Pincho Paxton

Science makes the rules for science forums. You could have a forum where Pseudo-science threw scientists into a separate forum, and told them that they are not allowed to use maths on the site. It all started with Isaac newton who had the idea that maths should always be used as proof. But ironically.. his maths proof does not stand up to his description of attraction. Gravity is a bump. So maths isn't proof. He should have said.. mathematicians should work together with artists. Then he would have made a friend instead of an enemy, and he would have been a better man for it. And we would be way more advanced than we are today.

It's a particle transformation, to implode more or less to turn inside out. It's a barrier all right.Otherwise there would be visible anti-matter, and black holes all over the place. But luckily they are nicely tucked inside matter.

Ok start at the beginning. The first particle is the equivalent of zero, it is a shell +1 with a inner negative mass hole -1. The important thing here is that the hole has the properties of the Membrane but reversed.If you want mathematical proof like you keep asking for.. +1 + -1 = 0 They equal nothing, mathematically proven.

You squash mass to negative mass. The barrier I was talking about.

I think that time travel is made up.. sci-fi. We travel through a substance, and that substance can squash to become thicker, then thinner, and that can affect light, and clocks. It is the change from thicker to thinner that gives an illusion that something odd is happening. But water expands into ice, then ice shrinks, and some substances switch around a few times. Also hot, can be forced to cold with lasers. There are switches in quantum physics, but time is just a switch of pressure, and flow. Being as clocks require energy to work, and electrons will also switch around under pressure, all you are seeing is the result of pressure around materials that create electrons. And you will see similar things happen to photons. Evidently Neutrinos switch from one flavour to another, they must be right on the edge of change, so their barriers are easier to get through. The speed of sound is 343.2 metres per second, so it is the same for us if we were already travelling at 343.1 metres per second.

Well I see maths as story telling. If you look at a Neural Network computer program, the program that is supposed to simulate neurons in the brain it comes to life because you don't tell it to do anything specific. There is maths, but no mathematical forced objective. No physics to tell a person to walk, just let them move their legs around until they can walk. I use entropy to simulate a universe. I don't use G, or M as physics. Gravity comes from natural interactions that I have no control over. It is the fact that I don't use any strict physics that becomes the proof that this is real. No strict maths is my way of creating proof. But then finding results requires an extra evaluation which I haven't added.I mean hard coding and forcing G I'm sure is what most people would do with a Galaxy generator. But where did G come from? I don't hard code it, it actually takes a long time to evolve G from the physics of entropy, and you only have overlap, which is basically a Quantum bump. So gravity is a bump force, and so the big bang is out, because it would bump away forever. When you are strictly not using forced equations you realise that maths is a story, and people who create simulators with maths like G are putting rules in that story, and ending up with a big bang.I don't add rules, I don't even add movement to the beginning of time (I don't add actual time physics either, that evolves as well).. even movement has to evolve, as particles have no means to move by themselves. They have no limbs, they have no waves, there is nothing to make them move. I evolve everything, that is my proof.

I have to not use maths in my models, because I feel that mathematical algorithms are there to make something happen, and I'm trying to stop anything from happening by playing the part of entropy. All my computer simulator does is make everything equal zero. I am going to add a sphere which I can drag around interesting areas, and then use that sphere to evaluate, and translate this area back to maths, but I am trying so far to do everything the way the Universe does it.. chaotically.

It would behave that way as it resonates the other particles to bump one another, and so it has a tiny propagated area that would look a lot like a single electron at our scale. But in fact are mini results of the first result.

I should explain what I believe an electron is based on how I think it occurs. In my theory I have tried to evolve every particle from Aether (which I call Aether as recognition to Einstein, because although different, it still fits in where Einstein left it). I have particles which are mathematically +1 membrane around a -1 hole, and equal areas, equal X/Y/Z, equal speed, equal velocity, and spherical.. so totally entropy safe. I believe that zero is a relative number, and doesn't exist on its own. Entropy therefore doesn't recognise this Aether particle at all, it is therefore nothing. The +1 membrane is only entropy safe as a sphere. If two particles overlap, their area become entropy unstable. +1 overlapping +1 just a tiny bit covers a small area. To change this area back to a total of zero it must fold inwards to negative mass. To fold mass to negative mass is like a barrier, it's like a sound barrier it causes a bang. An electron is merely the pop to negative mass. So in effect it is a tiny explosion which resonates through other Aether particles. To ask for the mass of an electron is like asking for the mass of a sonic boom. Science has measured something, but I'm not sure what it measured. Maybe a few Aether particles, I'm not sure. I would say that the Electron has zero mass, because it is happening between +1, and -1 state change.

It seems that asking me a question when you don't know what mass is will never work, you are still looking for the Higgs Boson remember? So I have answered the question, you keep thinking about a different type of mass. It'll take a lot of evolution to get that large though. 1+1 = 2 is a combination of a lot of overlapping particles to cover something like the scale of + 1's to get 2.

Gravity is a flow force of Aether, so mass is a vector rotation of that flow force. The electron is bump propagated, it doesn't exist long enough to have a mass established. You are just seeing a strobe effect of movement.

Anti-matter, and matter don't annihilate each other in a perfectly spherical form. They are uniform, and Entropic free, and safe, and invisible. We however have evolved to see change, to sense change with instruments. So when we see matter, and anti-matter it is not entropy safe, it is causing a result. Entropy then removes this result, and we will see a flash, and the particles will vanish back to the safe state. They are still there, but we can't monitor them. If you were after the total chemistry of life, that requires a computer model. I haven't finished the computer model yet. This is a thread for explanations of how that computer model works. So I know how life comes about in the program. Randomly folding material into holes which are particles, and bonding them together, interlocking them using entropy. It's similar to random computer code just playing out forever.

hmm you start with a question way up the agenda which will appear to pop out of thin air without working up to it. I'll start with something from nothing as that is the earliest stage. If you check for yourself, you will find that 0 does not work on its own. Speed 0 is relative, take an apple away is energy redistribution. You will never get a case where zero exists as a singular thing. So the first state of zero is +1 + -1 =0... So that's how you get something from nothing. Nothing is an equal amount of matter, and anti-matter +1 and -1. Life... As Aether overlaps it is changed back to zero by entropy. Energy rises when particles overlap. This is because a sphere is mathematically equal in all directions, but overlapped particles are no longer spherical, they work together as a new shape. Entropy tries to fix this new shape back to mathematically stable. Entropy is a membrane like the Universal membrane. If you have a balloon full of water with another inflating balloon inside it the outer membrane reflects what is happening to the inner membrane. By squeezing the outer membrane you can push things apart in the inner membrane. That's sort of how entropy works. Under pressure the outer membrane reflects back that pressure. The Galaxy has a membrane, the sun blows out a membrane, a black hole blows out membrane. We are in a sort of bubble wrap, and that bubble wrap is all working together as a directional force to hold back energy. The first particles which bump to create energy were originally chaotic. Cause and effect happened for billions upon billions of years. Entropy ran out of control. It was always possible to squeeze the membranes using logic rather than chaos. Something had to evolve to control energy eventually. We can control those bumping particles, and we have taken over from entropy until we lose the pressure of our membranes. We have free will. The biological materials came about as particles started to overlap more particles and got trapped inside the outer particle. This creates flow holes, and spin, and bumping patterns of energy, and complex entropy. From the outer particle you get complex inner particle evolution. When science thought of holes to store biological life, it didn't notice that an atom is a basic hole. You can put a lot of information in an atom, and you can put even more complex information in a molecule. The bumping of the Aether will randomly produce billions of results. You will eventually get life. Mass is a vector force. An electron is not a particle it is a result inside another particle. The other particle however is invisible so you measure the outside of this other particle. It's mass is zero, it's vector force is relative to a new model of physics. It is 1. It's energy output is.. E = pi*(R+r-d)²*(d²+2dr-3r²+2dR+6rR-3R²)/(12d)

I will use tests that have already been made. I have already predicted about 20 things since 2004.They have been discovered.

Because I am going to switch science to the creative fiction whilst answering questions, and switch my theory to the leading theory. For example I will fix relativity, and turn relativity to fiction.

In reality +1 + -1 = 0 That's reality. Being as nobody seems to get the hang of this, here is time...

I have to evolve radiating waves, so at the first stage there are none. They evolve from multiple Aether flows, and I start before that happens. I have no movement at all at time zero. Two thing make nothing as I explained. You cannot use the identifier zero on its own. You have to create it physically with relativity. Nothing is related to something. There is an assertion that you use two comparisons to make nothing +1 + -1. The universe is made symmetrically from an equal amount of matter and anti-matter +1 + -1. zero is not symmetrical, it is singular, and has no opposite. You make it from equations of two things. This is why the Theory Of Everything is in Pseudo-science. Science has added extra things like a singular zero.I always say.. "If you can de-evolve something it is no good." Just de-evolve it. Remove the zero, get less parts, turn string theory to particle theory.. get less parts. Turn Relativity into Aether theory get the cause instead of the effect. Einstein would much rather of had the cause than the effect.

I started with a Universe made from nothing. I allowed no physics apart from expanding nothing until it overlapped... It's very simple 0 is always relative to two conditions. +1 + -1. If I had 1 apple, and took 1 apple away.. you are actually transferring energy. You have two conditions, but they are hidden in the question. If something has a speed of zero.. relative to something else. Two conditions. Zero is always made from two conditions. So +1 + -1 = nothing. It is actually nothing once you get your head around zero being relative. But the way I have made the Aether is very special as well. The inner area is identical to the outer area. they are both spherical. the both share the same X/Y/Z. they both move together at the same speed. They have nothing to distinguish them apart until they overlap. I have made +1 and -1 relative to each other. Once I had sorted out how to create physics from nothing. I allowed that to evolve.. Some of my replies are easier understood by animations. The membrane in the last picture are actually swapping positions in a figure 8 formation. That is also time.

Because science is not close enough to the truth for the Theory Of Everything to be accepted as truth. So it will always end up in pseudoscience, it will have nothing to do with Relativity, the Big Bang, or a singularity. It will break mathematics down to such a simple formula that it is hard to imagine how it works to evolve higher mathematics. But it quickly evolves into higher mathematics, and it quickly evolves into physics, and eventually life. The person who comes up with the idea will need an artistic, 3D visual imagination, and the brain area of an artist takes over the brain area of the mathematics. This person is me.. a sort of new Da Vinci, with no knowledge of mathematics, but an understanding of physics from nature. I am the one who is hard for mathematicians to understand, and maths is hard for me to understand. Yet the Theory Of Everything is a natural phenomenon, and I think that the 3D artist wins in the visualisation area.I started science from scratch, I was very strict on how I moved from one particle to the next. I had to evolve each stage just like biological evolution.

I have the real theory of everything. I am willing to answer questions like... What is time? Where did we come from? How did the Universe begin? What happens in certain Quantum Experiments? How do you get something from nothing? Is there a God? What is a Black Hole? How do Galaxies form? Is there a multiverse? What is Dark matter? What is Dark Flow? What is Gravity? What is magnetism? Why does the Universe expand? What happened before the Big Bang? What is a singularity? What was there before the singularity? I will give you the answers, but you might not understand them. but do I cheat? No. I base everything on a single formula +1 +-1 =0.Don't ask for maths.

I haven't added anything. It's very simple 0 is always relative to two conditions. +1 + -1. If I had 1 apple, and took 1 apple away.. you are actually transferring energy. You have two conditions, but they are hidden in the question. If something has a speed of zero.. relative to something else. Two conditions. Zero is always made from two conditions. So +1 + -1 = nothing. It is actually nothing once you get your head around zero being relative. But the way I have made the Aether is very special as well. The inner area is identical to the outer area. they are both spherical. the both share the same X/Y/Z. they both move together at the same speed. They have nothing to distinguish them apart until they overlap. I have made +1 and -1 relative to each other. Get your head around E then... E = pi*(R+r-d)²*(d²+2dr-3r²+2dR+6rR-3R²)/(12d) E = the overlap of two Aether particles. You might be able to improve that. My maths is terrible. So nothing is made from the membrane, and the hole. I didn't add them they are the fundamental properties of nothing. The observer isn't human. The outer membrane is the observer. It just resets by equalling pressure. The background noise is the equalling of pressure in the Universe.The equalling of pressure from a distant membrane is action at a distance.

Based on a geode.. oblique spheroid?

If there is an error, there are 15000 errors. Somebody will get a red face!

yes.

There are probably better ways to work out E to be honest. I think you could get it quite exact at the Quantum Level. You are within the mass physics so you do need to account for E without mass. It should be something like... E = pi*(R+r-d)²*(d²+2dr-3r²+2dR+6rR-3R²)/(12d) Now remember that I can't do maths, so that's probably terrible. But I can describe it. E is the overlap of two particle areas. So above is the best I can do with my useless maths. And it probably doesn't even make sense.Anyway you couldn't get the particle sizes so its useless at the moment.