MJ kihara

Fro Wikipedia; When relativistic effects are significant, the action of a point particle of mass m travelling a world line C parametrized by the proper time τ is The one second I was previously referring to in the thread is the proper time.

Hahahaha...🤩🤗🥰....atleast atleast the forum has improved a little bit, you can see who is on your thread ...the negative marks....someone around holding ''personal vendetta" has been following me putting mad and cow dung in my threads inform of red negative marks...to that person DON'T BE JEALOUS! Open A thread and see I won't put such a shit there...such behavior is being uncivilized.

Do use your luck of understanding to clarify the OP...I had realized earlier; Your ranting doesn't make you correct. This is tantamount to soapboxing...your are becoming a preacher...you are pretending to defend science and yet you don't know the importance of standardization of units...are you not aware of Caesium atomic clock? Don't use your lack of understanding to clarify the OP...I had realized earlier; I fail to understand the relevance of your questions to OP...esp since you are leaving important fundamental questions unanswered...stop asking questions that leads tap-dancing. The first part of question;Michelson-Morley type experiment if it's able to detect such a particle..the answer is overwhelming No...as I had stated earlier.. Though you have brought up this issue; The kind of energy am talking about is very very little unimaginably little..10^-64 j....if you start to think about renormalization and the Planck's constant things start to make sense.. otherwise this argument is out of OP, therefore,I won't extend further than that. Regarding; The second part of the OP question involving units of action is the one being discussed, I don't think it has been sufficiently addressed in regard to the first part.... Is it possible to calculate the action of a single free falling particle,given it's energy is known?

I did I say that?...it becomes an energy when your dealing with one second.... substitute one second then tell us what you get? Being ambiguous is not an answer...why are you referring to others..the question was specifically directed to you...'others' is not an answer. given a particle of energy What's it's mass?....what childish game is there? What other information do you require to convert that to mass?.....I told you to use speed of light. You are talking of elementary physics...I'm realizing you have a serious problem with internalizing physics concepts...may I ask you, your qualification on physics? not in bad faith. Is there any other way apart from...E=mc^2..you have energy and speed of light is a constant? What else do you require?

I get you...I have been ambushed am considering your question. Can you precisely clarify what you mean by this? I see you take what I have been doing with seriousness...from that energy calculate the mass of that particle and you will see...it's almost massless therefore,just use the speed of light...let me give you a clue, follow the other posts then beat the bush around yang-mill theory mass gap problem then see which rabbit comes out....I think 🤔 that million dollar I should get....I don't think the majority of people around get it.

You like bullshitting..not everyone like bullshitting neither do I...you need to update your understanding... don't paraphrase my statements then ask me nonsensical questions...can you have your own bullshitting post we see how it appears? Action implies a constant energy which is a difference between kinetic energy and potential energy for a given duration.. what about if potential energy is zero?...it's energy will be in kinetic energy. It seems you are hallucinating your own definition of action that we/am not aware of...your verbose is full of confusion. If you can't see them what are they?....mmmm... This are your numbers. I talked about ; Meaning it's times 10^-41 the CMB photon energy your talking about.

It's for each particular particle in the 'stream'....note the quotes. Definition of action from Wikipedia.."..equivalently, action is the difference between the particle's kinetic energy and its potential energy, times the duration for which it has that amount of energy." If the particle consistently have that particular energy(it's K.E-P.E) as it free fall for a particular time...that is it's action...mmm... Look at this replies... The initial answer should be just simple Yes/No followed by explanation.which one is which Yes or No?

Okay then. Can you answer this question Upto that point?

Can we answer this question...we be in agreement before the fight begins about the other issues...exchemist and others. Are you okay? Or you need a psychiatrist?

Can you answer the question in OP, otherwise I will feel entitled to ignore you nonsense littered queries....also again your "PS"...don't divert attention around by your obsession with language.

👍 I have never forced you to follow my threads...fear mongering filled cocoon won't be allowed to hold everyone hostage. .''..never..''. according to your understanding ... Atleast you should have answered a simple Yes/No to the OP before unleashing your vitriol.

I don't know how you are looking at it. Hz^-1 equate to a second...then it will be 1×10−64 J⋅s. I can see your agreeing with my take regarding to OP

We should stick to the thread appropriately to avoid highjacking.

There more correspondence and symmetry to be discovered it's not like we are at end of the world..once we accept to come out of fear mongering echoes filled cocoon, problems like yang-mills mass gap issues can be easily deciphered ....they is nothing wrong with intuition as long as you are not doing magic,provided intuition is followed by scientific explanations...once person intuition can be different to another person intuition..if person is able to use his intuition well and good.

Well understood. Neither did I mean that. Correspondence and symmetry arguments work best when the urge of cherry picking is contained. Back to the first axiom of equivalency.

My question is simple can michelson-morley type experiment be able to detect a particle with an energy of 1×10−64 J or a stream of such particles @ 1×10−64 J⋅Hz−1 Discuss....My intake is NO.

That's not the point of discussion; you don't get it.

In what context? That sentence was part of a statement. or rather, a reply to request for further clarification/explanations following a conversation.

When the map breaks down at some points cause the territory happened to be wrapped in a manner the map can't handle or the territory behaves in a manner the map can't explain...what we end up with is the best map of the territory,not the territory.

🙏 ...even me I wonder the purpose of all these...it always take me back to mainstream concept,however,for me, with high form of controversial interpretation like for instance all have been doing is interpreting eiπ +1=0 in unconventional way....the weird thing I never started there but I ended up there. The latest part,is when I talked about 'metric emerging ' it was becoming clearer to me,I may also be dealing with Holography...talking about confusion....this makes me EVEN MORE CONFUSED....it's knocking on the gates of believe...what to be believe or not...you can imagine projection giving rise to physical distance...I need a break... Holography is a mainstream science.

😂 AI agent.

I now get it...I been obsessed by my former thread...I saw it as an opening for me to lay out my thinking. Sorry for misunderstanding It was a form of irony... however I was satisfied by;

Once bitten twice shy. I can assure you, there is no need,esp after all those red flags. Modred used to steer things around when it comes to my ideas...I asked about understanding of saying ''metric emerging '' I never gotten any replies..am sure if he was present in the forum there could have been a rich discussion pertaining that issue. Some people are stuck with my former perception, I now understand GR mathematics better,therefore, scaring me with terms won't work,like Christoffel symbols....just use change in basis vector... connection...use the conditions of doing parallel transporting operation....curvature...use deviation from uniformity. in short am aware of these mathematics and how it relates to my ideas...am not filling my lack of knowing gaps...what am saying;am also working hard to study as more physics aspects as possible and you know what's amazing sometimes i get stuck, when I get referencing from the 'theory' I get by rather quickly... a good example entanglement and violation of bell inequalities....it's more about synchronization...source information and gaussian distribution... what's a wonderful thing 👍. Thanks for the offer, however,the condition around is clear...forum is not ready for that.

I don't get it. Open a thread on the theory?. "...It's own thread..." How?

It seems it gets worse whenever I try...you know MigL i can just start playing to the rhythm by posting what's already established what I need to do is just paraphrase it ..and I won't quarrel with anyone around...I think I have a not so bad understanding....my ranking by now could be shining in forum...which one is easier? A criticism is not issued to be liked...anyway, I analyse it carefully..I go through my threads to try figure out any useful thing I get from criticism. I get you. Have always asked my self why do I keep pushing...I think self censorship should be given as a condition,coz that is what getting in my mind...esp when someone start deleting and rewriting sentences. Jigsaw puzzle when added at rate beyond comprehension can lead to catastrophy....that I think it's my case..when I was new in the forum I talked about neutrinos but in a language that was more poetic, it's part of jigsaw.I talked about jumping out of black hole also more poetic and more of an irony...is it possible for me to convince these people( scientific community entrenched in established science)?...I engaged in talks about consciousness it lead me to highjacking label..e.t.c..e.t.c then finally in the parameter of TOE...I atleast outlined the condition necessary, waited to see anyone able to challenge the conditions,no one forthcoming...I went for it. All this are part of jigsaw...so huge with a lot of implications I expected what is happening... My problem according to me is dealing with a lot of jigsaws...I feel time doesn't wait for even kings....the feeling got worse when someone posted in these forum how a Chinese AI, Deepseek,answered about consciousness,after reading the conversations,it was like I was in an echo chamber. The issue with me is that the jigsaw already has been filled in my head and already the mind has settled with that,therefore,it's like a library has formed,where I just rush to look for answers....when they talk about rotation curve being flat and extending with no limit in sight..it gets me back to why I fundamentally stated further than speed of light... anyway before that fact,there are complicated arguments in between that I am now becoming a ware it's beyond the scope of this forum. The limit that am facing is why is it like this. Correct... sometimes I get my self agreeing with you unconditionally. ..Are this rules made of diamond pillars...why can't you consider the challenge of our time that new intelligence is emerging faster than we can handle...and make amendments so that this rules are made of rubber pillars...I.e they can bend or be reviewed after a while? I don't intent to preach around but when somebody start declaring my lack of physics knowledge is deep like mariana trench..those declaration are magnified soapboxing...anyway I get the need of protecting one of your own ... I appreciate the time spend contributing to the forum...I can't provide such man hour in the forum... My intention was not and has not been to change Planck's constant...it's a constant it will always remain to be a constant...My discovery relates to it's importance as a constant and how it relates to the Virtual particles (related to space time) I was talking about, and to the conventional virtual particles,off shell particles(related to quantum fluctuations)...within... ℏ →0....ℏ →1... Cycle. When the pot contains a lot of things then ...shut it up, I mean close it then put it on a lot of heat....its given, naturally, it while ramble if not explode. A lion is not a cow...I don't understand when lions started cowing. Is there anything like negotiated science? You let facts flow..if you tailor make your designed facts and fill the jigsaw it will be your jigsaw;your Universe,and of course it won't fit coz we know of this only universe..you let facts fit the natural universe where there already established facts ...am I going against GR ...my answer NO!...am going against QM my answer NO!...what am I doing ;Adding new perspective! is it comfortable NO! to established perspective...what should I do...you can propose a solution there. When was new in the forum I saw how people Ideas were shut without disdain...that scared me a lot,given the time have spend doing this(developing/comprehending the theory...I wonder the best term...coz it's not me developing it,I let it develop it's self...I should be forgiven for using me developing it... revealing it...waaa....I don't know how to say not to be contradictory)...all this discussions have been provocations to gauge the ground if it's mature to handle it, so far so good all signals are overwhelming negative...am afraid I might even be challenging a lot of entrenched believes. I have to wait...tho time doesn't wait,not even for kings. Am not ready to go jumping a cross the internet looking for even more crack pots.Am trapped.