Unified Theory

[genius2007]

My argument against mass and what E=mc^2 really means <br /><br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />E=mc^2 the most famous equation of all time and the most correct for practical use.<br /><br />The speed of light squared provides balance between quantum and relative mechanics in that Planck time is the speed of light between Planck particles and the speed of light we see the stars by. But what is mass really?<br /><br />Planck time 5.39121 * 10^-44 seconds<br />Light 2.99792 * 10^8 m/s<br /><br />So E=mc^2 is 5.39121 * 10^-44 = m * 8.9875 *10^16<br />Thus m = 5.9986 * 10^-61<br /><br />An interesting number if you like. Assuming as I do the diameter of the proton as the boundary of the universe it then means energy equivalent to 5.9986 * 10^61ev to shatter the proton. Now to balance the equation both sides as a universe boundary is not a simple subtraction leaving zero, zero as I contend is not an option.<br /><br />To balance the equation both sides of the proton through all the protons a multiplier is required which gives:-<br />E-our quantum side * E-other quantum side = 1<br />1 = the single energy universe = 3.5983 * 10^-121<br /><br />Note the number 3.5983 * 10^-121 is very close to the measured amount of zero point quantum vibration.<br /><br />I contend one universe an energy universe fully captured and collapsing and that while it is most unlikely we would ever cause or kick start it again it is entirely plausible that the much weaker electromagnetic force could be interfered with by allowing a very low temperature reaction over a suitably large area.<br /><br />The comet that has so recently undergone a million fold increase in brightness could in fact have been just such an electromagnetic instance being large enough and not hot enough to be a barrier to the flow of energy from very high emissions from the protons within it.<br /><br />An energy universe is strange, very stable to a point and explosively and electrically

 

[origin]

Uh..... What?<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Planck time 5.39121 * 10^-44 seconds <br />Light 2.99792 * 10^8 m/s <br /><br />So E=mc^2 is 5.39121 * 10^-44 = m * 8.9875 *10^16 <br />Thus m = 5.9986 * 10^-61</font><br /><br />Where to start? Lets just look at those pesky units...<br /><br />E (energy) = mc^2 = (you say) plank time(sec) <br />So what kind of energy has the units sec???<br /><br />You go on to say: plank time / c^2 = mass<br /><br />So in you world mass has the units sec^3/m^2??<br /><br />That doesn't come close to making sense.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">I contend one universe an energy universe fully captured and collapsing and that while it is most unlikely we would ever cause or kick start it again it is entirely plausible that the much weaker electromagnetic force could be interfered with by allowing a very low temperature reaction over a suitably large area.</font><br /><br />So what you are saying is:<br />The universes manifold if viewed from plank time shows a curvature that twists dark matter releasing the zero point dark energy creating a quantum ripple (if you will) that gives rise to what we precieve as real matter while the anti matter is transfered to an alternate brane resulting in a wave function that collapses into a singularity.<br />Or to sum up more succenctly - a steaming pile of horse excrement.<br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">If not and you see trees glowing do not approach them they are deeper and may be highly charge differentiated, lie down foetal position and maintain good earth contact for discharge. Synthetic footwear will prevent earthing and flash-over is a problem. Cats fur very rapidly shows charge are also excellent indicators of potential difference.</font><br /><br />Well if I ever come across a grove of glowing trees, I pray that I have a cat handy!<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[genius2007]

So what you are saying is: <br />The universes manifold if viewed from plank time shows a curvature that twists dark matter releasing the zero point dark energy creating a quantum ripple (if you will) that gives rise to what we perceive as real matter while the anti matter is transferred to an alternate brane resulting in a wave function that collapses into a singularity. <br />Or to sum up more succinctly - a steaming pile of horse excrement. <br /><br />I see you are a skeptic and that is good. I am saying that general relativity has the same shape that is the same six dimension geometry from the proton going upwards as quantum mechanics going downwards. It means an overall gravity density holding the atoms together. If one was to look at a clothes peg from inside the area they press together it may look like the surfaces are attracted to each other. From further out one sees the spring pushing the surfaces together. It is very similar to the idea that Tesla had about an extreme energy density that could be tapped into outside the particles. It is without question that he engineered some extra ordinary effects.<br /><br />So no dark matter or at best very little and the entire universe shaped by gravity connected at the boundary of the proton. All general relative or larger than proton effects mirrored to all quantum effects.<br /><br />Just out of curiosity what ever happened to all the cloud chamber studies of particles and cosmic rays before they were detected? I remember as a child nearly 40 years ago that some of the imaged cloud trails through a super saturated alcohol cloud were suggestive of particles either travelling back in time before they were detected or potentially exceeding the speed of light. It was very big world news back then.

 

[genius2007]

One of the key scientific principles is that we do not know everything. When conducting experiments there is consideration given to risk versus benefit.<br /><br />I believe it is good to ask questions and not just accept that we must clearly always be right. Some very big questions still remain unanswered otherwise why look for dark matter, why doesn't gravity work properly in galaxies?<br /><br />Given the size of the plasma tail on comet Holmes one line of thought is could that charge really have built up in a comet. Or is it possible that it was sufficiently low temperature in the gravity well of the solar system to make it an electric charge receptor.<br /><br />If I can get just one family to fit a static discharge strap to their car then all the skepticism I have encountered for daring to question 'Science' has been worth it.<br /><br />It is about reasonable and affordable precaution. Modern tyres have a lower carbon content to reduce wear due to static build up and any operation involving the transfer of petrol in bulk involves careful earthing to avoid sparks. So all I need is that at least one family take that cheap reasonable precaution and then I really don't mind at all.

 

[origin]

<font color="yellow">If I can get just one family to fit a static discharge strap to their car then all the skepticism I have encountered for daring to question 'Science' has been worth it.</font><br /><br />??????<br /><br />How does the fact that a static electrical discharge when filling your car with gas can cause it to ignite, have anything to do with questioning science??<br /><br />I have seen many cars with grounding straps on them. Like this. They use to be more common but I think they are less common because typically the car discharges through the driver when he gets out of the car or removes the gas cap, so are really not necesary.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[americanpsycho]

Brilliant argument all the way around. I don't have a fraction of the knowledge involved in this conversation, but I am trying to understand many things involved in universe expansion and space/time. I'd love to hear what either of you can tell me about my stupid question if you can make heads-or-tails of it.<br /><br />http://uplink.space.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=sciastro&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0<br /><br />Thanks for the excellent reading. Troy

 

[nova_explored]

"If I can get just one family to fit a static discharge strap to their car then all the skepticism I have encountered for daring to question 'Science' has been worth it. "<br /><br />Then that family will not be starting their car... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[founder2007]

dosnt these straps stop car sickness?

 

[genius2007]

Thank you founder2007 and nova_explored.<br />The normal fitting as I understand it is from the body of the car to the ground not across the battery terminals.<br /><br />Seriously at the very small quantum level the motion is described as 'jittery' very small jumps so that units as we know them be they metres seconds kilos are rather without meaning. It is just gaps as we can measure even time at that level is best described as a gap.<br /><br />When measuring a gap the unit used could be a linear measure or size. Once enough quantum units come into play yes we get into the more familiar realm of what happens around our world which is closest in proximity to the proton as the stable point of reference between the very small and the very big. Even the very big gets quite indistinct as the supposed dark energy driving expansion is able to prevent us from knowing what is beyond the Hubble limit.<br /><br />I am amazed that there is so much thought given to beginnings by certain groups when they are the keepers of why it all goes sour at or around about now if one listens long enough. Does it ever occur to anyone that there is existence now and that is regardless of what it was or how it actually started. Then if we are to get 1000 years of bodies burning and a third of the world's population to die a number of times that there might just be a real science to that and in a universe as large and seemingly not quite expired as this one is that human curiosity and experimenting with power beyond control and human understanding might just be the cause.<br /><br />Something very simple then, electricity a Tesla coil fired up in a city would have an effect on circuitry and lights for kilometres around lighting lights frying circuits and destroying information. That is not something that is 'normal' capacitive build up and then how about electrical storms. Storms show discharges high into space hundreds of kilometres into space, a vacuum where there is no conductor, it is theoreticall

 

[origin]

<font color="yellow">Glass is a fluid but by measuring ancient windows it can be seen to flow very slowly over centuries.</font><br /><br />My wife is a ceramic engineer and let me assure you this is totally incorrect. Glass does not flow at room temperature at all. It is an urban legend that old glass is thicker at the bottom, old glass is wavey because of the way it was manufactured!<br /><br />This line is priceless:<br /><font color="yellow">The only point of fitting an anti static strap is that if there was a massive imbalance of charge due to an experiment doing a comet Holmes on the earth the controlled balance of charge would stop the fuel tank from exploding.</font><br /><br />The english is so bad I don't know precisely what you are trying to say, but it sounds like you are saying the comet has something to do with static charge build up on a car.<br /><br />Just priceless. I finally get it you are not serious and are purposely saying goofy stuff to mess with us.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[genius2007]

The man whom I hold in the greatest respect was a modest man. This Quote from Albert Einstein<br /><br /> * "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction."<br /><br />The clue is that any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. Consider this while you are slapping me around; Einstein clearly found Unified Theory, so how long has it been since he made this most famous quote?<br /><br />He was so far ahead of any of us that in all this time none of the intelligent, fool or otherwise have worked out what it was. I am a cleaner, I mop floors and clean toilets ... what is your excuse.

 

[genius2007]

To make things easier I will tell you where I started just over a year ago with a fairly simple thought. Two galaxies moving away from each other so the gravity between them although very small is becoming less.<br /><br />The space between them is empty and gravity by convention is given a slight negative charge. By conventional thinking that area already at zero is reducing in charge. Since there is nothing to reduce space time in minute places dip at points becoming less than surrounding areas. A collection of minute charge over vast space causes the centre to bend ever further becoming a vortex, a negative vortex that sufficiently large will have the power to seek a high energy source.<br /><br />The power of the void is not a minor source of energy. Once it connects a wormhole in space, conventional space is formed along with everything that was in the dip that started the process. Wormholes have two ends and all that was in the zone of 'empty space' is connected and travels inside that wormhole. Because it formed and travelled over time to the high energy source the ends of the wormhole have a time separation component.<br /><br />That is just normal standard typical space. Which by its very nature can not be empty and not bend. To be within an event horizon of a wormhole if sufficiently large would not tear matter to pieces, it is simply a tube a means of travel from one place in space to another at what ever the speed of the flow of space through the tube is. As space is travelling all light between near objects obey normal laws of light but as you look along the tube you only see as far ahead as light is able to travel back to you giving the appearance a huge collection of light or stars dragged through with space towards a super massive black hole. As you look behind you the light that is further back than can catch up tappers off at the outer edges, a feathery edge that looks like it just ends.<br /><br />The power of the void would in every instance of flat spac

 

[MeteorWayne]

"The space between them is empty and gravity by convention is given a slight negative charge."<br /><br />What justification is there for this scenario?<br />THe space between is not empty. Why is gravity " by convention" given a slight negative "charge"? What is a negative charge, since gravity has no charge? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[origin]

genius said:<br /><br />1. The space between them is empty and gravity by convention is given a slight negative charge. <br /><br />2. By conventional thinking that area already at zero is reducing in charge. <br /><br />3. Since there is nothing to reduce space time in minute places dip at points becoming less than surrounding areas. <br /><br />4. A collection of minute charge over vast space causes the centre to bend ever further becoming a vortex, a negative vortex that sufficiently large will have the power to seek a high energy source.<br /><br />5. Once it connects a wormhole in space, conventional space is formed along with everything that was in the dip that started the process. Wormholes have two ends and all that was in the zone of 'empty space' is connected and travels inside that wormhole. Because it formed and travelled over time to the high energy source the ends of the wormhole have a time separation component.<br /><br />6. That is just normal standard typical space. Which by its very nature can not be empty and not bend.<br /><br />7. To be within an event horizon of a wormhole if sufficiently large would not tear matter to pieces, it is simply a tube a means of travel from one place in space to another at what ever the speed of the flow of space through the tube is.<br /><br />8. As space is travelling all light between near objects obey normal laws of light but as you look along the tube you only see as far ahead as light is able to travel back to you giving the appearance a huge collection of light or stars dragged through with space towards a super massive black hole. As you look behind you the light that is further back than can catch up tappers off at the outer edges, a feathery edge that looks like it just ends.<br /><br />9. The power of the void would in every instance of flat space poke holes in it giving space a different shape entirely. That is not a hard little exercise to follow ... surely<br /><br />----------------------------------------- <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[genius2007]

1. If I say space has energy It will be pointed out that it is a vacuum. If I say it is a vacuum then by definition a vacuum is empty. If I say it is empty then I am told it has energy. So if I can't pick a starting point then the rest gets more difficult.<br /><br />5. Yes again with the wormholes and there is no evidence to say they don't exist either.<br /><br />So how about E = mc^2<br />E is energy<br />m is mass<br />c^2 is the speed of light times the speed of light which is a constant.<br />So there is equivalence for energy and mass.<br />So if I said the proton is an object with mass and a stable minimum half life of 10^35 theoretically, it is an object with shape.<br />Then the proton is also the shape of energy with a stable minimum half life of 10^35<br /><br />This from Wikipedia<br />Protons are observed to be stable and their theoretical minimum half-life is 10×1035 years. Grand unified theories generally predict that proton decay should take place, although experiments so far have only resulted in a lower limit of 10^35 years for the proton's lifetime.<br /><br />reference here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton

 

[origin]

<font color="yellow">1. If I say space has energy It will be pointed out that it is a vacuum. If I say it is a vacuum then by definition a vacuum is empty. If I say it is empty then I am told it has energy. So if I can't pick a starting point then the rest gets more difficult.</font><br /><br />Space is not a perfect vacuum. But that is not what I objected to. I objected to this - "by convention gravity is given a slight negative charge".<br /><br /><font color="yellow">5. Yes again with the wormholes and there is no evidence to say they don't exist either.</font><br /><br />Oh crap, don't even go there or I will be forced to go to that stupid (but accurate) argument that there is no evidence that pink dragons don't exist.<br /><br />The absence of evidence is not evidence.<br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">So how about E = mc^2 <br />E is energy <br />m is mass <br />c^2 is the speed of light times the speed of light which is a constant. <br />So there is equivalence for energy and mass. <br />So if I said the proton is an object with mass and a stable minimum half life of 10^35 theoretically, it is an object with shape. <br />Then the proton is also the shape of energy with a stable minimum half life of 10^35</font><br /><br />Yes, E=mc^2.<br /><br />Yes, a protons half life is estimated in the range of 10^35 <b>years</b> (it is always important to include units!).<br /><br />Proton is the shape of energy - what a strange way to put it, but I suppose that is OK. By the way since we cannot directly observe a proton - even if we had a microscope with an infinite magnification - the shape issue is rather academic.<br /><br />But what does this have to do with 9 points I addressed?<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[genius2007]

1. Space is not a perfect vacuum. But that is not what I objected to. I objected to this - "by convention gravity is given a slight negative charge". <br />___________________________________<br />I am not calling gravity electrons or anything like that just saying there is a negative charge component.<br />This is from a description of gravitation:-<br />"It takes energy to create one-way temporal entropy from "all-way" spatial entropy, because an asymmetric, one-way temporal order must be imposed upon the symmetric, random spatial expansion. In other words, a form of symmetry-breaking must occur, somewhat like the order imposed by a magnetic field upon a randomly expanding plasma. This entropy-energy cost of time and history is the origin of the "negative energy" characteristic of gravity and the negative sign of "-G". <br />reference here http://people.cornell.edu/pages/jag8/gravity.html<br /><br />_______________________________<br />2. Wrong (1, 2, 4,and 6 wrong)<br />_______________________________<br />So it is fairly clear you disagree with my attempts to redefine the shape of general relative space on the very large scale.<br />______________________________<br />3 and 8 words strung together without meaning<br />_______________________________<br />You are not alone in not following my attempts to describe space as bendable and moving<br />__________________________________<br />5 and 7 wormholes<br />____________________________________<br />From Wikipedia Exotic matter<br />"Exotic matter is a hypothetical concept of particle physics. It covers any material which violates one or more classical conditions or is not made of known baryonic particles. Such materials would possess qualities like negative mass or being repelled rather than attracted by gravity. It is used in certain speculative theories, such as on the construction of wormholes. The closest known real representative of exotic matter is

 

[origin]

<font color="yellow">"It takes energy to create one-way temporal entropy from "all-way" spatial entropy, because an asymmetric, one-way temporal order must be imposed upon the symmetric, random spatial expansion. In other words, a form of symmetry-breaking must occur, somewhat like the order imposed by a magnetic field upon a randomly expanding plasma. This entropy-energy cost of time and history is the origin of the "negative energy" characteristic of gravity and the negative sign of "-G". <br />reference here </font>ttp://people.cornell.edu/pages/jag8/gravity.html<br /><br />I disagree with the authors idea of what gravity is.<br />This is what the author (who is not trained in physics) says about his work:<br /><br />"Most of these papers are unpublished, have escaped the peer-review censor, and are of a speculative nature."<br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">2. Wrong (1, 2, 4,and 6 wrong) <br />_______________________________ <br />So it is fairly clear you disagree with my attempts to redefine the shape of general relative space on the very large scale.</font><br />Yep.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">3 and 8 words strung together without meaning <br />_______________________________ <br />You are not alone in not following my attempts to describe space as bendable and moving</font><br /><br />Thats what you were trying to say? I agree then if you mean that space is curved by massive objects and it is also expanding.<br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">this is just posted as an idea to see if it adds any value. If it is no good then it should be disregarded.</font><br />I don't know if your ideas are 'good' or not. I am just challenging you to dig a bit deeper and see if they make sense or should be disregarded. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[genius2007]

Point 9 this is just posted as an idea to see if it adds any value. If it is no good then it should be disregarded. <br />________________________________<br />I don't know if your ideas are 'good' or not. I am just challenging you to dig a bit deeper and see if they make sense or should be disregarded. <br />________________________________<br /><br />I will do my best regards digging deeper. One thing would be the size of light material should increase over time as measured by a heavy metal ruler. So if a suitable known object 50 or more years old say a diamond was known to as accurate measure as possible was to be bigger and the increase might just be in microns then it would be a fair test.<br /><br />One thing for certain as a cleaner my best hope is to blog the idea as I just don't have any chance of meeting peer status let alone peer review. So if and I say if there was anything new and useful who ever picked it up and proved right (or wrong) would get the credit. By posting along the lines of the science of Revelations is not going to win friends if discovered afterwards. But what is infinitely worse is trying to talk to those who know the wisdom of that teaching and shout you down before even listening to the idea. I agree the time is not known but the physical signs are very clear. What really gets me is if this was to work I would have a flood of 'informed' by their leader what the 'new science is' on another of their annoying recruiting drives.<br /><br />I have had about two minutes in my life of great feeling of contact, most of that in my conversion and within days was told now that I am one of their 'saved' group and everyone else was going to hell. I left them as I didn't become part of any group to condemn anyone. In all fairness they could only be more annoying if there was some catastrophe and they would be even more persistent in their selective drives to promote large scale every one else go to hell campaigns.<br /><br />So yes it is different, yes it is

 

[genius2007]

I worry that the last post will be seen as word salad so I will try for something a bit less difficult.<br /><br />In a compression system the closer to the centre is more clearly defined. So for relativity the precession of Mercury is absolutely right and for quantum the further down the rabbit hole to the smallest particles most accurate.<br /><br />This brings us to the arrow of time in quantum. The mathematics indicate that an event is the sum of all the inputs physical and thought over time so by thinking on an election result already run the thought energy was actually calculated into the result. This means then the arrow points both ways from the present back to the past and from the past to a possible present. It is the ghost in the machine or consciousness which could not exist in a non-connected system.<br /><br />This is why bigger particles pose problems and are so short lived. It means that quantum is the inverse to relativity and feathers at the edges with large particles and that meshes with relativity which feathers at the large extremes but is an excellent description for within the solar system.<br /><br />To match them space needs spin which is carried in filaments of density and is mirrored in all particles. The density of space is gravity which matches the strong nuclear force. The filaments are the charge between the streams of stars and so in galaxies are a link between the spiral arms matching the electromagnetic force. The weak nuclear force is the lower potential of space that holds the filaments open and as it is a lessening of gravity allows iron to be the crossover point for atomic stability.<br /><br />This description allows space form and flow and just as tornadoes or hurricanes have two ends but are not the total of the atmosphere so to space exists in a series of connected vortices open at both ends.<br /><br />A better experiment is to take a light material of exact length with a heavy material of exact length and check for difference in size

 

[origin]

<font color="yellow"> I worry that the last post will be seen as word salad so I will try for something a bit less difficult. </font><br />What you said was not difficult it just did not make alot of sense.<br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow"> In a compression system the closer to the centre is more clearly defined. So for relativity the precession of Mercury is absolutely right and for quantum the further down the rabbit hole to the smallest particles most accurate. </font><br /><br />Yea, I got a response, Uh.... What?<br /><br /><font color="yellow"> This brings us to the arrow of time in quantum. The mathematics indicate that an event is the sum of all the inputs physical and thought over time so by thinking on an election result already run the thought energy was actually calculated into the result. This means then the arrow points both ways from the present back to the past and from the past to a possible present. It is the ghost in the machine or consciousness which could not exist in a non-connected system. </font><br /><br />What is that suppose to mean?<br /><br /><br />I have a suggestion for you; pick just <b>one</b> coherent thought and let people comment on it. Then, you can discuss their comments and maybe some progress could be made. This jumping around from Revelations to Mercury to tornadoes is a bit to manic too follow. <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[yevaud]

I gotta agree with you: that did not match anything I was taught. A lot of "Buzz Words" that I cannot quite comprehend. Perhaps it was the delivery, not the concept? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[origin]

Perhaps it was the delivery, not the concept?<br /><br />Very well could be, Yevaud.<br />I assume english is not his first language.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[mindmute]

Geni,<br />I like this thread.<br />For a while there, i thought origin was going to try and out "words per post" you. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />Word salad? maybe. however, taking what i am able to gleen from your, uh, expressions, you clearly have thought very much about this, and some of the concepts flying from your posts are indeed quite thought provoking.<br />do not be discouraged. I have been trying for 15 years to put into english some of my "inter-dimensional relation theory". have you created a website detailing your theories? if not, please do.<br />I'll come back later and read the 2/3 rd's of this tread i still haven't gotten to yet. <br /><br />Event horizon huh? how about that layer where time is not yet a zero, yet there is more mass above you than below you? the universe might seem to look like it's expanding perhaps? i donno. <br />

 

[johnsje]

Check this out.<br /><br />http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/14/scisurf114.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox