rwjefferson
-
Posts
104 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by rwjefferson
-
-
~gotcha againdef: baryonic matterfamily hadronsyn: quarkydef: densestrong shells resist penetrationsyn: unable to admit simple truthdef: quantum matterleptons and all other mattersyn: not quarky like youdef: relatively equivalentsimilar but not quite the same as same assyn: relativitygravity forces mass acceleration and curvature does notbasic physics.101gravity and inertia states massattraction and repulsion states energye=mc2 states matterImagine the eye of a cyclone spun to a singular point up. How is this similar to a galaxy? How does this differ? Do you know how to calculate the differential?What's ridiculous is the image that your massive balls rolling around on a poorly sprung sheet of fabric is the same as gravity.ItSpeacer~apologies' carl-4
-
Is quantum matter relatively equivalent to baryonic matter?flash newsScientists observe at least one black hole horizon spinning near the speed of light and create sonic black holes.Is electromagnetic energy relatively equivalent to sonic energy?Is curvature the same as force?just askingron-1
-
one small stepYes. I am making a giant leap from relative vacuum energy around strongly interacting massive particles of baryonic matter toward relatively equivalent vacuum energy around weakly interacting massive particles of quantum matter and can so do forth and back as long you want and welcome to my wormhole and the science revolution.Yes. My best answer is still yes and I am so full of grate I am not already thrown out again like trash and welcome to my wormhole and the science revolution.gotcha again.007What happens as a free floating spacetime traveler places a sphere of matter upon a plane of elastic fabric fixed at all four corners?What happens as a black hole is opened underneath and through the inner shell?What happens as the momentum of inertial pressure differential exceeds the bonds of electromagnetic fabric and does light flow toward black holes?kind and well reasoned responses are always greatly appreciatedat least by merwtruth is not dependent on the dictates of mainstream authority-2
-
I ask questions that someday even those marked like you might recognize simple truth. What is nonsensical is that you will not admit that vacuum energy can both attract and repulse or that there is energy inherent in pressure difference and that you have the power to silence kind and well reasoned conversation.Is matter pushed or pulled toward lower pressure?How does air spiraling toward a tornado throw tractor trailer trailers away?peacerontoo much mainstream learning is a dangerous thing; it blinds weak minds to simple truth-1
-
close and try again
Correct answers are "Yes, current observations indicate vacuum energy is inherent space." and "Yes, pressure difference matters more."Is matter pushed or pulled from a far higher pressure toward vacuum energy?peaceronbonus question.007What might bang~entropy mean to you?Does vortex ring a bell?0 -
Does an underlying background vacuum energy exist in space?Is vacuum pressure a push or a pull?ronsimple questions deserve simple answers in kind0
-
Does space exhibit vacuum pressure?
Does vacuum pressure push or pull?peaceron0 -
speak for your self.101You over-complicate self-evident truth with alpha-numeric ba-bel. You'll never know how gravity works if you continue to refuse even try recognize quantum pressure differential and quantum vacuum pressure.What is the point of hubris and hostility and ignorance and power? What is the point of a standard model of physics that fails to predict gravity and evolution and topspin lift? What is the point of propagating dogma in the Name of science? What is the point of another innocent mind blinded by dogma?quantum gravity.007Force is inertial pressure differential. Attraction is reaction in verse vacuum pressure. Earth's atomsphere is filled with interactive massive baryonic particles and space is filled with weakly interactive massive quantum particles. Matter accelerates toward lower pressure and matter is e=mc2.Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. Observations indicate Hoover and Higg's and weak nuclear and Van der Waal's and gravity are consistent with state of attraction.Kindly prove beyond a reasonable doubt that gravity and Van der Waal's and weak nuclear and Higg's are not consistent with vacuum pressure or fore ever hold your peace .ItSpeacer~vortex is the tango between newton and bernoulli0
-
welcome to the science revolution.101def: fieldarea subject to forcesyn: same as aboveAround each and every working vacuum cleaner nozzle is an area or field where attraction holds sway.q - What happens as ping pong balls and marbles and ball bearings and other forms of matter are spun past the working end of a vacuum cleaner?a - Attraction signifies and defines vacuum pressure.I already know how states of force like entropy and vacuum pressure and Higg's and weak nuclear and Van der Wall's and gravity and lower pressure differential all share and demonstrate the property of attraction.other than time and distanceI just want to know why you seem to think there is a significant difference between states of attraction like Higg's and gravity.ron-1
-
technically.101Fields and couplings and curvatures are reactions to force and I am asking what you know of the force that unifies all states and properties and reactions.r~fieldRoll a ping pong ball and marble and ball bearing through the inertial pressure differential field near the working nozzle of the most convenient vacuum cleaner.Can you predict the path of matter through an inertial pressure differential field?What property signifies and defines vacuum pressure?just askinron0
-
The list goes on and on. Yet no one else in this forum seems to have a clue how a mathematical model based on geometry will never hold always true.ItSpeacer~1
-
What is the force that attracts matter to Higgs Bosons?
Place a powerful vacuum inside a porous model of earth. What path is followed as a model moon is spun toward this low pressure earth?
What is the difference between gravity and van der waals and weak nuclear and charisma and vacuum pressure?
ron
0 -
I agree.
Standard Models are rather ugly. The current Standard Model fits annoying well with observations; just like the old Standard Model of Epicycles. The hint that they are based on fallacy is that neither accurately predicts gravity or dark matter. I recognize one force that unifies all and everything. How many forces does the Standard Model currently recognize? Is Charisma is the force of the Higg's Boson? Really?
One seeking truth expects to find a better theory, but the hints provided by nature are hidden and cloaked by immoderate alphanumeric dogma. Have you or the brains at Cornell ever tried to calculate the drag of weakly interactive massive particles? My estimate predicts a 1kg mass at the surface of earth will be accelerated at 9.78 m/s^2 and weigh 2.20462 lbs no matter density.
How do your calculations differ?
ron
ignorance and power is not the same as intelligence
0 -
Is the Standard Model consistent with current observation?
If not, how does the Standard Model fail?
ron
0 -
kind and well reasoned elves and leptons are all ways welcome
Do you seek truth or dogma? The Standard Model fails because it is based on fallacy:
relatively equivalent is the same as same as and spacetime curvature is the same as gravity and gravitons are massless and black holes are dense and those are other threads and welcome to my wormhole.101
elementary physics.101
force is inertial pressure differential
curvature is no more than equal~opposite reaction to inertial pressure differential
bang.entropy.et al
def: graviton
each and every singular quantum particle that carries force as gravity
syn: dark matter
to the unenlightened
Gravity is carried by weakly interactive massive quantum particles. Massive means subject to gravity and inertia.
a noble science fair experiment~challenge
Bore the working ends of your most powerful free floating vacuum cleaners through your most powerful electromagnets of the same pole.
At distance, attraction is greater than repulsion and vacuum cleaner matter accelerates toward matter. As distance decreases, the energy of repulsion increases by a magnitude greater than the energy of attraction. At a specific distance, the powers of attraction and repulsion tango around equilibrium until rest and entropy prevails.
in the spirit of peace
ron
Have you heard the tail of wimpy spacetime monkeys that gravitate toward massive spacetime bananas even as they flee energetic spacetime bananas?
-2 -
ditto
0 -
memory is the second thing to go
It is certainly not kind or well reasoned or appropriate. It is mean.
Now kindly tell why you still believe the mathematical miscalculation that curvature is force. Show your proof.
ron
0 -
Lack of kindness and reason is never an appropriate response. How might an innocent child best explain to an elf on the shelf that curvature is nothing more than reaction to force?
ItS
peace
grandfather clause
0 -
Force is mass acceleration and curvature is equal and opposite reaction to inertial pressure differential.
Mathematical calculations based on curvature are alphanumeric images of force.
Images are easily misinterpreted.
Is "That might be the most meaningless nonsense I've ever read in a single post." a kind and well reasoned response?
peace
ron
(:I see through the empress` new cloak:)
0 -
truth is not a hijack
Force is inertial pressure differential. Curvature is not.
peace
ron
0 -
That might be the most meaningless nonsense I've ever read in a single post.
def: hush
There is never need to brag about willful ignorance. I can no more make trolls understand basic physics than I can make a creationist understand evolution.
Relative equivalence is not quite the same as is. Force is inertial differential. Curvature is not force.
Please cite the first word that escapes your limited comprehension of self evident and stop insulting your self.
ItS
peace
r~
0 -
We know that light does bend around a mass under the General Theory of Relativity, but why does light also bend under Newton's Law? and how is it calculated?
just because.101
Force is mass acceleration and curvature is equal and opposite reaction to inertial pressure differential.
Mathematical calculations based on curvature are alphanumeric images of force.
Images are easily misinterpreted; especially by zealots.
Light (energy) bends toward lower quantum pressure the same way sound (energy) bends towards lower baryonic pressure.
How do you calculate what happens as sound encounters the event horizon of a supersonic cyclone?
Can you imagine the eye of a baryonic vortex condensed to a singular quantum point up?
peace
ron
-2 -
science.evolution.102
def: classical physics
modern mainstream physics once upon a dream time long ago
syn: memory is the second thing to go
It's the mass(or energy) which causes the distortion in the fabric of space and time.... the distortion is directly proportional to amount of mass(or energy).
current wiki
Gravitation is one of the four fundamental interactions of nature, along with electromagnetism and the nuclear strong force and weak force. Modern physics describes the phenomenon using the general theory of relativity by Einstein, in which it is a consequence of the curvature of spacetime governing the motion of inertial objects. The simpler Newton's law of universal gravitation provides an accurate approximation for most physical situations. The true cause of gravitation is yet unknown to science and different hypotheses accounting for its origin have remained unproven.
self evident observation
Inertial pressure differential is the fundamental force of nature.
Gravitation (attraction) and inertia (resistance to attraction) are the fundamental interactions of nature.
Gravitation, weak, nuclear, and electromagnetic are the fundamental states of force.
B~E (condensate), earth (solid), water (liquid), wind (gas), fire (plasma), aether (quantum matter) are elemental states of matter.
at least by me
Kind and well reasoned responses are always greatly appreciated.
ItS
peace
ron
0 -
there is no bar to already forgiven
at least by me
0
Is quantum matter relatively equivalent to baryonic matter?
in Speculations
Posted
clarification