Torsion On My Mind, Part II

Since Chris Jeynes and I developed such a strong rapport during my attempt to burn down the barn that Goedel cobbled together (and he attempted to prevent it), after I published Torsion On My Mind I sent him an email with a link and a request that he and Mike Parker just read it (an 8-minute read) and think about it. He responded favorably and the very next day I received an email from Mike Parker. I don’t know really how to take it, although I immediately responded to it. He seems to suggest that these experiments are not possible, or that it is difficult to determine the “scale”. But the process, as outlined in their key papers, is really straightforward and clear: the scale is determined by the radius of either the helix (a special case) or the logarithmic spiral (the general case). With these torsion experiments, as I outlined them, the logarithmic spiral is relevant: r = ae^{b/θ}, where r is radius, a is the scaling factor, b is the growth factor which controls the “spread” of the arms, and θ controls the length of the spiral. You are free to determine r as you wish and set “a” to unity. You are free to determine “b” and “θ” as you wish as well, provided the “model” matches the actual physical construct. The only other important parameter is the radius of the info-entropic source, which can also be freely determined. These two, together with the “half-thickness”, determine the radial parameter, and the radius determines the pitch. It’s very straightforward and directly analogous to the galactic case study in their paper. The key difference being, with the galaxy we are not free to choose! He could, on the other hand, be thinking of the granularity, but we are free to set that as well. Setting the granularity is not a physical process, rather, it’s kind of like setting the resolution and for their galactic case study they used the Planck length, which leads to the Holographic Principle.

Anyway, I’ll reproduce his email and my response, as a possible comment on the sociology of physics. Let me know your analysis in the comments, if you have one — Bhupinder Singh Anand — Medium?

Dear Wes,

Thanks very much for your Medium article. I was really pleased that you’re actively trying to apply the key concept of C2 symmetry to other geometrical set-ups, as a means to understand their entropic properties from a QGT perspective.

Unfortunately, although the circular disk is clearly C2 symmetric, the same isn’t so obviously true of the associated Balance Arm; and indeed, the whole combined system also doesn’t obviously have C2 symmetry — although, since it consists of two complementary sub-systems, there is perhaps the basis for a design that more clearly displays a C2 symmetry…

[As an aside, from your description, it still wasn’t clear to me what the Kozyrev Torsion Experiment is expected to demonstrate when it is in operation? Your figure only shows the evaporating acetone aspect, and not the freezing water; and it’s not obvious to me what is supposed to happen and whether conventional kinematical physics provides an explanation for the observed phenomena……?]

Another important issue with QGT is that the entropic scale has to be chosen; and the scale length for the Kozyrev Torsion Experiment isn’t so obvious to me…However, related to this is something that you have also importantly (and correctly!) discussed, which is the ‘entropic mass’, which as you correctly say is also associated with the pitch 𝚲, which in turn also determines the entropic scale. So, identifying the appropriate entropic scale will automatically determine the associated entropic mass; and assuming the entropic mass is appropriately correlated (i.e. of a similar magnitude etc.) to the inertial mass within the Torsion Experiment, then that will presumably ensure a good resonance between the inertial and entropic masses, which will in turn enhance (amplify) the entropic effect to be observed. However, what that entropic mass (or entropic scale) should be, a-priori, unfortunately still isn’t obvious to me….

In any case, your overall article is articulating very clearly the important holomorphic (analytical) properties that are inherent to spacetime and many other physical phenomena (such as electro-magnetism, and also info-entropy), but which are still poorly understood or appreciated by the physics community — that said, the mathematical-physical framework offered by Geometric Algebra is now starting to be more widely accepted and taken on board. Thus, your article really is providing important coverage and illumination in an emerging and increasingly important physical area, and is therefore very valuable!

Many thanks,

Mike

Mike,

The point of my article, certainly the motivation for emailing a link to Chris, was to motivate discussion about (a) NON-LOCAL entropic forces as described by William Tiller, and how those may relate to your formalism, and (b) extending your formalism to non-equilibrium systems using data empirically generated via these torsion experiments. From your email I get the sense that you did not read William Tiller’s analysis? Allow me to be systematic in my response.

“Unfortunately, although the circular disk is clearly C2 symmetric, the same isn’t so obviously true of the associated Balance Arm; and indeed, the whole combined system also doesn’t obviously have C2 symmetry — although, since it consists of two complementary sub-systems, there is perhaps the basis for a design that more clearly displays a C2 symmetry…”

The idea here is NOT to determine the entropy of the asymmetric torsion pendulum, rather, it is to determine the entropic force imposed by the source ON n copies, n >= 2, of the asymmetric torsion pendulum. Consider an arbitrary spiral galaxy, then conventional theory says you have a rather significant entropic source surrounded by these density waves composed of hydrogen gas and stellar bodies. That system as a whole has some type of n-fold symmetry axis and is, hence, in possession of Cn, n > = 2, symmetry. Clearly, you can do the same exact thing with these asymmetric torsion pendulums!?! Place your vessel of acetone (water) and then strategically place asymmetric torsion pendulum constructs, n of them, according to the nth roots of unity, as I described in the article. This would establish Cn symmetry at least as clearly as any known spiral galaxy!?!

“[As an aside, from your description, it still wasn’t clear to me what the Kozyrev Torsion Experiment is expected to demonstrate when it is in operation? Your figure only shows the evaporating acetone aspect, and not the freezing water; and it’s not obvious to me what is supposed to happen and whether conventional kinematical physics provides an explanation for the observed phenomena……?]”

They’re torsion experiments, so they demonstrate torsion!?! Okay, I had to say it. Regarding the asymmetric torsion pendulum, you have two massive bodies, m and n, the one, m, significantly greater than the other, n. These are connected via some type of arm and hung inside the vacuum chamber by a fiber strategically placed so that arm/mass assembly is vertically balanced, i. e. the fiber is attached to the center of mass of the arm/mass assembly. When a positive entropy source (heat evaporated acetone) is placed near the small mass n, but on the outside of the vessel, it repels the small mass, I assume to one side or the other creating torsion in the entire arm/mass assembly. When a negative entropy source (freezing water) is placed near the small mass n, but on the outside of the vessel, it attracts the small mass, I assume from one side or the other creating torsion in the entire arm/mass assembly. The circular disc is the same except the info-entropic sources are placed immediately above the fiber connection point at the top of the vacuum chamber and the positive source generates clockwise rotation (from the perspective of the source) and the negative source generates counter-clockwise rotation. Conventional physics maybe provides an explanation, as you probably know. Kozyrev and the other Russians have proposed that spin adds a torsion component to the gravitational field, which is certainly consistent with David Hestenes (pages 9 and 10), but I probably don’t have to tell you, there’s been problems reconciling such a component with the dynamics. You can read Torsion-Gravity and Spinors in Fundamental Theoretical Physics, a special issue journal, or the two papers from the Cambridge group, Gravity, Gauge Theories, and Geometric Algebra and, more recently, Geometric Algebra, Gravity, and Gravitational Waves (see the key reference). On the critical side there’s Torsion Gravity: A Reappraisal (teleparallelism started with Einstein). I cannot make any judgment whatsoever without knowing the actual data, which I have been unable to find — the paper by Lavrentiev et. al. Detection of the Reaction of Matter to an External Irreversible Process, I mean. But I would point out that Tiller’s solution is non-local, which seems consistent with the QGT analysis. And Tiller has buckets of other data supporting his model.

“Another important issue with QGT is that the entropic scale has to be chosen; and the scale length for the Kozyrev Torsion Experiment isn’t so obvious to me… [H]owever, what that entropic mass (or entropic scale) should be, a-priori, unfortunately still isn’t obvious to me….”

As I understand things, you are free to set the scale when constructing these pendulums. Your radial parameter includes the galactic half-thickness (the half-thickness of the entire construction, whether asymmetric or circular pendulum), the galactic radius (the radius of the entire construction, whether asymmetric or circular pendulum), and the black hole radius (radius of the info-entropic source). The entropic mass is determined by the “helical pitch”, which should follow from the “galactic radius”, should it not? I’m using your table of isomorphisms from the Most Likely paper. I mean, that’s the whole point of conducting actual experiments, benchtop experiments which allow one to control these parameters. All of the uncertainty is, here, contained in the info-entropic source, or so it would seem to me. But what is of interest here is the entropic force. There is clearly a tosion force at play here and it seems intimately related to an info-entropic source. Are you not in the least bit interested in clarifying that relationship?

With regards,

Wes Hansen

I often get the impression that if it doesn’t come from the LHC, then physicists aren’t interested!?! But perhaps I spend too much time with Peter Woit’s blog . . .

Hey, how about that Mobius strip? It requires a 720 degree phase shift to get back to where one started . . .