Jump to content

Speculations

Pseudoscientific or speculatory threads belong here.

Speculations Forum Rules

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:

  1. 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 input, you need to provide a case that science can measure.
  2. Be civil. As wrong as someone might be, there is no reason to insult them, and there's no reason to get angry if someone points out the flaws in your theory, either.
  3. Keep it in the Speculations forum. Don't try to use your pet theory to answer questions in the mainstream science forums, and don't hijack other threads to advertise your new theory.

The movement of a thread into (or out of) Speculations is ultimately at the discretion of moderators, and will be determined on a case by case basis.

  1. The proposed method, explaining the 11-year solar cycle, is based on an unusual theory, according to which some fundamental physical constants, including the speed of light in vacuum c , which we consider universal for the entire Universe, have different values in the spheres of influence of other stars, planets or space objects. Analyzing this theory, I assumed that for any two space objects that have gravitational attraction and revolve around their power centers in accordance with Kepler's laws, their speeds of light c1 and c2 , and gravitational parameters µ1 and µ2 are interconnected by the following relationship: (1) According to this relationship, t…

  2. One of the results of SR is time dilation, TD. Check for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation There and in all other books I read about SR there is a relationship between the time t' from S' and t from S. S and S' are two inertial reference systems that move relative to each other at constant speed v. Here I indicate this relationship: t' = tγ where γ = 1/(1-v2/c2)1/2 is called the Lorentz factor, LF. My question to you: Is it true that the concept of time dilation is depicted with this formula? Yes or No.

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 41 replies
    • 5.2k views
    • 2 followers
  3. Started by K.M.Northrup,

    I am working on an essay regarding what we can say about what form alien life might take. My thesis is there are things we can plausibly say because life—and if such life achieves sentience, any technology they might develop—will be constrained by the same 94 naturally-occurring chemical elements we have at our disposal. Some scientists seem convinced that the first evidence of intelligent life elsewhere we come across will be their artificially intelligent, robotic avatars. Barring science-fictional biological entities that secrete *unobtanium* from their pores to fabricate spaceships, it seems to me they will have to somehow extract pure metals from the ores contai…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 1 reply
    • 1.5k views
    • 1 follower
  4. I dunno if it is the artificial sugar or natural sugar that does the trick. But if you don't believe me, just start taking or if you already did stop taking sugar for a week and you will know what I am talking about. Other food suggestions are welcomed, like lemon? I am not sure if lemon does the trick as mentioned in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy".

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 10 replies
    • 1.2k views
    • 1 follower
  5. Started by Butch,

    I have been working on modeling my "proto-particle" some of you are familiar with it... as it turns out my proto-particle is actually a graviton, so I have been doing some reading on that. It is encouraging to see the same problems with math that I have encountered (recently I believe I found a basis for math describing the graviton, more on that later). Can someone explain to me why a graviton must be a spin 2 entity?

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 5 replies
    • 1.9k views
    • 1 follower
  6. When something doesn't have time, gravity, and 3D ..what makes you think spacetime is involved? I'm talking about QM objects when they are unobserved and are considered waves (the unobservable). Have you considered QM might not exist within the fabric of spacetime until observation? The Wave function wouldn't result in probabilities if it was possible to include spacetime. QM waves do not need anything from spacetime to continue existing. Entanglement is obviously not a property of Spacetime. Spooky action at a distance can happen because QM doesn't have time like we experience and the particles are likely connected via a QM wave that could stretch to infinity i…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 1 reply
    • 847 views
    • 1 follower
  7. Started by t686,

    You can see on the website, https://quantumfrontiers.com/, scrolling down the page, it mentions tiling the plane aperiodically. If you can tile it correctly, you can make a turing machine out of it. What I was noticing that when they make aerogel, the least dense commercial prouct, they put the gel into an autoclave, and the pressure combines a liquid and gas into one. I was previously thinking that you need two things to make something interesting, when really it's just about the one thing. It's a little bit complicated, but I made an X-shaped cellular automata, you can hit play on the first post in this thread: http://www.conwaylife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 0 replies
    • 1.1k views
  8. Do you have a paypal account? Ever think of renting out your brain? I would need you to read my grunts, pretend that you think it's possible, and write an equation smart enough to pacify another physicist just as angry as you to new ideas. Here's the hypothesis: The QM/Spacetime Divide Spacetime = classical/relativity QM = waves Our singularity (big bang) initiated in an existing Quantum Field of virtual particles. If everything in the beginning was waves, does it help explain the insane expansion rate right after the singularity? Spacetime didn't exist until after inflation? ..maybe when the singularly became large enough to be observed? Was the ver…

  9. I was wondering if you could selectively combine the normal jpeg compression with fractal compression. To make a metallic glass, I thought it was the fractal part of glass that made it unique, but actually it's combining a solid and a liquid into one. I believe this has something to do with the sudden change in temperature in water at a certain depth. I believe that when combining two things, that it creates a unique area of "very low disorder", because when you bounce a metallic glass ball, it continues to bounce, so that little is lost to random vibration, that is, when bouncing, the low disorder aspect of it comes through to maintain an almost perfect bounce bac…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 2 replies
    • 1.2k views
    • 1 follower
  10. Started by t686,

    I noticed that tap water is smooth to drink, but I don't like the chlorine aspect of it, although chlorine makes it smooth to drink. I believe there is an atomic substitute that would be good to replace chlorine once the chlorine treats the bacteria, it can evaporate and the new molecule substitues. You can see how chlorine salt affects soil, it makes the soil larger balls, and decreases the surface area, so it's an antifractal, chlorine is https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038080616300099. If gas pollution is an irritant, then burning woods or charcoal paradoxically can improve the air quality if it's not too much, because it's a coarse particle in t…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 5 replies
    • 2k views
  11. Started by Moontanman,

    Could an object around the size of Ceres or even the size of the Moon achieve a stable orbit around the Earth along with our own moon? Would some sort of orbital resonance make this possible?

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 2 replies
    • 741 views
    • 1 follower
  12. Quantum objects are not large enough to inhabit spacetime. When a particle is in a state that can only be described as math ..it is not part of spacetime. If something was tiny and didn't inhabit spacetime ..I'd say it would probably do quantum weird things. The math says the physical object remains 3D when in superposition, so the only avenue left to detach is spacetime. In math, it is waves, in reality, it has lost a dimension. Something that has lost a dimension is crazy to us. What is the Uncertainty Principle telling us? Is it saying the power of observation/measurement of a quantum object is not enough to make it a genuine 3D + 1 space-time object? If something…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 30 replies
    • 3.7k views
    • 3 followers
  13. Started by QuantumT,

    Is the universe still accelerating? Sometimes I read articles that argue against it, so I'm not totally sure anymore! But if it is, I have a conjecture that might explain it. It is based on quantum fluctuation. (1) I might not be the first to think of it, and (2) it might be mathematical impossible, but here goes: Quantum fluctuation is (as far as I know) considered a come-and-go phenomena. Hello, goodbye. 2 - 2 = 0. But what if it leaves a vacuum? A tiny tiny vacuum? If so, there must be gazillions of tiny vacuums made every second. Speeding up the cosmos? (Sorry if this is wrongly placed! Feel free to move it to Speculation if needed.)

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 10 replies
    • 1.3k views
    • 2 followers
  14. ‘Mental Momentum’ is a collection of ideas about mind and brain. I treat thinking as a perpetual flow of thoughts to study where they come from and where they will go to. There'll be short essays reflecting on how our brain tackles the commonalities and oddities of everyday life. Hope you’ll find them interesting. LINKS DELETED Look forward to hearing your thoughts.

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 49 replies
    • 5.3k views
    • 2 followers
  15. Now I am not a creationist, but I have a bit of different view, this is because believe I have a framework for a theory of everything. Now I could be wrong, fair enough, but if I am right, there is going to be a paradigm shift in physics and a dramatic reinterpretaion of the cosmos. Now we once believed the sun revolved around the earth, it is easy to think that, it feels like there earth is not moving and the sun looks like it travels across the sky. You could forgive early folk for making this mistake. It looks like the sun is going round the earth so they modelled it that way, they assumed it was that way. The thing is, someone came along and said this is not corr…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 44 replies
    • 4.8k views
    • 5 followers
  16. The two sides of the coin run perfectly fine on their own. My point is that when we zoom into a large object, those atoms bonded together are not going to display quantum weirdness. If we separated a single atom from that object, I claim that atom has become 2D, but is 3D while we are observing it. So to unify, we can write an equation that says Relativity is 3D and QM is 2D or less. Quantum field theory and Quantum Electrodynamics obviously haven't unified the two yet because we get guys like this still saying they are not unified, from a couple days ago (see the 3:10 mark) https://youtu.be/dW7J49UTns8?t=190

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 50 replies
    • 3.8k views
    • 3 followers
  17. "Blessed is he who believes". Do not substitute physics for mathematics. Any matter has some limiting resource, which we call "energy" (or "mass"). Therefore, if matter creates a gravitational field, then it cannot be infinite. I am sure that you make a mistake by comparing gravity with electromagnetic waves (or light), since we can screen electromagnetic waves, but gravity cannot. For example, according to the theory that I develop, the gravitational fields of the big planets of the Solar system reach the Sun. Therefore, the orbits of these planets are close to a circle. But the gravitational fields of small objects of the Solar system (asteroids, plutoids, and also …

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 37 replies
    • 4.9k views
    • 3 followers
  18. Nothing is unstable. If you try to quantize nothing, you will find that anything less than the Planck Units of spacetime would still be considered nothing, since it has no detectable influence on the universe. A point-like particle at rest could exist inside of the Planck Units of spacetime and still be considered nothing, because it would have no mass and energy. There would be nothing to compare it's frame of reference to, so it could assume that it is traveling at any constant speed due to relativistic theory. Therefore, it could then have mass and energy in another reference frame. It could then interact with itself in time-like loops due to being in a state of s…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 127 replies
    • 8.4k views
    • 3 followers
  19. Started by Bez,

    E=MC squared F=Friction E + F = electromagnatism Electromagnetism X Motion X Form = Everything evidence: Electromagnetic field surrounding this planet actually drives (produces) the molten core center

  20. this cannot be called a theory (its not even a very educated guess). if you know of pilot wave theory, you might know that people have found a flaw. but the same person that came up with pilot wave theory came up with an alternative theory that is similar but (as far as anyone can tell) predicts the same outcome as standard quantum mechanics (except entanglement) here is a link to an essay that explains all of this. so I decided to expand it and found a bit of irony. imagine that the probability wave is controlled by an actual physical wave that travels through a medium that we cannot detect (to bring old terms back I will call it the Aether) this Aether wo…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 19 replies
    • 2.3k views
    • 2 followers
  21. Hello people... I am a new addition to this forum, which may become plainly obvious from the predicted mistakes I will make during my first few posts . I should first state that I do not posses any scientific qualifications. But I have been a passionate armature astronomer for the past 13 years, and do retain a "little" scientific knowledge from attending upon several OU modules in past years. I am here because several years ago, I formulated a correlation hypothesis related to the detection of pre-seismic locations, which in many cases led to determination being made up to 30 days prior to seismic occurrence. I have been testing my hypothesis on several US predict…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 38 replies
    • 4.3k views
    • 2 followers
  22. The question appeared while we were discussing emegence and realized(again) how deeply it is embedded in Nature. Could Energy be a result of a process?(like Space expansion) I think Energy can pop to existence but can not disappear. Would such a function violate the Energy conservation law or generally the Laws of Nature?

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 4 replies
    • 908 views
    • 1 follower
  23. You've probably read my other post below. And here focuses on the idea of optogenetics. To being with, I will post a video on the introduction of optogenetics. Now this baby only activates or deactivates neurons. The real work for our focus lies in modify the dendrites and the synapses, therefore we could change the rhodopsin structure to match our needs. The video below shows the structure of the rhodopsin channel. So by modifying the G receptor, we will introduce 4 pathways. One pathway increases the number of dendrites, one pathway decreases the number of dendrites, one pathway uses glutamate to modify activation of the synapse, and one pa…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 4 replies
    • 827 views
  24. I have been using a relativity program i made in 1997 and have some ideas, I believe massless particles travel along with the actual speed of the expansion of the universe C, , , , the apparent rate of the expanding universe is 44.7387 mile per second per mega parsec, which works out at an actual rate of 99.999999 C here is a screen shot of my program, , , Note the actual speed of .99999997, or 186243 MPS and the apparent speed at the bottom of 64.30355 MPS My twist on Einsteins formula shows 1) how massless particles like photons can travel at light speed 2) That the apparent expansion of the universe is speeding up because the actual speed is slowing d…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 1 reply
    • 593 views
  25. Supermassive Black Holes are caused by and necessary for the rapid expansion of the Universe and are proof positive the Universe is expanding faster (and has been from origin) than the, "speed-of-light!" This traveling faster than the speed of light is supposed to be impossible but what is seen and perceived is only relative to this motion system. Our perceptual senses are located in our bodies and our bodies are on this planet going approximately 67,000 mph around the sun and the sun is cruising around the center of the galaxy at about 140 miles per second. The galaxy is hauling across the Universe. We are going places very fast yet we don't notice that motion. All…

    • 0

      Reputation Points

    • 20 replies
    • 1.7k views
    • 2 followers

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.