Speculations

So it rains and raindrops break down when evaporated, then eventually they piece back together but may be containing more or less atoms then they had before. Also they combine with other raindrops. I believe from a bit of research the same thing may happen when going through a Black hole. Now this whole theory is based on alternate universes and when going through a black hole which may or may not be the link; we break down from intense gravity then when and if there is an other side we materialize and may contain or lose parts. An example we may be missing eyes and have one arm but contain rocket fuel instead of blood. But still like a raindrop, we materialize we combine…

So i've been wondering recently and it seems that it all makes sense if we go along with life in everyday size. In conclusion, we should delete 'Quantum Theory' from all time. Please give your opinions, I would be extremely grateful! Thankyou

Minutes after creating this thread, in which I spoke about the Schrödinger's Cat idea in relation to astronomy and life on other planets, I realized that applying the concept to life in the universe uncovers an interesting paradox as well, which I'm not sure was given quite as much thought. Since this is a subject of its own, I decided to create a new thread for it. - The idea: Schrödinger's Cat is the idea that, when an event noticeable to the human eye can be influenced by quantum physics (such as a particle's quantum leap), all outcomes must exist in a superimposed state until someone measures or observes the outcome and knows which of the possibilities had hap…

WHAT CAUSE CURVE-LINED MOVEMENT OF QUANTA? In the news, about a model atom’s experiment in Washington University Missouri, the electron performed circular spherical trajectories with a figure like a deformed clew of thread. Indeed, this was a model. But the idea that electron in atom performs circular spherical trajectories, is something (I think) contradictory with “statement that electron is wave”. Now I am convinced that, no scientist has absolute argument to tread electron as “ wave” and to deprive it from its status as “mass particle”, as “charged particle”. But in this thread I want to learn about mechanism of trajectories of quanta, stripped by “mass”, stripped b…

The following is the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin Film showing what is either an undiscovered bipedal primate walking along a creek bed in Bluff Creek, California or a man in a suit... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e-8FeEEo-8 I'm interested in asking members, particularly those with training in physical anthropology and/or anatomy, their opinions on the subject of the film. 1) Do you think the film looks realistic or like a man in a suit? 2) Do you think the subject has normal proportions or proportions explainable by a man in a suit or anything that would qualify as inhuman proportions? The following graphic was made to demonstrate that the subject has an inhumanly long…

Supertring & quantum mechanics TIME Gerard 't Hooft Prof Leonard Susskind Supertring is the way it's spelled on youtub. Now you find it with just that, Supertring. Gerard 't Hooft has won a Nobel Prize and Leonard Susskind covers all the math used by Physics at Stanford. I have to reserve the rights so that I may defend my Ideas and possible Theory. I should be able to at least have something only someone fron Cern could know. I restarted subject in 2008. But I know when they had Bains. The short title is Parts. Half way into this I realised their were too many Effects in the Universe's System. Bob > Petersen In 1973 I bought a CRC a Hand Book …

Posted as comment in the Andrea Rossi's blog Journal of Nuclear Physics: deleted

yeah well, nobody ever disagreed on similarities on chromosomes. the problem with creationists is just WHY new species evolve into different forms. In the humans case, it is not explained why nor how the human brain evolved so rapidly. you should type in the youtube search field the name (name of video channel removed by moderator) cuz this girl came up with something truly cool about evolution. it's a new video and it took me a while to watch it all- at the end she explains evolution and frankly it's the first time i hear a theory like hers but it makes really good sense. i keep thinkin about that video so i cant wait for more people to watch it cuz i really wanna share …

Ahead is a discussion between Andrea Rossi, Wlad, Mr. Joe, Mr. JR, and Mr. Curiosone, in the Rossi's blog Journal of Nuclear Physics. http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=7#comments Andrea Rossi wrote in August 1st, 2014 at 7:24 PM Curiosone: As you see, I have edited a little bit your question to make it correct. Matter is made by waves ===================================== COMMENT Waves cannot colide like billiard balls, as happens in Compton Effect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_scattering Only corpuscular particles can collide like billiar balls. As from the foundations of Quantum Mechanics is impossible to eliminate the incompatibi…

only path of least resistance. The reason an electron stays bound to a proton is because the least-negative direction is in the direction of the proton, and thus there is least resistance in the direction of the proton. Basically, what I'm thinking is, only like-charges interact with each other; positive and negative never interact with each other, and what appears to be 'attraction' between a positive and negative charge is actually just the particles staying along the path of least resistance. Would you guys say that's correct? That isn't considering gravitational attraction, which according to GR isn't attraction either, but geodesics of space-time. Although …

San Clemente Fault. Palos Verdes Fault. Rose Canyon Fault. Newport-Inglewood Fault. Whittier Fault. Santa Cruz Fault. Malibu Coast Fault, San andreas fault, and moving tetonic plates are all educated theories because they cannot be seen or demonstrated for all to see and understand, and siesmic inducators only detect movements and vibrations. “What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)

Sir Edmund Halley believed that the Earth was hollow. While the Earth being hollow would explain many stories in ancient cultures, would it change physics? Is it scientifically impossible?

What do you think about my explanation of Pioneer аnomaly http://vixra.org/abs/1407.0102 I have a few questions. Is there a link between Pioneer anomaly and flyby anomaly? OK They solved Pioneer anomaly. They used thermal model of the two spacecraft Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11. http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2507 Astrophysicist Slava G. Turyshev said ” We still have an uncertainty in our study of less than 18 percent. But for me, this is the answer. Some may argue it is not final, but in my mind we did a good job, and it's very clear what happened.” http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2012/08/the_pioneer_anomaly_heat_gen…

yes what would be even more interesting to know, is not even where in the brain the info is stored, but actually in what FORM the memory is coded. I mean, when we send images, sounds videos or even just txts to our mobile phones, the original info is de-coded and then coded back at the end device. Knowing the code language that is used to to this, I can get in the middle of the message during its transmission and easily read the exact message. NOW, wouldn't this procedure work in the same way if I knew the CODE used for memories? Then I could dissect a brain and re-code its stored memories, so that I can exactly SEE/view them! I know this sounds crazy, but if memorie…

We can`t see multiverse. it exist theoretically, but we can`t see them. Instead of saying that it is due to the event horizon that prevents light from entering-reaching us. I would like to post a speculation. Is it possible that it is due to the fact that our companion universe is full and compact with superclusters, clusters and galaxies, thus lights from galaxies in our companion universe cannot pass through them and creates a shadow, which make us unable to "see" them. I think the multiverse is just invisible due to the fact that we lie in their shadows.

I have asked this many times to people of greater intelligence than I, but never really receive an answer (I also know that its an almost impossible question). But where are we in relation to every thing, where is our universe and what is it in? This has been in the back of my mind for many years, as there must be an answer to it. In my opinion, the universe has to be somewhere an within something. So i`m just kind of hoping for some discussion on this topic, cheers.

I don't know how to discuss this or even ask questions without falling into speculation, and though there are a lot of threads about time in non speculative parts of the forum I couldn't figure out how to bring this up without feeling like I might be hijacking the thread, so this is probably the best place for the thought. Current views on time are that the faster you go the more time slows down, and that if you are the one going faster you are not even going to notice. Apply this thought to falling into a black hole and time slows. At least this is the way I understand it. Apply this thought to the big bang. What then? It wouldn't seem to make sense that the …

The concept of matter waves can it create Strings ? A hypothetical superluminal particle can create this field called String. What do you think of it ? The Huygens Combination and Matter Waves --> a superb link to visit --> http://www.quantummatter.com/space-resonance/matter-waves-and-buddhist-thought/ Can we just do-it with only one source ?

Gravity is the recoil of energy to it's source. Things of the earth or any object of the universe, may leave it's source. However, the object/energy, can only escape but so far, before it's connection to it's source, acts upon it. Pulling it back to it's itself, since it's energy and its connection with it's source is stronger, then the distance it can escapes too. Electric magnetic radiation generally escapes gravity, so light is not effected by gravity, unless it's captured by a black hole, whose gravitational pull is strong enough to effect even light. All other energies recoil back to it's source, and that recoil is what we call gravity. Think of it like a compressed …

So the jury is still out on the question whether or not NASA et al have got it wrong or they have stumbled on something fundamental. I would like to note that the principle of having a material object such as a spaceship seemingly act as a perpetual mobile is consistent with the idea that photons have mass and accelerate holding c in the Higgs field that is formed of moving mass as well in a graviton field that does the same. Gravitons spinning Higgs particles into Gluons forming strings, two of which form a photon. Taking the entire cosmos then as a closed system the energy level will be and remain constant. No conflict then with the law of conservation of mome…

Fun Fact: The body has no nerves designed to feel heat. The nerves can detect cold and they can detect warm, but not heat. The heat sensation comes when something is so hot it can stimulate both the warm and cold receptors at the same time. (Note: I have had numerous comments about the use of the word heat here. I mean this to be roughly temperatures above 45 degrees, and shoulkd have said HOT not heat. I also think this is a fairly obvious assumption and it is ridiculous I need to clarify this.

If you were to remove 1 cubic foot of water from Jupiter, and weigh it on earth, would it weigh the same as 1 cubic foot of Earth water?

I've been working on finding scientific arguments that spirits and an out-of-body consciousness exist, and that our awareness isn't just an effect created by signals in the brain as some speculate. Yesterday I realized something rather obvious, but very important if my understanding is proven correct. My argument relies on the theory of relativity... with focus on the idea that time is a fixed dimension, where the past and present both exist in a static state across a 4th axis. After nearly a day of pondering this view, I couldn't find any counterfacts to it, and I'd like to hear what others think and other pro / con arguments. So let's consider this: Right now you ar…

From this debate I, a lay-man, am more confused than illuminated. It is simple: Electron and positron, two mass particles of mater have: Stationary energy E = 2 * me * C^2 = 2*8.187*10^-14 joule. Interacting, they transform in two mass less particles (gamma) with Run-away energy E = 2 * h*1.2359006*10^20Hz = 2*8.187*10^-14 joule. All the mess is created by the ill term: “ annihilation of matter”

Hi, This is a great idea. That works as you say. The tense string that you represent (position) is the line of gravity zero and the perfect planeity. After, a piece of energy (bit), just hit to come the string at rest. It is what you have demonstrated and it's waht I think too. This is the same rules as "energetic intensity" http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/69831-could-particles-with-intrinsic-properties-explain-quantum-gravity/page__view__findpost__p__713748