Speculations

Alright, now they have this thing about neutrinos being possibly faster than light. With this they say ruins cause and effect.... Now if you go faster than the speed limit away from a person next to you and looked back at them they will have appeared to be going in reverse as you are catching the light that was reflected off of them in the past. Now say you travel 2 times the speed of light away to 10 light years away the person you would see would be that of 5 years ago. Now you travel back to them at 2 times the speed of light they would seem to be moving around in fast forward at 2 times the actual speed because in 5 years of traveling towards them at twice the speed o…

Another way to look at Dark Matter. (Ether) The idea of particles eventually becoming so small they would have little to no direct influence on this universe. Particles so small they would appear to have no mass at all or perhap negative mass and create the 3d space everything we see is in. Missing mass? Not at all, just tied up in particles to small by far to detect in any way other than indirectly. How can it take time to cross empty space unless space is dark matter? If you use this explanation for dark matter I think you'll find wave particle duality explains itself. Like sound traveling through air. Force traveling through dark matter is perceived a…

My main thought, the Bible is a physics book and its freaky......... In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. Two heavens= draw a line above and below the centerline drawn representing the "earth" Waters= top and bottom energy And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day Light=energy of li…

1. Gravity is much weaker than the other forces because it's a force of mass rather than a force of energy, and because E=mc2, the strength of acceleration due to gravity times the speed of light squared is exactly equal to the strength of acceleration due to energy. 2. A black hole is a perfect four dimensional sphere so its length in time is the same as its length in the spatial dimensions, so its life span depends entirely on its mass. 3. The mass of a black hole partly depends on how far away it's observed from because length contraction and time dilation increase the closer an observer is to it, which is why there are no nearby quasars. A black holes mass dec…

Gravity in not believed to travel at c, It is thought to be either instant or travel as fast as c2. Massless particles is used fairly common, but I believe this to be incorrect as well. we know light can and does excelerate space probes and we explain this as radiant energy, but energy with out mass has no inertia and clearly makes no sense. I don't believe in massless particles, I would venture to say that at the mass level and speed the convertion of energy is 100%. I would go as far as saying you can not have energy without mass and I know this is not conventional, but energy as we know it is motion and their is no motion without mass.

If there's one thing which has remained more or less constant throughout human evolutions it's been... humans, or more to the point our brains. We've seen some incremental genetic changes which have improved performance but more or less humanity has existed on a timescale which precludes any major revisions to the overall design. Meanwhile, we've evolved into a society beseiged with information overload. To quote historian James Burke, "Never before in history have so many known so little about so much of the world around them." By this he's referencing the grid, the complex set of human interdependencies which allow us all to pool our resources and collectively at…

Watch the image below. If we combine the two triangles we get different results. Triangles will be replaced with the number 3 (because triangles have three angles), the results obtained with the number as a geometric object angles. Connecting the two triangles is the mathematical operations of addition a + b = c 1.3 +3 = 3 2.3 +3 = 4 3.3 +3 = 5 4.3 +3 = 6 5.3 +3 = 7 6.3 +3 = 8 7.3 +3 = 9 8.3 +3 = 10 9.3 +3 = 12 The current mathematics has the answer (4.3 +3 = 6), it is impossible for the other, the reality is that this may be true. I'll show you a review of mathematics that solves problems, join ...

Some where in the not too distant past... I read that black holes create new universes by ripping through space time and the energy released by such a puncture (puncture seems more to the point) releases even more energy that expands (energy of expansion was the wording) and creates anew space time full of energy condensing into matter... at some point it seems I remember something about the mass of the black hole reaching a critical mass but then again maybe not... The idea was that universes that have laws of physics that give rise to black holes are more likely to give rise to other universe via the creation of black holes and so propagate their laws of physics. L…

Seeing that Nobel prize laureate Frank Wilczek has published on space -time crystals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-time_crystal%C2%A0 As did David Bohm prior to him as I've just learnt. I wonder why it hasn't already been attempted to do a computer simulation whereby you try to get as many as possible as highly as possible conductive identical spheres go to order in a dynamic crystal given that they all have the same speed in random straight trajectories in a as large as possible as highly as possible conductive cube? The walls will act as a disturbance hence the need of a very large simulated box. If a space-time crystal is a reality it should be…

How Balance Solved Everything By: Cory ArmlinDE- Dark Energy, EM- Electromagnetism, 3D- 3 dimensional When you read this all I ask is that you finish the paper before giving any judgment. There is only one force that governs everything, Balance. Without this force existence in itself would be impossible. This force is observed to govern everyway of existence but one. You see it in the quantum world as every particle has a twin but with a different charge. You see it in the sky every day. The sun is mandated to maintain balance to survive. If balance was lost it would either implode or explode. Night day, hot cold, left right, good evil, sour bitter, and most importan…

Absolutely; everything “IS”. But due to the reference frame of different procedural step of its quantum being; “EVERYTHING WAS AND IT WILL BE”. And this “IS” relativity from univaso science point of view of res extensa verses res cogitan. For example; thunder and lightening are caused at the same time, but the difference in the procedural quantum steps of accessing there being as a function of the reference frame of the consciousness, subjects them to different times of effect, and this is E=MQ2. Let me re-use the ordinary example illustrated from my previous work that can establish the equilibrium frame work between relativism, absolutism and E=MQ2 as a function o…

I don't understand why don't physicists make gravitational-kinematic slowing of time? T=T0(Rc2-2GM)/Rc(c2-v2)1/2 T-slowed time T0 - usual time v - speed in gravitational field

I have my own theory for gravity... It involves space as not a force that pushes as Einstein explains but pulls ... Think of it as like a game of tug of war... Where the knot in the middle is like the earth... Space pulls all around it therefore earth is a sphere... The photons from the sun keep us in orbit and gives the earth its orbit as well... And could even explain the expanding universe... What goes up must come down... Except for light...i know this goes against the theory of relativity in some aspects but it makes sense to me... The sun leaves seven or eight pounds of photons on earth every year, one side of the earth gets heated up so it turns away from the sun t…

These are my thoughts, and only a work in progress. I have a grasp of the physical world and wish not to offend. Comment by all means... In my world, the Universe is expanding, the galaxies orbit each other, the stars orbit the centers of galexies, the planets orbit the stars and the moons orbit the planets. But when an apple falls,... there is no gravity to pull it to the ground. Still, the planets rotate and the tides still flow in and out. How is this all possible without gravity? It is possible because empty space, is not empty! Empty space is not a vaccuum. It is a matrix of magnetically charged, monopolar particles. These particals are all of an alike ch…

I don't see this as baseless in scientific fact or outside of mainstream physics so I'll post it here. If general relativity is right then what happens when the first of two objects free-falling towards a black hole at slightly different distances reaches the horizon from the perspective of the further object? It can't reach the horizon until the second object also reaches the horizon, which means that all objects would have to cross the horizon at the exact same time. Singularities are always a sign that the theory has broken down. Why general relativity is exempt from this obvious rule is completely beyond me. Two objects start along side each other and fall tow…

I was just sitting here on the couch thinking about things like "The electro magnetic force is infinite. and that time and distance are relative. And I started thinking that perhaps there's a sub-micro plane expanding faster than our macro plane. From a macro plane perspective this would be seen as an inward force. Then I thought about it some more and I figure that perhaps a single proton click governs general relativity for the macro perspective. and that a single click of a preon governs general relativity for the micro world, and that perhaps a single click of the gravaton governs relativity for the sub-micro world. The strong force that holds the governing …

The expansion of the universe is a hypothetical view implying a return to the middle ages with Earth at the center of the universe because the hypothetical expansion and the hypothetical acceleration of the expansion are the same for the same distance in all radial directions from Earth. Additionally, R.M. Santilli has established experimentally, the lack of expansion via spectrographic measurements according to which the redness of the sun itself at sunset experiences a redshift without any relative motion. In other words, redness of direct sunlight, (that without scattering) and not the redness of the atmosphere (which is indeed due to scattering) constitutes vi…

The consciousness as a part of the Universe If we accept,that everything in the world is relative, then the outside world, those we see , we can accept that is inner.As a result we can suppose, that inner world of man that is to say the consciousness is outside.At the same time The consciousness is the same at each men.From these two admission we can make conclusion , that consciousness is the first dimension of the Universe that is to say to be externally and the same everywhere.This explain us the philosophical question, which is first the substance or consciousness.The ANSWER is that they are different dimension of the Universe.We can make interesting conclusi…

Hi all I just posted a paper on ViXra, http://vixra.org/abs/1212.0163 , with title as above and will be very interested in any constructive criticism etc (which mayl be acknowledged by name in future versions, unless otherwise requested). Evidence for the model would be a formal proof that the basic tenets of QM can be derived from it, which I believe should be possible and is something I am currently considering. Note that emphatically nothing in the paper is intended to suggest that QM is in any sense "wrong", quite the reverse. It is merely an attempt to discern and sketch a realist or "operational" underpinning to QM. It is fairly short (10 well-spaced pag…

So, a thoughts been lodged in my head for awhile that I'd like to discuss, to see if it's taken as common knowledge or as a revolutionary point of view. From my perspective, the speculations of a "Gravitron" somewhere in matter isn't right, mainly because light has no room to cary it with it as it's doing loops in spacetime. So, Einsteins theory of relativity shows that spacetime bends around matter; isn't that gravity right there? What if spacetime is a fabric, a three dimensional fabric laced by strings, and matter is an obstruction to this fabric, a sort of cosmic tumor? (not going for a nilhist perspective on this one, trust me) lets say that, theoretically, this fabr…

The position of an object (or an event) in spacetime can be described with a set of 4 coordinates: 3 spatial coordinates and 1 temporal. (x,y,z,t) Say we have event A with coordinates (0,0,0,0) That represents something that happens at the origin right now. Then some other random event B. Say event B has coordinates (x,y,z,t) . One can choose a set of spatial axes so that x axis is aligned to the direction between the observer and event B, so that we get simplified coordinates (x',0,0,t). Now: 1.If B has coordinates (0,0,0,0) we can safely conclude that A=B (= sign meaning that A & B are 2 events that took place at the same place at the s…

Hi all. I remember a while back I introduced myself as a new member... and then needed to disappear for two weeks. well, the two weeks turned into something like 4 months, But Im back now for a while anyway. so excuse me if I don't respond to posts daily. anyway here is a link to an article describing how radiometric decay can be sped up significantly by the removal of electrons from around the atom. after reading the article, discuss what implications this will have on accurate radiometric dating, and thus on the accurace of the theory of evolution. http://creation.com/billion-fold-acceleration-of-radioactivity-demonstrated-in-laboratory also, please comp…

Daniel posted this: It is a fact that space is a familiar entity, in contrast with time which is so mysterious. but do we really know what we think we know so well? Here below some considerations and question marks. _it has been established that there is a relation between space and time: any distance corresponds to a certain duration. We cannot get information from any distance in zero time because nothing can go faster than Speed Of Light. IOW in order to observe real simultaneity, information (EM radiation or any kind of other signal) should transfer at infinite velocity and this is not the case. In short, everything that we observe in the space dimensions is…

Theory: perhaps dark energy is only gravity. That's why we can't detect it, only see its effects. Maybe our universe is just an irregular bubble in a very large black hole. That would account for gravity being all round the perimeter of our universe pulling the galaxy's to the edges. Then what? Why did the bubble form? Heat is a basic catalyst to create a reaction. Is the center or creation point of our universe becoming a larger void or is it full of fairly uniform matter like the rest of the universe? Food for thought. Good day. Chrisb PS; A very small spec of a black hole would contain a huge amount of matter, perhaps a universe full.

Today, we use time in a majority of uses. From cooking food to counting down to the new year. But in my eyes, we are viewing time incorrectly and impractically. For example: If you are on the east coast of the US at noon, and on the other side of the earth its dark with night, according to humans it is a different "time". The very meaning of time is being thrown out in this example. We don't use time in a scientific sense, we use it in a hypothetical sense. Time is woven into the fabric of space, it is a constant, therefore if you are on one side of the universe, the other side is the same time. Understand so far? So the way we use time today is completel…