Question Infinity or not infinity that is the question.

[Gibsense]

It gets quite complex but that is my answer to your question !

Oops, Linear algebra. Is that really necessary? Or, is this coming down 'hard'? I guess so. In a dispute, if someone cannot swim invite them into the water strategy. It is much more difficult to meet issues on common ground. A bit frustrating for you considering the relevance of eigenvalues in dealing with fields and particles in space.

Nice if a further explanation could be given. It is a discussion, not a gladiator arena - or maybe I am wrong.

 

[Gibsense]

Additionally the correct equation would be

r=m+M/F

This doesn't work.
Also, your rejected Newton equation has put a satellite past Uranus.

 

[Catastrophe]

To me darkness is the absence of light.

But there might be a lot of sideways light that we can't see. So even if filled with light, it would still be dark.

How about:

Absence of light, whether perceived directly or indirectly, as in reflection or refraction?

Cat

 

[Thermoman]

This doesn't work.
Also, your rejected Newton equation has put a satellite past Uranus.

Hmmm , yes it does work ! You need to think again .

Here try this :

You lift an object off the ground using ? Answer force

The amount of height you lift the objects is called ? A radius

Therefore radius equals mass 1 plus mass 2 divided by a force !


My equation is a real equation not a virtual equation that is senseless !

mM/r^2 isn't correct , a radius can't divide masses , a radius is a metric not a force !

 

[Thermoman]

You are wrong if you think we would not want you to come down 'hard'. That is good so long as it is done with respect. Please do so.

Fixing science mistakes and adding new stuff isn't going to improve my life any !

 

[Classical Motion]

“People don't realise that when Einstein converged Space and Time to create Space-Time, the underlying Space in his theory , was Newtons Absolute Space .
I listened to Newton , Einstein and Higgs to conclude that Absolute Space has a conservation property and any given point (x0,y0,z0,) conserves a 1:1 ratio of light . This conservation being the ''fabric'' of Space-Time or a Higgs ''field''. In the old days this conservation was known as the aether but until now , ''undetected''. “

I have read a little of Newton. I don’t recall him offering a theory of gravity. As a matter of fact, unless they have changed it, he explained he didn’t have a clue as to what caused gravity. So, he did the only thing he could do, and that was an attempt to describe gravity mathematically. Which he did.

I am confused about the 1:1 ratio of light. Please explain what that is. And what is conserved?

So I may try to discern what you are taking about.

 

[Thermoman]

I am confused about the 1:1 ratio of light. Please explain what that is. And what is conserved?

So I may try to discern what you are taking about.

(x0,y0,z0,) is a coordinate point of space with zero dimensions .

(x0,y0,z0,) is equal to one point !


(x0,y0,z0,)+(x0,)=(x1,y0,z0,) and is the smallest conceivable vector measure possible .(Two adjoining points)


(x0,y0,z0,) has an inherent force Gravity-B that allows the point to conserve a single point of energy . This energy is light !

A volume of conserved light is a space-time manifold , cross reference Higgs field and Aether .

 

[Classical Motion]

I still don’t know what the 1:1 ratio of light is. What is it?

 

[Thermoman]

I still don’t know what the 1:1 ratio of light is. What is it?

1 point of space per 1 point of light . 1:1 is conservation max ratio of a single point of space.

If I recall correctly , do you remember Einstein stating that a single point could be occupied by an infinite amount of energy/light ?

This is true but the point will always return to its conservation state 1:1 . The point can never conserve more than a 1:1 ratio .

 

[Classical Motion]

One point in space can not posses energy. Energy is simply motion. And all motion requires area.

A photon loses energy from one point to the next point. Photons dissolve as they fly.

The only thing conserved with a photon is it’s speed and it’s length. Not it’s density or it’s energy. Nor it’s direction. Direction is not conserved. Only speed and length.

 

[Harry Costas]

Thank you Classical Motion

 

[Thermoman]

One point in space can not posses energy.

false statement

Energy is simply motion.

False

And all motion requires area.

Volume

A photon loses energy from one point to the next point. Photons dissolve as they fly.

False

The only thing conserved with a photon is it’s speed and it’s length. Not it’s density or it’s energy. Nor it’s direction. Direction is not conserved. Only speed and length.

False

 

[Gibsense]

Thermo I have read your last post and cannot argue with it. What happened?

 

[COLGeek]

false statement

False

Volume

False

False

And? Please enlighten others with detailed explanations and/or sources to support your brief responses.

 

[Gibsense]

COLGeek requested a detailed response. I can't wait.

 

[Thermoman]

And? Please enlighten others with detailed explanations and/or sources to support your brief responses.

''One point in space can not posses energy.''

Without a Quantum mainframe (space-time manifold) of conserved light , wave function collapse occurs .

''Energy is simply motion.''

Energy is any substance that can do work ! Energy is the cause of motion!


''A photon loses energy from one point to the next point. Photons dissolve as they fly.''

A point of energy with 0 dimensions cannot lesson anymore than 0 . A photon does not dissolve .

 

[Thermoman]

COLGeek requested a detailed response. I can't wait.

''One point in space can not posses energy.''

If all (x0,y0,z0,) of (x,y,z,) are equal then why would (A ) Transition to (B) in displacement ?


00000
00100
00000


See above an (x,y,) matrix , 1 can not transition in displacement to 0 when 1 already is attracted and occupying a 0 .

Consider 0 and 1 are Eigen values !

 

[Classical Motion]

Motion requires displacement, direction, area, density, and therefore has momentum and duration. With either mass or field. That’s motion. Motion is qualified. It’s physical. It’s not a point from a to b. A point only has a location, NEVER a value. It’s not occupied.

Work is the transfer of motion. Motion trading. Some to advantage, and way too much for loss.

A chunk of coal has a lot of motion within it. That release in motion puts motion into everything around it. Temperature is motion. All your different types of energy is just motion. All mass is stored motion. And the only way to store motion, is to confine it. Mass is confined motion.

The potential of all potentials is the potential for motion. Potential motion.

Light starts out as a flying wedge. The width of the wedge shrinks with distance. Until only one line is left. This can not interact with matter. And becomes part of the orphan emission for the background static. This is not the CMBR background. The CMBR lays within the orphan background. The CMBR is another dynamic. Not orphan.

I had/have a different library than Thermoman does. And I am intellectually limited. I can only roll with simple. The real simple stuff.

It’s my disability with spacetime. And my discernment of flux. A flux of hay bales.

 

[Harry Costas]

CMBR is used as evidence for the BIG Bang Theory.
Then why is the BIG Bang Still as Theory?

What is evidence?

 

[Atlan0001]

CMBR is used as evidence for the BIG Bang Theory.
Then why is the BIG Bang Still as Theory?

What is evidence?

c=creation.
c^2=creation^2.

 

[Harry Costas]

I understand your point of view.

 

[Harry Costas]

Can we see back in time?
Or is this just one of those things?


[Submitted on 25 Jan 2024 (v1), last revised 2 Jul 2024 (this version, v2)]

How far can we see back in time in high-energy collisions using charm hadrons?​

Laszlo Gyulai, Gabor Biro, Robert Vertesi, Gergely Gabor Barnafoldi

We use open charm production to estimate how far we can see back in time in high-energy hadron-hadron collisions. We analyze the transverse momentum distributions of the identified D mesons from pp, p--Pb and A--A collisions at the ALICE and STAR experiments covering the energy range from sNN−−−√=200~GeV up to 7~TeV. Within a non-extensive statistical framework, the common Tsallis parameters for D mesons represent higher temperature and more degrees of freedom than that of light-flavour hadrons. Assuming Bjorken-expansion, the production of D mesons corresponds to a significantly earlier proper time, τD=(0.18±0.06)τLF.

 

[Catastrophe]

This probably belongs here, rather than Astronomy, since cosmology is more metaphysics:

The probably irretrievable problem is that English (and probably any other language you choose - Esperanto - I don't know) is composed of ill defined words - many with multiple (shades of) meaning.

Such a mess is impossible to resolve, without exactly defining every word you use.

Paradise for con-merchants - the opposite for most of us?

I am not suggesting that anyone here is less than totally honest.

Cat

 

[Harry Costas]

Cat
I di not understand your post.
Confused
Sorry

 

[Catastrophe]

Cat
I di not understand your post.
Confused
Sorry

Harry,

The words are SO NOT the reality. The menu IS NOT the meal.

I am just pointing out the FRAILTY of language in communication.

Cat