jump to navigation

PPC 08 – The interconnection between Particle Physics and Cosmology March 5, 2008

Posted by dorigo in astronomy, internet, news, personal, physics, science, travel.

This just in – I have been notified by the head of the CDF speakers committee that I have been accepted to represent CDF at PPC08 – a conference on the interconnection between Particle Physics and Cosmology to be held in Albuquerque, NM between May 19 and 23.

In retrospect, my last posting about WIMPs was a good idea – it demonstrates my interest in the matters that I will hear about at the conference.

I also have to report a funny incident. Upon reading the e-mail, I went in search of the web site of the conference, and -by googling for “PPC08” – I found this other cosmology conference instead. I was slightly bewildered at the beginning, because I did not remember having applied for a conference in St Petersburg, and moreover in time clash with the CMS week of June 23rd -already marked in my agenda. But then I shrugged my shoulders – a CDF talk is always a great honor for me, and I would certainly never refuse the occasion.

Upon visiting the site of the PPC08 conference I noticed that the program had nothing to do with particle physics, though. Now, where was my talk going to go in the list of sessions, ranging from “Large scale structure of the Universe” to “Evolution of Galaxies” to “Cosmological models and crucial observational tests”? Admittedly all highly interesting stuff, but all talks had names attached, and none was on particle physics…

It took me about ten crazy minutes to figure out I had put too much confidence in google this one time. Luckily, the program of the Albuquerque conference is no less interesting (speaking from what I read in the poster), although St Petersburg would have been worth the visit.

It remains to be seen how I will structure my talk. It is tentatively named “Recent Results from CDF“, and I intend to stick to what the title promises: there are so many new results to show, it will be a real pleasure to pick la creme de la creme…


1. JustChecking - March 6, 2008

Sounds lovely, congratz on the talk!

I’m sure it’ll be a huge success… and I hope you’ll be able to post (link to) the talk after your triumph!

The incident with two PPC08’s is cute. 😀

The title “Recent Results from CDF” is really appealing… I remember back at college, how I always loved to attend the lectures by visiting scientists on state-of-art and recent-results… My fave was annual “Harvest of discoveries” on new developments in astronomy, by Jiri Grygar. 🙂

2. dorigo - March 6, 2008

Hi JC,

I intend to not only put the slides here -as I’ve done in the past- but to also blog regularly from the site, in pseudo-real time. In fact, that is a real pleasure for me, since it provides motivation to pay attention to the talk, and understand things!


3. JustChecking - March 8, 2008

Can’t wait!

Yes, it sure is a huge motivation to pay attention and understand, when you have to explain it to someone else later on… Every time I studied for any exam of faculty, I tried to make a lecture on it in head (or to any poor soul that was in my “shooting range” 😉 ) — if I was able to, i knew good enough to pass.

Anyways, looking forward to all your posts!

Keep up the great work!

4. SCINET « A Quantum Diaries Survivor - April 15, 2008

[…] cannot be there in person… On the following morning I am leaving to New Mexico for PPC 2008;. I am planning to post the video here, with a transcription (the language of the meeting is […]

5. forrest noble - April 16, 2008

Sorry to say that the way particle physics is structured today along with the BB paradigm of Cosmology I believe there is not even a remote connection, because both theories would accordingly be fundamentally wrong.

Still, I’m sure the conference will be fun even though I believe nothing positive could possibly be accomplished, except hopefully the downing of a few suds.

your friend forrest

6. dorigo - April 16, 2008

Dear Forrest,

stop behaving like a troll, please. You have a threefold choice: you can sit and watch what others say, you can participate to a fruitful discussion by putting forth some ideas, or you can throw unjustified claims right and left to cause a stir. In the latter case, you are not welcome to comment here – but I would really prefer if you allowed me and others to know whether you have anything interesting to say on particle physics and cosmology other than casting stones.


7. Neutrino Oscillations in Venice « A Quantum Diaries Survivor - April 17, 2008

[…] to find inspiration for two forthcoming talks I will be giving, one in Padova next week and one in Albuquerque next month. The nice weather made for a pleasant coffee break: below you can see a pic of mself in palazzo […]

8. forrest noble - April 24, 2008

dorigo, looking forward to standing in the same palazzo, god willing and the creek don’t run dry.

Because you asked, here’s my input. First regarding WIMPS: According to my own theories, the most likely candidate for a WIMP would be roughly a million + year old electron neutrino that by aging has slowed down to lets say 1/4 the speed of light. At this speed its spin and surrounding field vortex would greatly increase. At slower speeds these neutrinos could seemingly have mass and interact with matter, their energy equivalent would remain the same because of their reduced velocity. Because of there extremely great abundance they could be the missing WIMPS that would be the most forceful vectors of pushing gravity.

Another point mentioned above is Galactic Evolution. According to my related theory, as a field of matter/ dark matter becomes dense enough a black hole will be created. This black hole is essentially only a highly compressed form of dark matter which accordingly would also be the building blocks of all matter, a very tiny God Particle maybe a millionth the size of the proposed Higgs. As these black holes grow in size by “eating” field material (dark matter) it will begin to spin at a high rate based upon the converging vector flows of field material. When this spin become great enough the black hole will begin to grow at a slower rate. Immediately surrounding these black holes strings of field material would be bent into loops. The only two stable loops would be first electrons, and then protons. To a lesser extent positrons would be created. Anti-protons would accordingly not be stable particles and would just form as virtual particles (very short life) before their loop would disengage. Huge jets of these newly formed fermions would, under great kinetic pressures, be forced in polar jets out from the black hole area. Huge clouds of this material would both remain within the galaxy and roughly an equal amount would move out into inter-galactic space. Electrons would move in currents back toward the black hole creating ribbons of a magnetic field that would form the basis of the arms of the future spiral galaxy. A major portion of this new field matter would move toward and condense in these ribbon currents creating the first very large stars close to the newly formed galactic black hole.

Galaxies would accordingly form from the inside out. No BB is needed or the related very complicated unnecessary physics to produce all the stars and matter in the universe.

If you have any questions, contact me. I have a whole book of my own theories with 70+ observable predictions, supporting evidence and the related mathematics, about 250 pages rewriting Cosmology and Physics. It is currently titled “The Pan Theory — a General Unified Model of cosmology, physics, and quantum theory, scheduled for English publication hopefully in the fall of 2010. The first Prediction is that the observable universe is many times older than the BB model asserts, along with the related mathematics.

Sorry if you thought that I was behaving like a Troll in script. I have some new perspectives that would accordingly add simplicity to both physics and Cosmology, and which is supported by, I think, more evidence than existing models. This is all copyrighted material, some of which is almost 50 years old. Will send out any part to answer specific questions concerning the related theory, for any inquiries.

I don’t put down the work being conducted in these areas today but am trying to show simpler alternative theory.


your friend forrest

9. dorigo - April 24, 2008

Hi Forrest,

don’t worry about misbehaving, but it is very hard to digest such a list of claims. Why don’t you explain the basis on which you built your theory ? For instance, start by explaining:
1) why electron neutrinos are created one million years ago, and not ten billion years ago.
2) why do they slow down: what force causes them to do so, and what experimental evidence we have for the existence of that.
3) why does their spin cause vortices, and what is the mechanism
4) why a slower particle “seems” to have a mass.
5) where do you get your 1/4 of the speed of light
6) what mass do you predict for electron neutrinos, what their abundance, what their total contribution to the matter density of the universe
7) on what basis we have to believe the universe is much older than what is found by standard cosmology

I think this could be enough for a single reply…


10. forrest noble - April 25, 2008

Thanks Tomasso,

1) why electron neutrinos are created one million years ago, and not ten billion years ago.——–and
2) why do they slow down: what force causes them to do so, and what experimental evidence we have for the existence of that.

(experimental evidence) At roughly the rate the voyagers are slowing down, so accordingly would the momentum of all matter moving against the field motion of dark matter slow down. This is also predictable by the related theory where the original prediction was made some 30 years ago by copyrighted material.

The field motion that would create gravity in our solar system is generally linear but has somewhat of a slight parabolic motion which begins roughly half-way between Venus and Mercury toward the sun where very near its surface it becomes close to asymptotic. It also moves in a parabolic motion near the gravitational boundaries between one star and an adjacent star in a relatively short asymptotic path. These motions are the result of small solar vortex of dark matter.

Very roughly speaking it would take about a million years for the momentum of a particle or matter in general to slow to 1/4 its original velocity. All of this is primarily controlled by its relative motion as it moves within its surrounding dark matter field. At this speed and below (1/4 the speed of light) I have estimated that the spin of a neutrino which is practically spinless near the speed of light, would vastly increase so that it would produce a vortex in the surrounding field, the same as electrons and protons do according to this theory. Accordingly, at slower velocities, a neutrinos interaction with matter would increase until lets say at 20 million years old all the neutrinos would have been absorbed by matter. Naturally The source of these neutrinos would accordingly be stars at a million to 20 million light year away.

3) why does their spin cause vortices, and what is the mechanism &
4) why a slower particle “seems” to have a mass.

If dark matter fields and the ZPF are omnipresent, like the related theory asserts, naturally any particle spinning relative to the field would create a vortex of these infinitesimal particle in the field which would roughly contain almost all of the mass and gravitational potential of a particle. As I said, at the speed of light these neutrinos would have little or no gravitational influence. At 1/10 the speed of light this potential, because its new vortex, would accordingly have a greatly increased gravitational potential.

5) where do you get your 1/4 of the speed of light
6) what mass do you predict for electron neutrinos, what their abundance, what their total contribution to the matter density of the universe.

#5 is answered above.

#6 have not made any such rough calculation but a rough estimate would be as high as maybe 2% the mass of an electron. Because of their vast quantities this is still a lot of mass. As I said before, the related theory asserts that it could be the primary vector of pushing gravity. There would be no need to find the mass necessary to close the universe because accordingly below, for other reasons, the universe is closed and it has never had a different density. It would have had a beginning as also discussed below.

7) on what basis (do) we have to believe the universe is much older than what is found by standard cosmology.

This theory asserts that there was no big bang. That it took many billions of years just to create the field of dark matter and the ZPF from a single dark mater particle, exactly the same as those today only much bigger. Its diminutions would be a function of time relativity as discussed below. The theory is a different theory of Relativity that differs from Einsteins theories. It is also a variable mass theory. As time progresses, matter loses a little bit itself to the field, about 10% every 500 million years. It is a diminution-of-matter theory which predicts that 1.2% of the observable universe is over 40 billion years old, primarily K and M dwarf stars that originated in a prior galactic cycle. All atomic matter, electrons and protons would be created by bending strings of dark matter particles into loops by the forces surrounding galactic size black holes. Neutrons and heavier nuclei are created within stars.

Because of the black holes spin the internal and kinetic forces surrounding a black hole forces this newly created matter away from the black hole in huge polar jets. Nearly all large galaxies with central black holes would have been created from the inside out, no Big Bang needed for the creation of matter.

The red-shift is explained be the diminution of matter and the relative but unreal expansion of space. New matter and galaxies are created from this lost material and forms new galaxies. The saturation of the observable universe would remain constant.

Nice blog. Will answer any other questions or provide calculations or info as you may wish. Please e-mail me if you wish. Otherwise keep firing questions. All can be readily answered, I think.

Cheers to you too, your friend forrest

11. dorigo - April 25, 2008

Hi Forrest,

as I wrote in the other thread, I am leaving to a weekend on the Alps, and will answer your comment when I am back. Sorry for delaying the discussion here… Sometimes my family takes the precedence.


12. A result that warms my heart « A Quantum Diaries Survivor - May 2, 2008

[…] in the new analyses is boosted by the fact that in less than a month I will be describing them at PPC2008, a conference in Albuquerque where I am going to give a talk on new CDF results. So it is about […]

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: