Bufofrog

9 minutes ago, NeptuneSeven said:

Have any of you reviewed the admittedly meagre meat, ie the algebra, in the post?  Roughly from Figure 10 to Figure 15?  I would very much appreciate any corrections, comments etc on that part.

First you should actually print on the pictures the figure number so it isn't so difficult to try to determine which figure you are talking about.

Secondly I didn't see any algebra in your post to comment on.

21 minutes ago, Prajna said:

No probs, I'll just build it and test it and if it behaves as I imagine then you guys will have some explaining to do.

As exchemist said it won't work so building it is a waste of time.  The goesouts can't be more than the goesins, that is just a fact of life.

1 hour ago, JohnDBarrow said:

Is having male and female in separate bodies a practical reproductive plan for humans, mammals, birds and etc? 

I think the answer is a resounding yes.  Mammals have been around for 200 million years and birds have been around for 150 million years.  Sounds like it's working out just fine.

3 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

It seems I have disturbed many 'scientists' here. My apologies. I'll quit

Oh thank god, you had all our scientific dogma was circling the drain...

11 minutes ago, DimaMazin said:

Then Jews were obliged to serch for consensus with Hittler.

I have no idea what that means and I'm pretty sure I don't I want you to clarify it for me..

10 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

My ridiculous mind tells me that there must be a center of expansion

This is where learning about the actual evidence and not relying on your 'hunches' is a good idea.

8 hours ago, Sora Tōgo said:

Prime Number Patterns in Cosmic Percentages

• This is just numerology.  In other words this is just seeing patterns where none actually exists.

I also suggest that you should discuss this issue with a medical professional.

7 hours ago, martillo said:

If I disprove Relativity that constraint would not apply anymore.

It seems like the whole disproving relativity thing is going to be a rather large obstacle.

1 hour ago, martillo said:

The model is progressing too. Applying some adjustments and developing it further now.
I need time for some calculations (quantification) now.
I consider all the comments and criticisms in the thread as contributing to the model so this is a collaborative model between all the participants.
If it works it could be called the SFNM model. Science Forums .Net Model.
We are going to make it work, I'm sure.

I guess it's fun to fantasize that you have come up with some new physics.  

10 minutes ago, Lucas Bet said:

Although I am posting this to "speculations", to respect forum guidelines, I am certain this will eventually be considered the new frontier in physics soon enough:

I bet you a dollar this will not be "considered the new frontier in physics".

Oh I see this is just an advertisement for your book.  No thanks.

4 hours ago, martillo said:

It would depend on the efficiency of the hydraulic turbines/motors attached to the wheels, I know.

Regardless of the efficiency of the turbine, you will have a lot of loss of efficiency by running an entire hydraulic system.  It is cheaper and more efficient to just use the engine power directly to turn the wheels. 

Looks like the thing would work in principle.  However it seems to me that it would be much less efficient than using the pistons to directly rotate a shaft.

3 hours ago, Guille Yacante said:

Please, print the post. And share.

No thank you.

3 hours ago, JosephStang said:

In fact, adding math is opposite from logical understanding. Math provides a quantized understanding, not a logical one

Really??  I don't think so.

1 hour ago, Maartenn100 said:

Is the observer in the spaceship correct in saying that the universe is contracting in one direction (lengthcontraction due to high speed near the speed of light)? Or are we right from Earth, claiming that the entire space in the entire universe is expanding as a whole?

They are both correct.

42 minutes ago, Guille Yacante said:

Pretty much all of us are "in on it".

I'm in on 'it'??

43 minutes ago, Guille Yacante said:

I am deploying a worldwide project.

Oh I see, you are just spamming your conspiracy site to get some hits... 

No thanks.

1 hour ago, tmdarkmatter said:

You should give me some points for my reputation, because at least I did not offend anybody this time.

Gee, that's a pretty low bar... but what the hell. +1.

1 hour ago, JosephStang said:

Regardless of the geometry's ability to model Quantum Physics, the geometry itself is existential beauty. It shows how information can be carried at faster than light speed without any of the geometry going faster than light. It deserves respect.

That is a huge claim.  Could you demonstrate how that works?  

If you can show how information can move faster than light then your method will get plenty of respect.

1 hour ago, JosephStang said:

Your response is word salad.

You owe me the price of a new irony meter, mine exploded after that.🤣

1 hour ago, JosephStang said:

Which part of the geometry doesn't make sense.

All of the parts after this:

5 hours ago, JosephStang said:

Imagine

3 hours ago, JosephStang said:

The ring is pure velocity.

I'm sorry but none of this post seems to make any sense.

I'm curious about this though, what is your definition of 'pure velocity'? 

Humans are so good at finding patterns that can find a pattern where none exists, which is why I think numerology like this seems so intriguing to some people.  It takes a bit of critical thinking to realize that there is really nothing there.

3 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

The world's physicists were not aware of the bomb test success.

Right.

4 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Physicists cannot build a bomb.

Physicist working with engineers and technicians can.

5 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

It takes a Manhattan Project.

If you mean it is a really big project to develop a nuclear program, I agree. 

7 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

The test could have been covered up and the US would get into an intelligence operation to prevent other nations from developing the bomb.

Nope, the 'cat was out of the bag' in 1940, all it would take was money and a desire to make a bomb.

9 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Besides no other nation had the money for their own Manhattan Project.

Well apparently even countries like Pakistan and North Korea did.

11 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Are you aware that the project was secret?

Yes, are you aware that most physicist were already aware a bomb could be made by 1940?

4 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

You believe that the existence of the bomb could not be covered up?

Of course not.  The worlds physicist all knew of uranium fission and the idea of a self sustaining nuclear reaction by 1940 at least.  The hardest part of making an atomic bomb is refining the uranium or plutonium.

1 hour ago, tmdarkmatter said:

In that case how do you explain the existence of solar eclipses if the diameter of the moon is 3,474.8 kilometres and the diameter of the sun 1,392,700 kilometres? And even worse, how do you explain that the solar eclipe is only visible on a line of just a few hundred kilometres of width on Earth considering the size of the moon?

Assuming you are serious, here is a link from NASA on how eclipses work.  https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/how-eclipses-work