Speculations

Spin and dipole-dipole interactions may not be responsible for gravity, but they may not be directly relevant to magnetism either. Why do our solar system's solid bodies with relevant gravity have magnetic fields (omitting Venus)? Aren't magnetism and magnetic susceptibility inherent properties of matter, which has the mass? They are related by potential energy because mass has energy relevant to its inherent properties. [The potential for magnetism is related to energy which is related to mass which is related to gravity. ] why does mass attract mass? Do two marbles in space fall into orbit because of their mass? Why is some matter magnetic and other forms not so…

Well, on another forum dubblesoix had posted his Gravity model and I started to use Super-gravity equations on it, what is wrong with this, it turned into something strange which I am starting to call a "Wormhole metric" upon E transformation, this has to be wrong I still think what is your opinion on this, the equations that compose it are not wrong but this just seems odd. Dubblesoix's toy model taken way too far, I think. And Before Hand thanks, I know this is a long post to read, just to tell me how wrong the three of us are I blame myself and Polymath for not just dropping it at dubblesoix's solution.

Super Nerd, This is my first time on this site. I'm probably commenting in the wrong spot, but you sound like you might be able to reality-test a thought that I just had to a question I ask myself 30 years ago. But first, some quick prefaces: A space traveler departing Earth and then nearing the speed of light will have a slower clock than us remaining on Earth. When the traveler gets back home, they will in effect have shot themselves forward in time. Or, that space traveler could travel at the speed of a Space Shuttle and approach a Black Hole. The gravity will be so strong it will produce the same time-altering effects. Now, the question I asked 3…

Photon species total effective degeneracy number: [math]\boxed{N_{\gamma} = 2}[/math] Photon radiation energy radiant emmittance Bose-Einstein distribution integration via substitution: [math]j^{*} = \sigma_{\gamma} T_{\gamma}^4 = \int_{0}^{2 \pi} \int_{0}^{\frac{\pi}{2}} \cos \phi \sin \phi \; d \phi \; d \theta \; \frac{N_{\gamma} E_{\gamma}^4}{c^2 (2 \pi \hbar)^3} \int_{0}^\infty \frac{E_t (\omega)^3}{e^{\frac{E_t (\omega)}{E_{\gamma} (T_{\gamma})}} - 1} d \omega = \frac{\pi N_{\gamma} (k_B T_{\gamma})^4}{c^2 (2 \pi \hbar)^3} \left(\frac{\pi^4}{15}\right) = \frac{N_{\gamma} \pi^2 (k_B T_{\gamma})^4}{120 c^2 \hbar^3}[/math] Radiant emmittance Stefan-Boltzmann …

My thoughts on the electromagnetic drive have always been that no known laws of physics were ever broken, rather that some apparent as yet unknown aspect could be at work. The following article and hypothetical seems to support those thoughts........ https://www.sciencealert.com/physicists-have-a-weird-new-idea-about-how-the-impossible-em-drive-could-produce-thrust This Overlooked Theory Could Be The Missing Piece That Explains How The EM Drive Works What if it doesn't break the laws of physics? FIONA MACDONALD 7 OCT 2017 Ever since the EM drive first made headlines, science lovers have puzzled over how the propulsion system seems to produce…

It would take ages to dig up a hundred different ideas on what light actually is. So help if you can! Lets keep it to a very short paragraph of 2-4 sentences, assuming everyone knows everything about particle physics. Two word introductions! (I believe, Light is, We think, etc) I will start with my more recent conjecture. I believe light may be a string of sub-quark matter, created by high-energy quantum interactions and amplified by converging and colliding wavelengths. If a confinement medium is in place, they may become any number of known and unknown sub-particles, and interact henceforth. The center of the wavelength would be something similar to the h…

I might be beating a dead horse here, but hear me out. For fun! I see a huge dependence on the value of time in all scientific experiments and calculations (please ignore all non-physics applications). As is, I see no fault with that, as a system of measurement, it is highly relative, but invaluable nonetheless. Still, I believe that many educated individuals truly believe that it is truly a force unto itself. I see it as the measurement of the movement of matter, like a yardstick or ruler in the presence of the three dimensions. It has no energy, is not the catalyst for reaction, and literally doesn't exist but in the minds of men and most mice. Mind you, I am …

Start at the beginning I say, what is science?

I present my own, alternative concept of time. In my theory, time is not a linear and determined dimension (like X, Y, Z), but is defined by the frequency rate of all physical processes in the environment of an observer. I based this model on planetary cycles of celestial bodies in a common 3D space, but it can be easily applied to all possible scenarios, which include the flow of time and apparent duration (velocity) of random processes in different frames and for different observers. What differs my theory and our current concept of time, is the relativity of a perspective (as different points of view), which depends on the distance between observers (frames) and t…

AustinL Good Work. Thank You for sharing your hypothesis. All Scientific findings first start with an Idea. They do not become theories without first testing and rigorously attempting to prove the ideas wrong. I do not know where to start with your idea but will look at your thought experiment specifically focusing on a push verse pull concept of gravity to silence the critics on the thread. Great Minds should be encouraged... never suppressed. Lets first accept that the theory of relativity (and relative gravity) contains one of the most profound ideas in all of human scientific discovery... The affect of velocity and gravity on Time(Time Dilation).…

In this hypothetical thought experiment what is being stated will be stated as being true for the sake of the hypothesis to be stated clearly. We exist in a 4 dimensional space time matrix. In this space time we have an effect called gravity which is a push rather that a pull on the objects in our universe. The reason for this is the polarity of every particle of our universe. To explain the link between polarity and gravity we must consider higher dimensions. Fortunately, the link can be explained using only one additional set of 4 dimensions. With a single additional space time matrix the force of gravity can be explained in both matrices. The polarity of…

Electric fields, magnetic fields ... exist in two opposing states: · charge (+) and charge (-) · north pole and south pole Gravitational field has something wrong because it only has gravity without repulsive forces. Let us now assume that the "gravitational constant G" is not invariant by distance. It can take negative values, positive and zero. · When ( G < 0 ), it will have gravity · When ( G > 0 ), there will be thrust · When ( G = 0 ), there is no force At the point where G = 0 is called the the equilibrium position. There are two types of equilibrium position: sustainable ( R2) and …

The ebb and flow - the result of the Earth's rotation and whirlpools. The discovery published in the Russian-German scientific journal "Eastern European Scientific Journal" №3. 2015. Positive review was obtained from the Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences.. The waters of lakes, seas and oceans of the Northern Hemisphere rotate counter-clockwise, and the waters of the Southern Hemisphere, rotate clockwise, forming giant vortices .. It is known, what everything that rotates , including swirls have the property of retaining the gyroscope axis upright in space regardless of the Earth's rotation.. If you look at the Earth from the Sun, whirlpools spinning…

I post this topic in the section 'speculations', because it is speculative. The relativity of a straight path through space Mass curves space and time. That's what the GR of Einstein tells us and that what's been proven with the comparison of atomic clocks and with the relativistic corrections of GPS. The arguments for my hypothesis: If an object orbits a massive object in space, it follows a straight line in curved space (curved by mass/gravity). If an astronaut in a spaceship orbits Earth (due to gravity), he/she will not experience centripetal forces. The reason is: he/she follows a straight path through (curved) space. That's also the reason w…

If this is not physics news, then I do not know what is. I have just had an article published in an SCIE journal titled: " The Experiential Basis of Wave-Particle Duality, Quantum Uncertainty, the Creation and Collapse of the Wave Function, and Quantum Nonlocality.” https://www.neuroquantology.com/index.php/journal/article/view/1254 Long story short; the article solves the nearly one-hundred year old mystery regarding why quantum reality appears and behaves as it does. In so doing it demonstrates that physical reality is a reality that is being created in the brain and is not what is actually “out there,” where it appears to be. Now this should have be…

Hello everyone, It's been several months since I opened the discussion Scharnhorst effect + EM field greater than the Schwinger limit = c value increase on the NASA forum 'New Physics for Space Technology'. The focus of the discussion are the 2 articles: (A) Does the speed of light depend upon the vacuum ? (non-peer-reviewed) (B) The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light (a highly cropped version of the previous that has passed peer-review) The content of the articles concerns the constants ε0, μ0 and c0 which according to the authors depend on the physical characteristics of the virtual pairs. Over time I am convinced that the …

If E=m*(c^2) & light's_speed c=f*L where L is the wavelength Lambda then surely the energy must be related to the frequency_squared (f^2) instead, otherwise the units do NOT fit. Please explain.

These are my 'laws of observation': If you observe 'expanding space' somewhere far from you (receiding galaxies obeying Hubble's Law), it has something to do with your local clock and ruler here on Earth. It has something to do with the difference between your clock and the hypothetical clocks in intergalactic space over there. If you observe curved space far away from you, due to gravity, the amount of observed curvature somewhere else has something to do with your local idea of a straight line. Determined by your local clock in your own curved spacetime environement. Wherever you are in curved spacetime, your local idea of a straight…

Is there any tiny bit of this that can be real ? ----> http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-488531 ----> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_triangle_(UFO) ----> https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/679732/EXCLUSIVE-UFO-SENSATION-Could-amazing-footage-be-first-video-PROOF-of-mysterious-TR-3B ----> http://www.military.com/video/aircraft/military-aircraft/tr-3b-aurora-anti-gravity-spacecrafts/2860314511001 ----> https://archive.org/stream/TopSecretTr-3bAstraDocuments/Tr-3bSightingsPictures-ThisUfoSightingWasCaughtInParisFranceVideo_djvu.txt

There is only one chance to understand time: We have to think with more than our four dimensions. This is only possible, when we compare our 4-dimensional world with a situation, that has fewer dimensions. Also Albert Einstein did it, when he thought about riding on a light beam. Now I go a step further and think about a photon's life and how it is experiencing our space-time? The isomorphisms between a 3-dimensional and a 4-dimensional world can be very helpful for our understanding and imagination. With that help we can make assumptions about a 5-dimensional world. So my theory about the nature of time is as follows: Time is proceeding with the speed of light, the m…

GT= p * dx / KE GT is general time=observer time+traveler time p is momentum KE is kinetic energy

A question occurred to me that I think is quite interesting but I keep being told to go away when I ask it. Perhaps the physics community has become jaded by internet use. Anyway... (a) Given that all space-time exists simultaneously – Like a river I'm flowing along in ( the present). The upstream is still there (the past), and the downstream is already there (the future). And, (b) Assuming that Stephen Hawking's 'Imaginary Time' theory is possible and true – A dimension of time running at a right angle to space-time, providing a time dimension for the 'Big Bang' to have taken place in. Wouldn't that mean that all of space-time occurred in the…

I have a question regarding cancer. It is broadly accepted that this is a genetical mutation inside a cell that often has an external/environmental cause, such as oncogenes in food sources, or UV light, but it is thought that it could also actually happen 'spontaneously'. This sounds mechanical, instead of a living organism with a ‘purpose’ or an ‘intention’ of any kind. But if you look at the process itself, it doesn’t seem solely and purely mechanical at all, but rather intentional. Let me describe the process of 'spontaneous' cancer development: - The human body is well prepared to prevent the development of cancer. Cancer will only develop if protein coding …

Hi all We had another thread open that got to the 'need' for science, technology, engineering, and medicine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma The three links above are 'pro' advancement in tone. Three things against advancement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropocene https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_bird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics Discuss...

Is it possible for one or even two islands of stablity with very long lasting isotopes. Many say yes. Could they ever be created artificially? if so, how? could they exist naturally? It is a fascinating topic and I would very much appreciate some expert opinions.