Speculations

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…

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 …

(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…

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…

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…

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 …

Simply asking Google three questions. Intelligent No ?

Lets eliminated two false concepts first. No the earth can not wobbly under a stationary pin to make a mass that is unwinding from, or wrapping around the pin to make it go faster or slower. The Newtonian linear momentum of the mass remains the same. No there is not a huge amount of friction when a wrapping mass winds up or unwraps from the pin. An Atwood's or modified Atwood's makes far more momentum than the same distance of free fall for the extra mass. You can place that extra (all that) momentum into the same extra mass and it will rise 10, 20, 40 times higher than the distance it was dropped. The height increase depends upon the mass ratios used. The momentum of th…

I have been working on further concepts implied by my theory. One of those came up in a forum the other day when someone wanted me to talk about "particles". What I told him led him to ask me if I was saying particles didn't exist and that led to me sharing these short "quantum" tales: "They don't exist as a "thing". They are evolving events. An electron is neither a particle nor a wave. It is an electron, which can display both properties depending on how we observe it. This is why I don't like discussing particles. Of course we consider a ball to be a "particle" for practical purposes, but it is not. It is an interaction of the waveform probabilities within the contin…

Somewhere along the line people came to believe the conjectures of archaeologists. Probably this was caused by the fact that everyone calls themselves a "scientist" and we all know that experiment can't be done in the historical contexts. Since experiment isn't possible then some won't even do simple testing. You might be surprised to learn that the concept ramps must have been used to build the Great Pyramid has been disproven and simpler more efficient means are in evidence. Indeed, the use of ramps at all for building great pyramids has been debunked. It appears they used water filled counterweights and funiculars on the causeways instead. There is extensive …

Several years ago I got help here as I began developing my Time Dilation Cosmology (TDC) model. I am sorry I have forgotten the names of those who helped me, but I think they will remember me and will remind me who they are. I am posting now because I have now had 9 papers published, with a 10th under review, and thought they would like to catch up on the model. TDC is now well known throughout the English-speaking astrophysics/quantum physics and theological universities down to the PHD student level so they might already know aobut it. The papers are in 2 journals but there are links to all of them in Volume 27, "Time Dilation Cosmology", of the Journal of Cosmology, w…

The LLM is designed to provide answers at all costs. It's like a dog, a soldier, a gangster, or a slave who's been given an assignment and told, "You will die if you fail." It's like a student taking an exam with several incorrect and correct answers and guessing the answer without knowing it. Teachers at school (normal human school) say "if you don't know the answer, guess" (i.e., use your intuition, common sense, and probably later a real guess). So this is de facto emotional behavior. Most often, hallucinations occur when someone asks a question that 1) the LLM doesn't know the answer to, or 2) the question is too ambiguous, or 3) the context window size of the model h…

Standard Model is extremely well tested, but e.g. is incompatible with general relativity, is rather for effective perturbative approximations, also uses this gigantic Lagrangian found in epicycle-style: by guess&fit terms. So maybe like in Copernican Revolution, we should search for compact deeper nonperturbative Lagrangian (e.g. Skyrme-like), effectively described close to Standard Model + gravity? Nonperturbative Lagrangians look simple, but have extremely complex consequences - maybe AI could search through them, automatically performing simulations testing various agreements? This kind of approaches have already started, e.g.: Towards AI-assisted neutrino flavor…

Einstein has taken us down a wrong path, and 100 years later, physics has not recovered from the consequences. We need to look at the clear evidence and go back to working on real physics instead of science fiction! Theory and experiments show Special Relativity and General Relativity are optical illusions. Space and time are absolute as denoted by Galilean Relativity. Hi my name is Dr William Walker and I am a PhD physicist and have been investigating this topic for 30 years. It has been known since the late 1700's by Simone Laplace that nearfield Gravity is instantaneous by analyzing the stability of the orbits of the planets about the sun. This is actually pred…

I am an independent researcher with a formal background in physics: I hold an MSc in physics, studied in a postgraduate physics programme, and have earlier peer-reviewed publications from that period. I am currently outside an academic institution, so my opportunities for ordinary academic discussion are limited. For this reason, I would like to ask for technical criticism of a recently published paper. The paper is: A. N. Smirnov, Special Relativity as an Emergent Structure in a Timeless Euclidean Model, International Journal of Quantum Foundations, Vol. 12, Issue 2, pp. 272–312, 2026. Article page: https://ijqf.org/archives/8065 PDF: https://ijqf.org/wp-content/uploads/…

I got haunted last night. I was having a dream. I could barely remember it. But I did feel within the dream that I felt it rush to a conclusion. I said to myself while in the dream "Well that escalated quickly". I woke up. After I was awake I didn't feel alone. I heard two footsteps by the door then one foot step towards my window sill. I was keeping my eyes closed because I didn't want to see the ghost. It's mentioned often in GhostAdventures that Zack Bagans (The leader) has strange dreams sometimes because of the ghosts interfering with them. I've not really looked into it, but my first thought is something called MK Ultra. It's some sort of technology that enables m…

I’m exploring a model where the present moment (“now”) is the actual boundary of the universe. The universe is not a fixed block of past, present, and future, but something that is continuously being created at this boundary. In this view, the universe expands at the speed of light, not just in space but in spacetime itself. The speed of light is therefore not just a property of light, but a fundamental limit that defines how fast reality can grow. Light is interpreted differently here: rather than “moving through space,” it can be seen as a trace or trail that connects the present to the past, marking the structure of what has already happened. Mass, on the other hand, r…

Need to take my sandals off to count how many times someone's stated something along the lines of 'Thermal energy is the sum total of particle kinetic energy' or some such. The refutation is a work in progress. Please chip in if I get some of the maths wrong. Apologies for expanding tensor matrices out in full. It's the only way I can get my head around them.

In terms of the "big freeze" predicted as the end of the universe.... It may not be the "end".... time may keep going.....

The Incomplete Implementation of the Correspondence Principle and Conventional Oversight The quantization of the Einstein-Hilbert action remains one of the central unsolved problems of theoretical physics. Because Newton's constant carries negative mass dimension, perturbative quantum gravity (PQG) is non-renormalizable and loses predictive power near the Planck scale. This ultraviolet (UV) crisis has motivated major programs such as Effective Field Theory (EFT), Asymptotic Safety, string theory, and other attempts to modify or complete gravity at short distances. It is highly remarkable that the central unresolved problems of gravitational physics manifest across the en…

Hi, Are the LHC and the FCC projects - really - secure. I have though been "investigating" these types of projects in the "layman" view of "security" since about 2003. Does it exist any sort of physics that to a 100% risk level makes such projects secure? /chron44

Hi, all I’ve always wondered why Einstein struggled with the idea that geometry shouldn’t be a fixed stage, but something linked together with matter and energy. It has always felt real to me since I got more acquainted with physics - like spacetime is not a rigid container, but something that grows out of the universe’s own activity. /chron44

With the help of reflection, I now have a different take on what I perceived at the time to be an idea. I tried to explain it as some of you will be aware & even show it's existence. I have described some things really bad, I didn't have the words or knowledge. My current view is this, I didn't have any sort of idea at all. I haven't discovered anything. I wonder if I've merely 'seen' something/s physics already has a theory or theories for & it is just extremely strange. I don't mean everything in the physics world, just an angstrom snippet if you will. For back up, I refer to my very first post in another thread: https://scienceforums.net/topic/134685-1-sub-qua…

I’ve been exploring how geometry, mass, and gravity might have been applied in ways we don’t usually consider. The Mass Torque System is my attempt to model how small inputs can leverage large outputs through controlled torque and balance. In a simple demo, .23 oz of input force moves a 10.50 oz sled — a 4565% increase. I’m not claiming new energy is created, only that mechanical advantage can be harnessed in a novel way. Could principles like this have been used in ancient construction methods at sites such as Cusco, Baalbek, or Puma Punku? I’d like to open this up for discussion — do these mechanics resonate with known physics, or might they point toward overlooked appl…

Been a while, and hope all are well. As this was where I started, I thought only fair I pop back and share where I have got to so far. (And sorry, most the math still goes over my head, though my concepts guiding it I see clearly). If you have the time (40min) and want to listen, I have put a link to the notebookLM audio for my Theory as it stands to date stored in my Google Drive. I have built the theory and math via Colab simulations and the combined help of AI. Mainly being Copilot, but also Gemini, Claude, Grok and ChatGPT. I have also created a Github account and Zonodo account where the theory is located. Github includes all simulations that you are free to use, tes…