Leaderboard

Just a quick note to say happy holidays from me and all the other staff at SFN -- I sincerely hope you're all having a great break. I'm also going to take the opportunity to replace a failed drive whilst traffic to the site is a bit lower due to the holiday period, so there will be a short amount of downtime tomorrow at around 10:00am GMT (UTC+0).

He's saying the only reason people here so completely and consistently refute his points (as opposed to recognizing how profoundly brilliant and paradigm shifting they truly are) is because we're all bobble-heads blindly following the orthodoxy and we lack enough courage to honestly explore challenges to the system. He's full of shit, but that's the point he seems to be making.

Did you register your patents @ God ..... ps. I don't care about human's patents..

Vmedvil has declared that s/he "will not be back EVER!" so we have decided to close and lock the door, just to be sure.

! Moderator Note We're done here. Mason, you are free to ask questions to improve your knowledge, but baseless assertions just are not going to be accepted

A few points, as with your other posts, your perceptions are nothing short of speudoscience. Three points: [1] Cold or the degree of cold is simply the absence of heat. [2] You do not have a theory, you have a wild arse guess. [3] A BH surroundings are "hot" because of the intense tidal gravity and the rate at which it is attracting matter and breaking it down. No you are not. Speudoscientific nonsense! The universe is all that evolved from the BB. Cold or the degree of cold is simply the absence of heat. Correct. The absence of any heat at all would see us reach -273C or 0 degrees Kelvin something that has never been obtained in the lab, although physicists have go within a few billionths part of a degree above it. What we see in the picture is millions of galaxies made up of many billions of stars. The same effect can be seen when viewing a forest of trees from a great distance. We are unable to discertain any individual tree and only see a carpet of green. The different colours of the galaxies are a result of the prominence of the particular generation and population of stars present. The fainter dimmer light may simply mean it is further away. Nonsense: When I was a kid I also believed in Santa Claus. The BB is not an explosion: It is/was the evolution of space and time [spacetime] as we know them from a point 10-43 seconds after the initial event. The BB is overwhelmingly supported because it aligns with the observational evidence we have and the fact that it also agrees with Einstein's GR theory. The main point though is I really doubt you have made any worthwhile observations. Again, more nonsense. The universe is actually cooling. At present that temperature is 2.7K and was around 5000C 400,000 years after the BB. Firstly, you do not have a theory. Secondly, DM is evidenced by the rotational periods of galaxies and other experiments such as the "Bullet Cluster". If my comments seem rather harsh, then so be it. I'm just totally amazed how individuals can come to a public science forum, claiming to invalidate present day cosmology from the comfort of their arm chair in front of a computer. If I were you, and I was really interested in this awesome topic of cosmology and astronomy, and not just playing games or trolling, then I would start reading a few reputable books such as "A Brief History of Time" or some of Carl Sagan's books, or even probably the best book I have ever read called "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" by Richard Rhodes: Not so much a book about the bomb, but a history of late 19th century/20th century physics, and great scientists from Bequeral, Rhotegen, Rhuterford, Meitner, Curie, Szillard, Fermi, Bhor, Feynman, Einstein and many others.

It also takes no thought to blindly refute something, whereas it does take thought and effort to accept something.

As you have not provided anything that can be tested (e.g a mathematical model) it isn't possible prove that it is not consistent with observation. However, as many of your claims appear to contradict well tested theory then it seems likely that your ideas would be inconsistent with observation. In order to test your explanation you need to produce an equation showing how density affects gravity.

My understanding of US corporate law is that they are pretty much required to pass it to shareholders. The money will go to rich people.

Worst idea EVER, no surprise. You have been SO brainwashed! You're throwing away one of the most prestigious and profitable national charters on the planet as if it's worthless. A corporate charter in the US is a ticket to enormous potential in virtually every area of business. Why do you think that should be free? why do you think it's proper for a corporation NOT to help pay for roads and ports and the very infrastructure they use the most and the hardest? Why don't you listen to your precious Founding Fathers now? They were terrified of corporations getting exactly the power you so blithely give away to them.

You prefer making poor people even poorer and forcing them to suffer more than they already do, while making rich people even richer and crumbling the social infrastructure poor and rick folks all depend on?

I invented one when I was twelve but I wasn't dumb enough to think I could fire it.

Sorry for the short notice but wanted to take the opportunity to replace a faulty drive -- unfortunately took a bit longer than expected!

Apologies for the slightly extended downtime this morning, but the server is now back up and running. Do let me know if you see any issues!

Let me answer that another way for you to understand.... If magically we could compress all the mass of the Sun to within its Schwarzchild radius, [about 2.5 kms from memory] it would become a BH. Contrary perhaps to your "logic" the solar system would not be sucked in...all the planets would continue to orbit on their known orbital path. Also the gravity of any object depends on the mass of the object, and the distance you are from it. That explains why light within the interior of the Sun does not get trapped.......for that to happen all the Sun's mass would need to be inside the paraemter of the light/photon. And just quickly another point...If it has been answered I apologise, but from a distant frame of reference anyone viewing an object falling into a BH, would never see it cross the EH, just gradually red shifted beyond the range of your eyes or telescope until it gradually faded from view. But If that object falling in was me, I would certainly cross the EH, and be spaghettified by the tidal gravitational effects until torn asunder into my most basic fundamental parts. That was made known without a shadow of a doubt in the following thread...http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/112395-hijack-from-science-and-the-uni-multiverse-whichever-you-prefer/?tab=comments#comment-1030166

Vmedvil, you're in the middle of "Bill Angel" thread.. You should concentrate on answering "Bill Angel" questions, or questioning his speculation (using Standard Model of quantum physics) etc.. Instead of introducing your own, or String Theory.. Moderators consider it as "thread-hijacking", and your posts should be split to separate thread if you want to continue it this way..

the middle one (the small bottle) is probably an immersion oil for your specimen.

The first from the left could be Pasteur pipette (aka "transfer pipette") https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteur_pipette

! Moderator Note Your model is not the topic here. Replies should be mainstream physics, or questions regarding clarification.

'Classified' by Nature herself?

Hello today I'm am going to explain the entire universe and its workings and the future of the universe in basic laymen style terms. The universe in all it's entirety, Everything that the universe its-self consists of (not taking into account particles, liquids and solids - these are like sponges for the universe) the universe is only made of two temperatures (these two temperatures are Hot and Cold), they are the only part of matter, anti-matter, liquids, solids and particles that is in a consistent state, Meaning that no matter what the element or particle is, it will always have a temperature. I am going to post a famous picture with-in the science community, specifically in the astronomy field, The Hubble Deep Field. What is it that you see with-in the picture ? Millions upon Millions of particles or anti-matter, or maybe you see Millions of Galaxy's ? What i can see is Millions upon Millions of heat spots. The different colors of the Galaxy's indicate the dominant materials creating the heat source I.e A galaxy with more earth type materials (silicone, metals, oxygen, water and earth) will give of a more dominant bright light, where as a Galaxy with more particles (methane, carbon dioxide, sulfur) will show a fainter, dimmer sort of light, although the dominate bright light does not last as long because of the constant battle between the temperatures, This also means that the fainter, dimmer light is actually hotter. When any source of heat with-in the universe's structure can not sustain it's capability of retaining that heat, the object will implode (or super-nova) spreading what heat through what elements as far as it can (the on-going battle between Hot and Cold), I also believe that a galaxy can implode (or immense-nova) - (my own description) but this will be very-rare to watch or find. "The Big Bang" I also believe this to be an incorrect statement, I have come to this conclusion by my own believes that i have explained above and my observations, I will start by explaining that in every and any explosion the hottest point is either at the very start or a few seconds after the ignition has begun, with regards to the universe as a whole and though what i have observed though other peoples observations and images is that the universe (All of the Galaxy's, Stars and Planets) are gaining mass - The greater the mass the object has - the more heat its is able to retain, I believe that the universe cannot of started from a dense mass that exploded (The Big Bang) because the universe's temperature is heating up rather than cooling down, I call the beginning of creation "The Big Melt" (Similar to a ice-cube with all the elements frozen inside - this will also include what we call "time" or "expansion") My theory also explains "Dark Matter", Dark matter is an invisible element, Although it is visible to our perspective as a large mass just by looking up at the sky "The dark parts of space" I Personally believe that we are able to see its affects also here on earth, Our planet earth like our sun (star) also retains heat "places such as deserts (reflection's), and heavily forest (rain) areas Provide evidence of this", The opposite of these places is the other temperature (Cold), Is evident at the north and south pole (planet earths rotational axes), I believe these places to contain the majority of "dark matter" in the form of Ice and "Brisk Winds". "Dark matter" as a Particle in the eyes of a astronomer should be the biggest particle ever known, given the % of hot to cold with-in the universe. To be continued, More to come.

The gas contained in swim bladder can be air, if it is inhaled from the outside, which can be done only if pneumatic duct is present. Otherwise, it is whatever is produced by a gas gland, and that mixture of gases is not air. For instance, the eel Synaphobranchus has been observed to have 75.1% oxygen, 20.5% nitrogen, 3.1% carbon dioxide, and 0.4% argon in its swim bladder. This is not "my" diagram, it was obviously created by people who are seriously engaged in science, unlike you, and it would be silly to take into account your objections about that diagram. Besides that, if you think that my question is a "strawman", whatever that means, stop posting here.

And our star at its center is spinning on an axes like earth and Jupiter and mars, only our star is spinning much much faster creating a lot more heat, that is how the sun spots are created, as soon as our star starts to slow down, dark matter forces it to retain its heat (light) for as long as possible until it goes super-nova spreading light (heat) to the surround areas, where the failed heat source once was, it will either become a black hole (which is cold) or gain heat via mass to become a dwarf planet

No... In order, to test my idea, I will confront it with observations/experiments - so there's no need for any virtual calculations... I prefer practical science...

at its very center a black hole is very cold, the surroundings of the black hole are very hot because of there close proximity from what ive come to under stand from childhood is everything that is light, is hot i.e a light bulb or a fire, and saying that there is no cold ( to us as humans ) is astonishing, we feel the cold everyday even sometimes on a hot day, if there is no cold how come there is ice at the north and south poles and also in space, which is also water. Even mathematics explains my theory look at the fibanarchi numbers (i don't know how to spell it) every diagram explains the structure of heat and its storage system even humans maintain heat ( 37 degrees Celsius ) core body temperature.