Speculations

The speculations forum draws a fair amount of lively discussion. Here are some guidelines for ALL participants. The official rules regarding the Speculations forum The Speculations forum is provided for those who like to hypothesize new ideas in science. To enrich our discussions above the level of Wild Ass Guesswork (WAG) and give as much meaning as possible to such speculations, we do have some special rules to follow: Speculations must be backed up by evidence or some sort of proof. If your speculation is untestable, or you don't give us evidence (or a prediction that is testable), your thread will be moved to the Trash Can. If you expect any scientific …

It seems that pseudoscience, while often colourful, sometimes stimulating and - on occasion - entertaining, suffers from shortcomings which are dependent on the wielder of the hypothesis under scrutiny. Unlike conventional scientific theory, which is based upon a continually progressing and narrowing identification of event-level observations that can be demonstrated and explained via the scientific method, there is no unilateral standard within pseudoscience that restricts any one individual or group of individuals to a single approach to any given problem. Without such control, it is only a matter of time before any pseudoscience hypothesis spins wildly out of…

(A collection of some thoughts brought on by recent posts and posters. Some of these are touched upon in the FAQ and Pseudoscience section, and these sentiments can be found on other science fora) If you think you've toppled relativity, quantum mechanics, evolution or some other theory with your post, think again. Theories that have been around for a while have lots of evidence to back them up. It is far more likely that you have missed something. Here are some things to consider: You have to back your statements up with evidence. Anecdotes are not evidence. Being challenged to present evidence is not a personal attack. Calling the people in who challenge…

From http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i21/21b02001.htm Something is probably bull if: 1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media. The integrity of science rests on the willingness of scientists to expose new ideas and findings to the scrutiny of other scientists. Thus, scientists expect their colleagues to reveal new findings to them initially. An attempt to bypass peer review by taking a new result directly to the media, and thence to the public, suggests that the work is unlikely to stand up to close examination by other scientists. One notorious example is the claim made in 1989 by two chemists from the University of Utah, B. Stanley Pons and M…

Welcome, creationists, to Science Forums and Debate ======================================================== Please refrain from 'drive-by heathen-preaching', which is where you make one post scorning us for our 'belief' in evolution and then bugger off. This is a discussion forum, not a statement forum. We therefore ask that you stick around to discuss your points with us. Drive-by heathen-preaching tends to merely occupy the moderators' time deleting them, and paints creationists in a bad light. Purpose of this thread This thread was written due to the number of creationists who visit this site to argue against evolution. Whilst this is perfect…

Having posts moved to Pseudoscience & Speculations is not a punishment; it is meant to provide, for any casual reader, a clear divide between mainstream science and that which is still inadequately tested. By posting you have invited objective criticism, and if your post is moved, consider that one critique. Most posts moved here often fall under one or more of the following: No maths. Science requires specific predictions to be made so that a theory may be tested and falsified if it is wrong. Work that needs but lacks a legitimate mathematical framework is almost certain to be moved. Incomprehensible. Science uses well-defined terminology, so if you have made …

Philosophy of -I- There is only one identity in the universe. -I- what you are born with, an identity. What makes the living think or feel to themselves, I feel that, I want that, I am here, this is me? Darwin's theory of evolution rightly says we have a common, unbroken line back to a single ancestor. (one of the pond slime) We are all the 4.5 billion year old, (from then), children of this simple life. At some point this simple life divided its body into two living organisms, starting the process of evolution. From looking in every conceivable place I have found nobody has addressed what happened to -I- at the time of division. Simply put, if -I- am cut in tw…

I started at the ?Wall? of Action spreading from what was the center of what you call the Big Bang. I have never wanted to see a bang in wanted to see more. I saw things that would make so I could not be right. They are all as important as anything I recognized must be true. What moves the Universe as we know it can't be made of anything we know. At least on the scale it would have to be happen at. What I see must be doing something beyond that scale. If you have opinion about my choice please just listen. There has to ?Wave Form? other then Space at the Center that filling in and pushing out. ?Parts? says any ?Action? still show ?Parts? the ?Actions? which can already be…

Hi, Hopefully this is the right topic for this... I've studied quantum physics and cosmology as a hobby for 20 years reading books like 'A Brief History of Time', 'The God Particle', 'The Road to Reality', etc. --in other words I don't really know snot. Never the less (and of course!) an idea has come to me that solves a lot of proglems. It kind of turns things around but it seems nice, neat and logical. Its not completely original and of course it has to be completely wrong LOL, still I wanted to post it to have it formally torn down. But it's summarized in 4 pages of bulleted items and pictures in a zipped Word document. I think I can guarantee that …

Sorry Administrators i didnt know in which section i should put this concept as i rarely use forums ...... I published my thoughts , send them to few smart people,forums etc... but....some twisted answers and reactions ...very very strange to me ...everyone is pretending to be the smartes one ,but no one want to understand and listen ....everywhere i tried they banned me calling me crackpot ...so ill try here . ............... To understand quantum world we need to be like Copernicus ... we need first to stop world of MASS(material objects)where we live in ..then put on motion quantum particles ... Idea of ..why quantum world is completly unpredictable is becau…

I think it is rather humorous when there is speculation about 'possible' 'life out there' when there is a plethora of UFO sitings and crop circles, which, if even a fraction are authentic (there is abundant evidence of this) then we have never been alone. Perhaps we do not understand the time/space continuum as much as we might think, and life of the cosmos arises in such a way we are not yet aquainted with. Our 'space brothers' MAY be trying to help us not destroy the planet! I think many watch too many violent movies about 'aliens.'

'Dark Matter' & 'Dark Energy' are real, and entirely normal [DRAFT] 'Dark Matter' (DM) & 'Dark Energy' (DE) are known to have different properties, i.e. "behave differently". DM is spatially associated with stars in galaxies, which stars "trace" the presence of DM; and, DM possesses properties similar to stars, i.e. slow-moving, massive, gravitating point-particles. Prima facie, DM is dim stars, e.g. brown dwarves; and, dim stellar remnants, e.g. white dwarves, neutron stars, black holes. By contrast, DE is a uniformly distributed, diffuse, matter-and-energy density, logically linked to the vast inter-galactic 'Voids', which encompass most (~3/4ths) of the …

Hi all, I would like to pose some questions about Gravity as a zero-point-fluctuation force of Puthoff. The article: Zero Point Field cause an oscillation on fundamental particles. (electrons and quarks) and this cause a mutual interaction between those particles. Making the calculations Puthoff observes the correct dependence on distance. (r-2) The questions are: to simulate the presence of a particle outside a macroscopic object it should be sufficient to recreate the variable electromagnetic field that the particle would generate by oscillating. It would be enough to have such a field and the macroscopic object would be attracted by the gravity of the '…

In beta decay, a down-quark decays into a up quark, via Weak Nuclear 'W Boson' emission: [math]d \rightarrow u + \left( W^{-} \rightarrow \bar{\nu_e} + e^{-} \right) [/math] Could "pair production", from ambient "vacuum energy", account for beta decay, via a "Hawking Radiation" like phenomena, wherein a neutrino-antineutrino pair "pop" into existence, "near" the down quark; the neutrino interacts, with that down quark, via W- boson exchange, and "becomes" an electron; the anti-neutrino escapes ? [math]d[/math] [math]d + \left( \bar{\nu_e} + \nu_e \right) [/math] [math] \bar{\nu_e} \rightarrow \infty[/math] [math]d : W^{-} : \nu_e \rightarrow u + e…

"HIV" is a myth. Thabo Mbeki knew it, he knew his people were/are being targeted so to speak. Kary Mullis has a good 18:32 interview on youtube about it. Beri beri, pellagra, scurvy, once upon a time these were infectious diseases. Peter Duesbergs 'Inventing the Aids virus' covers it. He was approached with a paper with a slot for him to sign saying Koch's postulates has been met for it. The guy was having dinner with the editor of the journal 'Nature' that evening and said the paper would be published within the week if he signed it. He didnt sign it.

x' is a variable. Specifically, Einstein is saying that there is a function x'(x, y, z, t), and it turns out that you can determine x, y, z, and t from x'(x, y, z, t), y, z, and t - so as tau is a function of x, y, z, and t, tau can be determined from x', y, z, and t.------ Swansont Ph.D Physics Please read the article of Albert Einstein 'On the Electrodynamics of Moving bodies' and discuss the discovery by Swansont which even Einstein did not know.

Suppose that a Time Machine worked in the same fashion as rewinding a tape, where it made events occur in the opposite order that they happened. Now, suppose that the way it reversed the order of events was by 'reversing' the laws of motion--as an example, when Object A runs into Object B, the force is transferred in the direction Object A came from, instead of transferring in the direction that Object A is moving in. There's actually a name for this in theoretical physics, called Negative Mass. Therefore (if you follow), this time machine would make the positive mass into negative mass to reverse the order of events. The important thing to recognize here is that if a…

So does the body age because *Insert biological reason- DNA deterioration, etc"... Or does the body age because of the 'space-time' of the physical universe?

We can dispense with that conception of 'Time' which we have built an entire civilization upon, our relationship to that construction. This thread is not about that subject. I do not know the exact date of this essay from which I provide an excerpt below. Albert Einstein was asked to "write something for The Times on relativity." The title is: What Is The Theory of Relativity? From the book Essays in Science, published 1934, by Albert Einstein, page 53-54: We can distinguish various kinds of theories in physics. Most of them are constructive. They attempt to build up a picture of the more complex phenomena out of the materials of a relatively simple f…

In the previous two posts on Special and General Theories of Relativity of Electromagnetic Fields, an alternative, more intuitive and logically consistent explanation for the absolute constancy of the speed of light has been presented, and a possibility of the new theory to explain those evidences and experiments that are claimed as confirmation of Einstein's relativity has been given. We know that the whole theory of Einstein's relativity is based on the two postulates. The second postulate (the light speed postulate) has already been divorced from Einstein's relativity. This post is about the first postulate. In this paper, the incorrectness of Galileo's invaria…

Hi, Time postulate 1. The cause of time is created by all forms of energy. Time postulate 2. The effect, duration, of time is only applied on matter. These two "time" postulates are hereby proposed on the Speculations section. Any objections? Or some, maybe, aha.. sighs. /chron44

I built an anti-gravity machine using coke can, cell phone with antena, 4 AA Batteries, 1CD, tape, and a dime!!!

The expansion of spacetime is commonly called "The Big Stretch" (Carroll & Ostlie. Intro. Mod. Astrophys.), and is often likened to the blowing up of a balloon. Musing naively from the analogy, balloons only blow up, when something provides an internal pressure, in excess of the surroundings. Speculation: The closed "3-Sphere" of spacetime is being "blown out like a balloon", by a radiation of "hyper-particles", emanating from "interior Hyperspace" (the hyper-space topogically inside of the hyper-sphere of spacetime). These "hyper-particles" impinge upon the "inside surface" of spacetime. As they "rain down" on spacetime, they produce a "pitter-pa…

This is a list based on Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, his book about pseudoscience, how it's different from real science, and why it seems to be taking over. I think it's very good, and contains what Mr. Sagan calls his "baloney detection kit," which ought to be applied to all arguments, scientific or not. Looking it over, I found it fun to classify the various threads on these boards into categories of logical fallacy. Anyway, the following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments: * Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts * Encourage substant…

Ok so I have been reviewing some old basic electricity and magnetism material (Gauss’ Law, Maxwell’s Equations etc.) in preparation of the new school year and I came up with what I think is an interesting although most likely not feasible idea, and I wondered what other people thought about it. Basically the idea is to “bounce” on top of a dielectric using an electric field. Imagine we have a metallic object situated above a flat plane made out of some dielectric material. Also imagine that we have the ability to turn on and off an extremely large electric charge on this metal objects surface, at a rate many many times the relaxation time of the dielectric material be…