. Recently Leiden University presented article "Physical Reality of String Theory Demonstrated", in which scientists modeled some aspects of phase transition in hight temperature superconductors by concept of AdS/CFT duality, developed for ST originally. Such result is no surprise for AWT, because it allows to model HT superconductivity by ballistic charge transfer through field of electrons, highly compressed by presence of hole stripes. While individual concepts of string theory (concept of branes, hidden dimensions, AdS/CFT correspondence or even holographic principle) may become relevant for particle physics, as a whole ST remains void and fringe theory, because concept of hidden dimensions violates Lorentz symmetry, which the formal model of ST is based on.



Aether Wave theory therefore explains strings as a foamy density fluctuations of hypothetical dense gas, which is forming vacuum. While electrons in superconductors are heavily compressed near holes by Coulomb forces, they behave in similar way, like particles on event horizon of black holes and they forms "stringy" fluctuations of density - so we can use some of ST concepts for description of this system.

If such model is still relevant for string theorists, it would simply mean, particle strings are formed by highly compressed fermion field as well - which is essentially AWT model. Such result excludes model of particles formed by isolated strings and branes, as presented in naive drawings from Brian Greene's popular books and TV shows. Instead of this, every particle is formed by compact cluster of foamy density fluctuations, formed by another particles.



But string theory wasn't designed for such purpose - it was supposed to describe fermion itself, not the compact systems of fermions. While ST failed this target apparently from obvious reasons, the endeavor to model superconductivity by AdS/CFT correspondence is just an attempt to make the best of a bad job. We should realize, how string theorists are frustrated after forty years of ST development, while still having no real physical system to describe. Now they're modeling dense system of fermions instead of individual particles - and they're still happy.... Even worse - it seems, they even didn't spot the difference!

The true is, HT superconductivity is conceptually quite simple phenomenon and no working knowledge of string theory is required for its intuitive understanding at all. String theorists shouldn't forget it, when pretending boldly, they can provide the very first / only description of this phenomena, explanation the less. From AWT follows, every dense cloud of compressed electrons should exhibit a superconductivity and we can model it by computer simulations of repulsing particle field, or by numerical solution of Schrödinger equation on field of charged particles, i.e. via standard means of quantum mechanics without introduction of concepts borrowed from ad hoced theories.

AWT and multiple time dimensions

Concept of multiple time dimensions is dual to atemporal universe concept and AWT supports them both. In mathematical physics, a framework of equations is often put forward to model the physical universe. In some sense, a dimension simply means that a mathematical variable exists in some equation, allowing the use of certain mathematical tools. The physical implications of multiple dimensions are theoretical, at best; as it is not always clear what real meaning these extra dimensions actually have. Ascribing real, physical existence to multi-dimensional universes is largely a fringe idea and is not widely accepted amongst the scientific community because of lack of experimental support. Note that the concept of multiple time arrows excludes the concept of single God and creation, both predicate logics of formal math rigor, which are based on single causual time arrow and as such is thereofore refused both by deists, both by proponents of mathematical universe.

While multiple time concept gains popularity in recent time in the similar way, like atemporal universe (1, 2, 3, 4), deeper insight of AWT is greatly welcomed here. One of the first physicists to suggest the idea of inverse time variable was P.A.Dirac for his antimatter formalism in the 1930s and Andrei Sakharov in the 1970s. S. Hawking later proposed the concept of imaginary time on background of imaginary complex numbers, used in quantum mechanics. A second temporal dimension is also seen in Penrose's twistor theory.

F-theory is a branch of string theory introduced by Cumrun Vafa, who develops mathematical descriptions, which involved a second time variable, reportedly. While it's said, many branches of F-theory involve multiple temporal (time) dimensions, Ed Witten has argued, that the second time dimension of F-theory is only a mathematical fiction used to simplify calculations. Put simply, Witten accepts additional spatial dimensions, but acceptance of at least one additional temporal dimension is less popular amongst researchers. It was established after recent discussion on Wikipedia, that F-theory is not a "two-time" theory of physics, because it has metric signature (11,1). This controversy documented illustrates the depth of confusion in contemporary physics, where clear interpretation of piles of formal equations, mechanically derived by various theorists from mutually inconsistent postulate sets remains completely unclear.

Nevertheless, from AWT perspective the situation is still quite synoptic, here. Until F-theory is claimed to be part of string theory, it's expected to follow Lorentz invariance as one of fundamental postulates of string theory. And the Lorentz invariance violates the concept of multiple radiative time arrows, so no place for additional time arrow exists in context of whatever version of string theory. Indeed, such constrain violates the concept of hidden dimensions too, because these compacted dimensions should manifests itself just by violation of Lorentz invariance, which renders string theory a fringe theory as a whole. The situation is even more complicated by fact, contemporary physics distinguishes many definitions of time, the definitions of time arrow in particular - which aren't guaranteed to be compatible mutually under various conditions. This case just illustrates the depth of general level of confusion in contemporary physics and the urgent need of robust conceptual basis based on predicate logics, i.e. in similar way, like formal math remains based so far.

AWT just illustrates, it's a refusal of Aether concept, which prohibits us to see the hidden dimensions all around us - in this sense, it belongs between bests supporters of string theory concepts. Despite of this, the perspective of multiple time dimensions is just a special observational perspective based on exsintric (quantum theory oriented) view of reality and it has no place in strictly local and causual insintric perspective, as being used in relativity, in special relativity theory in particular. The mixing of exsintric and insintric perspective isn't recommended here, as it leads to mathematical singularities and conceptual confusion, above presented.

The general understanding of radiative and thermodynamics time arrow in context of omnidirectional Universe expansion is, the forward time arrow leads to expansion of matter into smaller particles, including particles of radiation, i.e. bosons. This is the reason, why we cannot travel in time in larger extent, or we would evaporate or collapse. Evaporation is generally considered as a spontaneous process during which the entropy increases. But such view isn't quite general, because it's generally followed by spontaneous symmetry breaking, i.e. condensation of matter into larger groups as a result of gravitational collapse. Because physicists aren't sure, which process is "more spontaneous" here, the omnidirectional expansion of space-time from insintric perspective can be considered dual to gravitational collapse of matter, forming such space-time. In AWT the general boundary separating both these perspectives is completely observer dependent, i.e. the CMB or human scale, which is adopted to CMB scale.



Briefly speaking, all objects larger then CMB photons tends to condense by shielding effect of these photons, while the smaller ones are separated. The CMB scale corresponds the scale of solitons inside of human brains, as it brings the maximal degree of complexity, which we can interact with in common life. From human perspective every birth alternates death, the smaller organisms then CMB photons are serving like parasites or source of food for these larger ones, the droplets of rain smaller then CMB photons would evaporate in rain on behalf of larger ones due the surface dependency of vapor tension, and so on. From our observational perspective one half of universe matter would evaporate into CMB photons due the proton decay, while the rest of it will condense into black holes of the same size in the similar way, like false vacuum has separated into matter and antimatter during inflation. As we can see, we can met with dual time arrows all around us, because with respect of time dimensions our world is quite symmetrical and reversible and no prevailing arrow of entropy exists here, in fact.



From general perspective of AWT both history, both future of observable part of our Universe remains fragmentized into infinitelly many time arrows like foam membrane, which manifests by quantum uncertainty on both macroscopic scale (the past), both microscopic scale (the future). It means, time has a character of fractal foam or tree (1) in the same way, like the space foam - just dual to the later one. While such perspective is dual to atemporal Universe, we can say safely, both groups of scientists have their side of truth, here.

Art and curvature of space-time

Being general theory, AWT explains many aspects of symmetry and periodicity in art and beauty theory. For example in Aether theory a fuzzy boundary exists between insintric and exsintric observational perspective, which affects the perceiving of space-time curvature bellow and above human distance scale. Insintric perspective corresponds the deterministic, curvature geometry based view of relativity, where space-time is considered deformed, while path of light remains straight due Lorentz invariance. Exsintric perspective corresponds the perspective of quantum mechanics, which considers undeformed Hilbert space, while path of light is deformed heavily, thus forming fuzzy reality composed of overlapped particles, where Lorentz invariance remains violated heavily. Bellow human distance scale the meaning of both these perspectives becomes reversed.

In this context an interesting question may arise, whether some objective, curvature based boundary between impressionism and expressionism in visual art exist? In general, impressionism is earlier movement, related to rather optimistic illustrations of real exteriors oriented to future - whereas the expressionism is more recent movement, connected more to internal, abstract and tragical feeling of the past. Abstract or psychical impressionism is based on intuitive preference of overlapping spots (tachism), where positive curvatures and altitude prevails, while expressionism is more rational art, based on curves and lines with zero or negative curvature and pessimistic connotations (informel). Note that expressionistic art is often generated mechanically or by algoritmic digital techniques. The distance scale between positive curvature of blobs and negative curvature of areas and lines still remains around 1.7 cm, i.e. at range of CMB wavelength scale.

Psychic impressionism of Jeff Lewis, 2001:

Jackson Pollock, Autumn rhythm, 1950:

Karin Kuhlmann: Inflammable matter, 2005:

Such perspective would explain the subliminal value (and objective price) of J. Pollock's abstract oil drip "paintings", which are of fractal nature (albeit their fractal dimension is rather low) and where the spot and lines feature of 2D curvature remains rather balanced in it - so they appear most transformable/transformative from our subconscious view, because they illustrate dual character of Aether foam in its critical Lifshitz point most exactly.

AWT and atemporal universe

In recent time the popularity of atemporal (timeless) Universe concept gained in similar way, like the popularity of emergence concept. This is not so surprising, because human understanding converges to Aether model rather quickly and both emergence, both atemporality belongs between important aspects of behavior of dense particle field. Such dense particle system is highly chaotic and atemporal and because no energy can propagate through it at distance, it can be considered "aspatial" as well. It simply has no meaning from causal perspective, as it behaves like empty void singularity with respect to energy and information spreading at distance. Unfortunately, just because various proponents of atemporal concept (J.A. Wheeler, D. Bohm, P. Yourgrau, Dennis A. Wright, J. Barbour's, P. Lynds, Ron Larther, Amrit S. Sorli and many others) didn't connected it with Aether concept explicitly, the concept of atemporality was left ignored by mainstream because of apparent lack of easy to follow (if any..) testable predictions (like the absence of global enthropy changes). Pure tautological idea without arrow of implicate logic isn't apparently enough even for positivistic approach of contemporary science from utilitarian reasons - no energy gradient has occured here.

In AWT the concept of time remains perfectly dual to concept of space. We can even imagine a hypothetical civilization, which would navigate through its dual Universe via time intervals mediated by longitudinal waves like bats - i.e. in dual way to human creatures, who are using space interval and transversal waves for such purpose (you can get the sample of bat clicking sound here). Therefore the concept of atemporal Universe is symmetric to concept of aspatial Universe and we can replace both of them by Aether concept easily without apparent lost of information.



This is because Aether concept still appears slightly more general, then the time or space concept and we can understand the relevance of particle nature of underwater for character of surface wave spreading even at the moment, when no surface wave can spread through it at all. This is because causal energy spreading in transversal waves isn't the only possible way of energy spreading and the longitudinal energy spreading is possible here, too. In addition, the concepts of both time, both space are rather abstract and derived from concept of particle environment like sand of water, which human mind has experienced first during its evolution. Therefore the water surface can serve as a good model for understanding of atemporal Universe concept. For example, we can imagine our space-time like 3D analogy of water surface, which we can observe via transversal surface waves only. What would we see on this surface?

At medium distance our view of 2D reality at water surface wouldn't differ very much from view of causal reality in 3D space. The so called capillary waves exhibit most pronounce transversal character of surface waves at 1.7 cm wavelength/distance scope and we can use them for explanation of relativity and Lorentz invariance concept in AWT. But at different dimensional scale our perspective would change radically.



At smaller distances the spreading of surface waves becomes dispersed into longitudinal waves by Brownian motion of water particles. These particles cannot be never seen by surface waves, because no object can serve both like subject, both like mean of observation at the same moment. But they still would lead to blurring of observable reality analogous to our observation of quantum phenomena at microscopic scale.

At the distant scale our view of reality would become analogous. As we know, only longitudinal waves can propagate at distance as so called gravity waves. It means, our vision of distant reality would become chaotic and blurry in the same way, like our observation of closest reality mediated by cosmic microwave background radiation. Gravity waves are related to vortices and tornados formation in fluids in analogous way, like gravitational waves in vacuum are related to black hole formation. Note that from exsintric perspective gravity waves remain tranversal ones in the same way, like capillary waves remains transversal from insintric perspective. We can met with 2D/3D version of T-duality and AdS/CFT correspondence in wave spreading here and because we can observe all artifacts in dual way, we can use water surface model for easy to understand prediction/explanation of quantum uncertainty principle. Note that the symmetry of longitudinal wave scale is violated toward longer wavelength even in logaritmic scale (compare the celerity curve for water above) - and we can use it for prediction/explanation of accelerated Universe expansion and CPT symmetry violation from particle simulation of space-time brane gradients as well.

Believe it or not, such view would change radically our understanding of cosmology at large scales. It would mean, our Universe is basically infinite and atemporal both at large, both at small scales and no real evolution or enthropy arrow occurs here. It would mean, what we can see in Hubble ultra deep field is not the formation of first galaxies in dark ages - it's just a foggy boundary of our part of Universe. It would mean, remote galaxies are widespread into infinity - we just cannot see them clearly. We can compare such view to the observation of landscape under haze. From distance every distant place appears blurry and foggy, although we can still believe, it would appear rather clear and transparent from local perspective. Every distant observer at the boundary of visible Universe would see our part of Universe from distant past in the similar manner, which we can experience in ultra deep Hubble field by now.

I do believe, the true motivation of atemporal Universe concept exist in a deep relativeness of observational perspective - but from AWT perspective this perspective isn't quite general, because it's dual to local perspective, which is indeed temporal and it has no meaning to generalize it for human observer, because we could not survive and/or exchange information in atemporal Universe anyway. Just the replacement of naked eye by devices enables us to interact with it vicariously. So we can always ask, which perspective may be more relevant for us - the remote abstract perspective dedicated to human intuition, which enables us understand and generalize - or the deeply local perspective represented by causal logics and formal math, which enables us to concretize and describe exactly the neighboring reality? From this perspective the atemporal Aether concept remains dual to fractal nested geometrodynamic concept - while the former one is still way way more palatable for human mind. We can still think, why is it so...

For me the most surprising aspect of AWT isn't the Aether concept itself - but a fact, nobody did ever attempted to think in such straightforward way. The common disbelief in Aether concept made people completely blind for dual vision of reality for long years. This should serve as a sufficient warning for human civilization: no matter how advanced it becomes, it may still remain quite primitive and short-seeing at certain level of thinking.

Did Aether concept hit the mainstream at last?

By Arthur Schopenhauer all truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed and ignored. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted in quiet as being self-evident. It seems, dense Aether concept has reached its third stage by now. This post is a reaction to recent article Remarks on the world-sheet saga of Prof. Bert Schroer. As Jacques Distler has independently figured out on Clifford Johnson's blog, Schroer's general "reasoning" goes as follows:

1. Only zero-dimensional particles are acceptable building blocks in physics. ..Wtf...?!?
   
2. So string theory must be a theory of point-like particle fields with infinitely many components, too.
   (The only question is, why scientists have realized just after forty years of string theory existence..)
3. This localization is inconsistent with the idea of world-sheets and the string theoretical interpretation of T-duality.

The expected denouncement of Lubos Motl had to follow. Every introduction of Aether model into physics fulfills predictable scenario, in which particle model will be used for politics and disposal of private animosities, rather then for reconciliation of existing theories. The pluralistic character of AWT model would be ignored during such confrontation completely. The problem isn't indeed in string theory, but in its postulate set. String theory is just formal layer built upon postulates, which could be reformulated anytime later. But because it's popularity serves as source of grant money for theoretical physicists, it's leads to easily predictable situation, when various people would add new and new postulates into theory, while ignoring former ones in order to call the result string theory anyway.

T-duality is the stand of (T)orroidal duality. We can imagine formation of such duality by torsion field inside of repulsing particle system or elastic fluid, which we would jump on like onto heavy urethane mattress. During which toroidal torsion deformations will be formed. At the moment, when the energy density/frequency of undulations exceed certain level, the inertia of environment must be taken into account and new daughter generation of smaller vortices perpendicular to original direction will be formed, and so on... In fluid mechanics this mechanism of vortex propagation is called Widnall's instability. From this follows, its a toroidal symmetry, which connect small and large distances by R-1/R relation. It's a continuous version of one to many duality, as expressed in following scheme:



Which conclusion follows from the above insights for string theory? Well, none specific. String theory is a theory of 1-dimensional quantum objects, which were later extended to N-dimensional quantum objects in M-theory. It's NOT theory of particle field or quantum loops or whatever else - and as such it's fully defined by its postulate set (or at least it should be..). It has no meaning to speculate, if description of T-duality or wordsheet in existing string theory is consistent or not, until it follows from string theory postulates in rigorous way. The introduction of quantum loops or particle field into string theory is indeed possible and string field theory or string net liquid concept takes account into it. But such theories aren't string theory anymore and they can lead to completely different predictions, then the AWT or string theory in its classical form and we cannot expect consistency in anything.

Until we believe, only zero-dimensional particles are acceptable building blocks of physics, no additional constrains or postulates of string theory are required to make such concept testable and predictable - or such theory becomes overloaded by its postulates, thus leading into new generation of fuzzy landscape of many possible solutions.