MJ kihara

There is a need for a better model/ theory that clarify how and why there is the exchange of 'virtual photon' I think there might be two issues of 'virtual photons' and attraction of oppositely charged particles that are displayed in electromagnetism that makes the definition of virtual particles from Wikipedia,which is somehow valid,seem ambiguous.

Before we look at artificial neural network thinking...how do you know you are thinking,what makes someone conclude thinking is taking place?

I think it will depend on the frequency of gravitational wave and the magnitude of gravitational lensing...since gravitational waves are a result of propagation of spacetime curvature disturbances,it's expected that any warping of spacetime caused by mass inducing gravitational lensing will affect curvature of spacetime that inturn will affect the way disturbances are propagated, assuming gravitational waves propagate radially from mass source and light moves in a straight line propagated by a photon, gravitational lensing in this case will be of different kind...the detector for gravitational lensing will have to work following different principles for light and for gravitational waves.

Ha ha..😂 remember matrix(the movy) where everyone becomes agents of the system....do we need a red pill...

When I was new to this forum I used to ask myself if Swansont is a person or a group of persons?...anyway,I got stuck to the forum and those questions vanished. However,those kind of questions start coming back again when the forum becomes offline or when some of residential experts takes a longer period of time without posting.

👀 gravitational waves are spacetime curvature disturbances.

The issue of superluminal velocities should not be be treated in a manner that its against SR and GR since both are well tested theories...the only possible route is to come with away that they co-exits each(SR/GR and superluminal effects) within their own domain.

Yes of course and it doesn't need to be based on life on Earth biochemistry nor it's DNA/RNA system. That's why I like sticking on speculation section.

Maybe given enough time it's equilibrium... forward arrow of time (Universe expansion) favors matter formation while backward arrow of time( Universe contraction) favors antimatter formation... Probably leading to an aspect of global time and local time hence T asymmetry,which leads to T violation which is difficult to detect experimentary since we are local observers...the mere fact that matter dorminates presently maybe of itself enough to prove T violation.

Matter and antimatter made up of the same stuff...the stuff is influenced similarly by gravity probably,therefore,matter and anti matter interact in the same manner with gravity..after all, matter-anti matter annihilate to produce energy which is equivalent to mass c^2.

?????? We need EM concept reloaded to make wave-particles nature of a photon more clearer.

You have to establish common ground for arguments...i.e which number base are you using when comparing 2 and 3. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/bases.html&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjdoa63y4CBAxX71AIHHb2zBtIQFnoECAIQAg&usg=AOvVaw0kqHKB77MQRP7C2cFfIu1z

What about the scale factor? If the green polygon represent the universe,then they are two different universes..with different metrics...meaning you are making wrong volume comparison.

I think we need to re-axamine nature of time...the issue of time reversal should not be completely concluded on observations based on observable universe alone,it's known dark matter and dark energy make the largest part of the universe. Fundamental understanding of time,what it is and it's origin should be clarified before using time as the reason to claim 'not anything' can escape from a blackhole.

Quantum of light is photon...the object in the image is perceived as of when that object emitted, reflected e.t.c those photons..you see the sun as when those photons in sunlight were emitted roughly 8 minutes ago therefore,if you see a galaxy that is 7 billion years older it mean the photons your detecting were emitted or came from the galaxy 7 billion years ago...in those 7 billion years where you are present( the position in the universe) in our galaxy was much closer to that galaxy position.As the photons were moving from that galaxy to your present position the space was expanding and since the speed of light(photon) is constant,therefore,it had to cover a larger distance to reach your present position,to cover or move a certain distance it's work done,therefore,those photons became less energetic i.e red shifted..at the same time the space within the photons wavelength is expanding,therefore,also contributing to red shift phenomenon. If the universe was static those photon could have passed your position long time ago...meaning perceiving the past could have been much difficult,since we can't be able to chase after the light 'nothing moves faster than speed of light'.

As the geometry changes does the geometry of an atom change? Assuming we measured hydrogen geometry 7 billion years ago is it similar to today's hydrogen geometry? Are atoms part of space? What is that that doesn't have identity or size?...I thought when you are referring to size their is aspects of dimensions and when their is dimensions there is geometry.

Allow me...'alternative/other idea'...the claim has substance...consider this,neutrino to be it's own anti-particle therefore, antineutrino in this case will be right hand neutrino which turns to heavy right hand neutrino that immediately decays to an electron...How? What about not detecting neutrinoless double beta decay? This is possible because of quantum fluctuations (local anisotropies), therefore,as neutrino are formed, given they are their own anti-particle, they fail to annihilate themselves since local anisotropies cause them to oscillate away from initial mass...meaning that also antineutrino formed(which is also it's own anti particle i.e it is neutrino) will oscillate away from it's intial mass state....the rate of oscillation in this case will be different because local anisotropies (quantum fluctuations) it's profound in every direction. Assuming during leptogenesis epoch local anisotropies (quantum fluctuations) of large magnitudes were dominant.Therefore,we have a situation whereby majorana neutrino gain Dirac mass term through quantum fluctuations... However it become difficult today to detect neutrinoless double decay because the magnitude of local anisotropies (quantum fluctuations) has significantly reduced due to expansion of the universe.

That was exactly what I thought when i first came across that expression...it gave me the urge to understand more...up to now...I had to spend seven year to go through internet materials to the level of coming up with a theory that someone of nature...layman...when he reads it to spend much less time to internalize the issues of gravity....and I think it works,since when I start short conversations with my friends(you know if am a layman...then they are strawmen) here about it and afterwards they start asking interesting questions some at par with question I see across... reasonable than from crackpots. Curvature-from my perspective come with geometric explanations that can be difficult to relate to initially to nature, for beginners.for instance relating right triangles with spacetime intervals,yet when i look at the skies(space) i don't see triangles...and further complicating things when it come to time dilation and length contraction....the beginner heads(of course depending on how hard it is) start spinning alot...I was once in such situations esp with just introductory elementary physics background...and it feels embarrassing sometimes to know they are critical issues of nature and universe that someone can't comprehend and yet it seem obvious to others(physicist). What does it says about about spacetime curvature?

got it. What's your area of expertise? If your a doctor I would want to know about that from you...having attitudes and stereotyping is not thinking coherently....you haven't talked anything substantial about light escaping from blackhole or are you coming up with a new way to communicate concept of relativity that am not deciphering...I need help here pliz...😂. This was a follow up for-exchemist comment. In such a case does the Blackhole in question have a singularity?

What's your area of expertise? If your a doctor I would want to know about that from you...having attitudes and stereotyping is not thinking coherently....you haven't talked anything substantial about light escaping from blackhole or are you coming up with a new way to communicate concept of relativity that am not deciphering...I need help here pliz...😂. How is it possible to crawl out of a Blackhole...of course Newtonian BH?

Lots of misunderstanding,it like you are fighting invisible enemy. When you see that ' ...' '....' associate it with me..🤗 its the way my neurons are firing. This one "........." for slack thinking you should tell me/us how you came up with it. Otherwise brain do the thinking... communication and sentences don't think, saying communication and sentence think is bad science (BS).

At every phase in history there seems to be a well defined coherent way of thinking for the majority of people at that particular phase of history only later to be realised that there were hidden layers of ideas within those coherence. I tried to overthink about that phrase when I came across it to understand it, it lead me to alot of things... sometimes even ambiguous phrases can lead to deeper meaning when you try to search for clarity out of those phrases...to me 'even light' seemed to emphasize the indestructible nature of Blackhole to say the least,this gave me the urge to over think about it to go beyond the established facts.

What is thinking straight? It depend on the range of thinking,the narrower the range it is,the straighter it appears,that is what I think. I totally agree with this.... yeah atleast nothing gets out.

Talking past each other...we are not in speculation section I could have asked you further questions and provided my arguments to clarify...of which so far am not near...am not intending to hijack the thread... personally am not a fun of pets but I will learn to...so that I learn how to dress them to be presentable. What is the difference between escaping and emission..in your context?

When the science behind the reasons is not clear esp in a form that can also be clearly understood by a layman it creates a room for ambiguous terms and phrases to be used. If you have the science behind it you would really know why it doesn't escape...which on itself will really lead you to something wonderful,that is,what escape from the Blackhole..... simplicity and consistency in scientific explanations leads to reduction in ambiguities....sometime when you try to bring clarity you end up with a pet theory.