New thinking

[Universenew]

Hi, lets try looking forward
forward and thinking new ways.
- Faster than light travel will be possible
- Gravity is solved
- Learning that universe have no limits in size forward or backwards in time.

I have no idea how, but think this is the way to go and search...

B.

 

[Gibsense]

OK. Human extinction

 

[Classical Motion]

A new thinking would be realizing that the beginning of this universe can not be determined. A new thinking would be realizing that time and length are constant pillars that all motion must obey. That space is emptiness without properties. A non entity. And that there is only one dimension, length, and that it is an orthogonal dimension. And that the same second fills all of matter and space. New thinking would be realizing that CERN proves matter can only fragment, never superposition.

And the realization that no one has a clue of what gravity is. Or what matter is….. or what light is.

That would be new thinking.

You will never see it.

 

[jhixon]

If science was open to EVERYONE and not just PhD's, then you would already have the answer....

 

[COLGeek]

If science was open to EVERYONE and not just PhD's, then you would already have the answer....

How so? Please explain.

 

[jhixon]

How so? Please explain.

I have calculated all four forces in quantum, and explained the forces, but trying to actually get a college to look at it...IMPOSSIBLE. I finally just mailed the whole thing. Whether anyone reads it????

 

[COLGeek]

I have calculated all four forces in quantum, and explained the forces, but trying to actually get a college to look at it...IMPOSSIBLE. I finally just mailed the whole thing. Whether anyone reads it????

That is a different issue altogether. Aside from emailing people, have you tried making an appointment with the physics chair at a college or university and meeting with someone, in person?

Can you imagine the cold calls/messages these guys get from others?

Lots of people have theories that are simply wrong. That may not be the case here, but asking someone to read something that hasn't been formally vetted in some way is not going to be fruitful.

Take the extra step and engage with a real person. Good luck.

 

[Universenew]

Hi Thanks for replys an engagement.
Gibense :Yes that seems the way as we have no way of knowing. And lot of threats, but no means to counter any.
Classical Motion:
I know I will never see, but it will happend.
Let say in a 1000 years we have now new knowledege an technology ?
Jhixon, you are mabye thinkan the wrong way, backwards ?
COLGeek :
Physics chair, OK, I couldt meet, but they would hate me for havin cause\agenda the they propably not could answer to.

AS mentioned, new thinkig is a good thing.
Old things we have learend from.
But if we do not hink new, we might be stuck.

Nice evening.

 

[COLGeek]

New thinking is great, if accurate, factual, science and math based. I think all would agree.

True?

 

[Universenew]

Yes COLGeek.
We must defenaetly use what we know, and use it.
But we must use it to look forwards, not looking backwards.

 

[COLGeek]

Yes COLGeek.
We must defenaetly use what we know, and use it.
But we must use it to look forwards, not looking backwards.

I get where you are coming from. Just future progress must be based on past and current foundations.

Many have future oriented theories based on nonexistent, imaginary underpinnings.

There is a huge difference here and many fail to grasp that.

 

[Universenew]

Hi, my intention with this is not to com up with a new theory (I Dont have any )
But a discussion on the matter and check the community on toughts.
Are people thinking old or new
B.

 

[COLGeek]

Hi, my intention with this is not to com up with a new theory (I Dont have any )
But a discussion on the matter and check the community on toughts.
Are people thinking old or new
B.

Both.

 

[Universenew]

Thats the problem ?
Thinking old and new.
Let the old be in mind but think new

You know, the old has not solved issues in my first post.
OK, stretching it.
Have a nice evening..

 

[COLGeek]

So, what is one new thing, with the supporting science/math to justify it, that does not draw on old knowledge (as you put it)? Just one completely new thing?

 

[Universenew]

Have a couple, but no Science/math to back it up (That is the point of this thread..... These are things we must figure out) If I had the answer, I would be a Billionare (+ +)
One new thing would be to create gravity
Second new thing is to find a way human physics can accelerate at enormous G-force
Third thing, then we travel faster than light...
Most respect for Einstein`s theory, but in some 100 years we have discovered other laws and ways.

Meaning...:
If there is possible and new ways for the human kind to move forward from today and have visions, will it ever happend if we do not try ?

 

[COLGeek]

I'll stand by to see what others think of these ponderings. In the meantime:

Artificial gravity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Faster-than-light - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Visions?

 

[COLGeek]

I draw your attention to this thread as well:

My ideas

Hello. I am a woman from Kyrgyzstan.I am interested in science and science fiction and i have some ideas: 1. Hyper space engine using electrons . Electrons transfer through covalent or ionic bonds , they can be the result of law of conservation of energy. Or there may be an electron field. 2...

forums.space.com

 

[jhixon]

I put this in the AL generator, and this is the summary it provided. I appreciate any feedback, thanks...

This paper explores the fundamental structure of the universe, beginning at the quantum level, where energy and matter interact through various forces. It posits that energy exists in two forms: positive energy, represented by quarks, and negative energy, represented by electrons. The interaction of these particles leads to the formation of matter through collisions that excite the Higgs field, resulting in the assembly of protons and neutrons. The paper discusses the roles of the four fundamental forces—Nuclear Strong Force, Weak Force, Electromagnetic Force, and Gravity—in shaping the universe, emphasizing the significance of quarks and their charms in determining atomic structure and behavior. It introduces the concept of negative mass and its implications for dark matter and the expansion of the universe, suggesting that negative mass density is essential for understanding cosmic acceleration. The paper concludes by addressing the complexities of time and gravity, proposing that the universe's structure is a delicate balance of positive and negative forces, which ultimately supports the existence of life, and includes quantum formulas for the four fundamental forces.

 

[COLGeek]

I put this in the AL generator, and this is the summary it provided. I appreciate any feedback, thanks...

This paper explores the fundamental structure of the universe, beginning at the quantum level, where energy and matter interact through various forces. It posits that energy exists in two forms: positive energy, represented by quarks, and negative energy, represented by electrons. The interaction of these particles leads to the formation of matter through collisions that excite the Higgs field, resulting in the assembly of protons and neutrons. The paper discusses the roles of the four fundamental forces—Nuclear Strong Force, Weak Force, Electromagnetic Force, and Gravity—in shaping the universe, emphasizing the significance of quarks and their charms in determining atomic structure and behavior. It introduces the concept of negative mass and its implications for dark matter and the expansion of the universe, suggesting that negative mass density is essential for understanding cosmic acceleration. The paper concludes by addressing the complexities of time and gravity, proposing that the universe's structure is a delicate balance of positive and negative forces, which ultimately supports the existence of life, and includes quantum formulas for the four fundamental forces.

Seems this, with an introduction, needs it own thread.

 

[Universenew]

I do not wish to mix AI into this.
AI only takes old tech and explains it, no new thinking

 

[COLGeek]

I do not wish to mix AI into this.
AI only takes old tech and explains it, no new thinking

In reference to the previous post, that member started a new thread. The AI generated content was a summary of his paper. Not directly relevant to this thread.

It was his "new thinking": https://forums.space.com/threads/structure-of-the-universe.70575/

As you can see there are many topics to explore on the site.

 

[Universenew]

OK, thank you.

 

[Universenew]

Vision...
That is looking forward.
A little orgin of the idea
Truth is that Earth will in time be unhabitable for all the reasons we already know.
It is good that work on counter measures are in work for known threats.

But what happends when stuff hits the fan ?
Then it is to late to find a way out.
So why not use resourses to looking forward, instead of figure out and understaning how\why we live.

 

[COLGeek]

Vision...
That is looking forward.
A little orgin of the idea
Truth is that Earth will in time be unhabitable for all the reasons we already know.
It is good that work on counter measures are in work for known threats.

But what happends when stuff hits the fan ?
Then it is to late to find a way out.
So why not use resourses to looking forward, instead of figure out and understaning how\why we live.

The way previously worded implied something else.

Looking forward...okay.