Speculations

I am looking for feedback from users who might know more or be able to repeat these experiments. These experiments basically show that light loses or gains energy to a medium. I think we all note the atmosphere warming during the day. Stretched out to a cosmological scale, as light travels it loses or gains energy to the intergalactic medium, and becomes red or blue shifted because of this. These measurements were repeated with our sun and monochromatic laser light without relative motion. R. M. Santilli, "Experimental Verifications of IsoRedShift with Possible Absence of Universe Expansion, Big Bang, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy," The Open Astr…

This new theory is based on the Steady state & Darwin theories. It gives a comprehensive answer to the universe as we see it today. Please do not compare it to the current theories (Big bang, Dark matter, quantum…). Actually, for one moment, try to forget all of those theories which you might know or believe in. Please reply if you agree with this theory. If you do not agree, please specify if there is any contradiction with this theory to any evidence which is available on our universe. But please do not compare it to any current theory!!!! So, let's summarize the basic elements of updated steady state Theory: A. Creation of matter a…

Hello All!! I stumbled upon an interview of Boyd Bushman.. {who seems to have worked for Lockheed Martin, Hughes, etc etc... has a wiki page on him(??) } In that he said somethings which were good enough to spark interest in high school physics...although a couple of mistakes viz. Lenz law analogy to anti-grav were present as well. But something which caught my attention was that he said.. if we substitute e=mc^2 in Newton's Binomial equation... we get 4 fundamental forces along with 3 or 4 unknown forces.. (anti-grav might be one of them.. i intrepeted ..) Now I am no maths guru to scrutinize the statement ... but as far as my meagre math skill…

What is a problem of this concept? [latex]Mass \quad amount= Field \quad density (field \quad intensity / volume)\times volume( governed \quad by \quad gravity )[/latex]

In a slightly roundabout way, I had an idea about one possible explanation for the emergence of bipedalism among our apelike ancestors, and a related reflex that might persist to this day. Of course there are several well-known explanations for bipedalism, based on its obvious advantages, and many ape species today walk upright, with varying degrees of alacrity and persistence. But as many of the benefits are gained only when bipedalism becomes a fully formed habit, it seems there's room for all these ideas and more besides, especially a new idea (as far as I know) which confers a big benefit on sustained bipedalism in its earliest stages. Given that our earliest ance…

Or it could possibly be that plasma electron density is responsible for most of the observed redshift which would match the obsrvation that 99% of the universe is plasma. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0030402608000089

I calculated the mass of photon. If I make hypothesis that there is a mass, then E_tot = E_kinetic + E_rotational. I chose wavelength and it's energy (122 nm & 10.16 eV). I approximated that radius of photon is roughly 0.8 fm. The result was 3.6e-35 kg. Current estimates say that upper limit for photon's mass is roughly 1-e54 kg. Problem with current measurements is that they are based on current knowledge of gravitation and EM. Therefore those limits are not valid. Actually if I reduce kinetic energy (and use only "rest mass") from total energy my result agrees with E=mc^2 nicely (within appr accuracy). More details can be found from my signature. To be more…

Hi I have an idea\ question about what could cause gravitation and i need someone to tell me that its not a working idea The first thing i did was to try to simulate the way matter bends space by spreading a sheet so its straight and there is nothing under it (weights on the sides) and then placing a ball in the middle. The sheet is the space, the ball is the matter and becouse im doing this with gravitation present the ball pulls the sheet down, looks like when matter bends space. So how can i make the ball bend the sheet without gravitation? i could use its polar opposite. antimatter ball? a space filled with antimatter next to a space fill…

This is a paragraph from my latest manuscript of my new hypothesis. My hypothesis is dealing with the DNA language and the core of determining the interpretation of DNA. It goes out to explain how DNA is to be read in order to understand the language. This manuscript will go out to explain the hypothesis and how it is to be handled. I am open to debate, so I would love to have a healthy discussion about it. If you have any questions about the hypothesis, just let me now.Here are a few main points of the hypothesis: - DNA is to be read not from straight forward reading the code the way it is, but needs to go through an algorithmic process to be processed easier and be…

Magnetic fields are responsible for gravity contrary to Einstein. All charged particles with spin have a magnetic field around them. If you analyze two magnetic fields closely at the same distance apart at all possible orientations to each other you will find a net attraction between the two, this is what is responsible for gravity not mass bending of space. An experiment to confirm this you take a horizontal beam of electrons and accelerate it to relativistic velocities in a straight line and when it leaves the accelerator you measure its deflection angle due to gravity. Since the spin magnetic field around the accelerated electron does not increase, the gr…

No one says a cause of the Gravity directly. This is one opinion.

Hello, I am currently developing a new and unusual theory on a unified theory in physics. My theory outlines the basic material that comprises all matter and light and also offers explanations for phenomena such as charge, force, gravity, etc. For those accustomed to conventional physical theory, my perspective may be difficult to accept. But if you are interested in reading what I have developed, I have attached a copy of my book to this post. Yutao Jiang

After learning a little about the subject of dimensions and their perception, I felt that the views I had witnessed were not entirely correct. Could any of this be plausible? Which parts of this can be disproven? If there would be any way of proving any of this how would I go about doing it? This is what i have come up with using my limited knowledge of the subject. Basic Laws of dimensional existence 1: There are two types of dimensions: spatial (which is static) and temporal (which is dynamic) 2: every object must contain at least one single point in Order to exist 3: no object may exist in 2 or more non consecutive dimensions at any moment 4…

Reality is digital, on the the large scale it appears analog, but on the atomic scale it loses it's resolution and becomes digital. This supported on the atomic scale by the fact that only certain orbital sizes are allowed for an electron around a nucleus. Velocity, space, time,distance and mass are all digital, this is backed by the fact that all these have to be measured in certain amounts and represented by a number. But certain amounts represented by numbers also have amounts between these certain amounts which are represented by irrational numbers. Irrational numbers are undefined and therefore these irrational amounts cannot exist which leads to a digi…

Their seems to be two possible arguments for potential energy mass equivalency. 1. An electric field has no mass and therefore has no mass energy equivalency, but when the potential field does work it creates new mass. 2. An electric field has mass, and therefore it transfers it's it's mass to the particle it's doing work to. A way to test for this would be to take an electron positron pair and separate them by a distance in an electrically neutral environment and let them accelerate towards each other and testing for a mass change with a magnetic field. This brings up a further question, would a change in electric field strength without the m…

Particles may contain properties like multiple forces, vibrations, or wobbles that could cause them to cluster with particles with similar properties. These clustered particles might together create a force and/or a push/pull on other particles. Perhaps, these particles, are connected by a medium that transfers vibrations/information and helps them stay together. I've become aware that theoritical scientist are working theories of quantum gravity and I thought how these ideas may offer effects to consider. I'm sure you'll let me know if this is posted in the correct place and if my idea is absurd, nothing new, or just hogwash. I'm thick skinned, so fire away.

Quanta theory ... but it's in Frensh .. What do you think about that : http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/712276arnaudantoineandrieu1.jpg http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/712276arnaudantoineandrieu2.jpg or PDF file : Thank Arnaud_Antoine_ANDRIEU_Quanta.pdf

The other day I watched a television show on animal planet. It was about this guy that is a self proclaimed cat expert. I ended up watching the whole show for some reason and I am glad I did now. I watched the credit roll by at the end. The first thing I thought was "How many people does it take to make a show about cats?" I would imagine you need a person to use the camera, a person to find the mean cats, the cat expert guy, some person to pay them for doing it, and some person to watch it. If you click this link you will see that it took 30 people to make this show(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1933073/fullcredits). My theory is that at least 43% of these people are not e…

The whole moon landings were faked. I've got the book Moonfire by Norman Mailer, there's no blast crater or disturbance of moon dust under the lander no a speck of dust on the lander at all. This is a coffee table sized book with large glossy pictures of the entire Apollo 11 landing. A lot of the shadows were completely impossible with parallel sunlight cast down on the moon surface. Here's some web sites that do a thorough investigation http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm http://batesmotel.8m.com/

Unified Field Theory. Unification of gravity field with the electromagnetic field. By: Mavriche Adrian

After discussing a lot in another thread, I wanted to post my POV about the metric expansion of space. Here below a sketch of what I think is happening: in short, when the metric of space is doubled, time doesn't change. Here we are: Leonardo's vitruvian man on the right is double in scale relative to the left one. If both are observers, they observe light travelling at constant velocity C, each one in their own metric. Both are observing the same thing, there is no absolute reference that says the left man is correct while the other is wrong. Both must be correct. So light is travelling at the same apparent velocity as observed locally by each one …

The experiment only seems to make sense if the electron is collected by the electron gun from the detector plate But in reality there is no electron just a path that has been made

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_thinkers_in_science#2001.E2.80.93today_.2821st_century.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists Why are there so many religious scientists/doctors? What makes these people immune to intellectual criticism from the scientific atheist community? Furthermore, if it's good enough for these brainiacs why are there so many anti-religious bigots in the world? Would you ever consider changing your stance in whatever your current spiritual belief system is now? Do you expect religion to ever disappear from the world? If so, when? Also, in your opinion, what is the correlation between religiosi…