PureGenius

I'm personally thinking ''reality check.''

Can you explain dark flow ? Galactic spiral arms ? Universal expansion ? Time dilation ? Variables of the speed of light , and their effect on biological systems ? Universal contraction ? I can and have explained all of these things in many posts also I have never once been thanked for taking the time to elaborate on all of the previously mentioned ideas. The fact is I have discovered many more things that are just as interesting. Black holes radiate the strongest electromagnetic field within our universe the spiral arms are the second most powerful electromagnetic field , there is a direct relationship between our universes central black hole and the rotational velocity of all black holes in our universe.

Ajb is intelligent and even pleasant at times, but he does obsess on me being wrong so it's difficult to tolerate .

I think it was around a month ago John that I presented my high velocity relativity ideas.

The moderators apparently no longer care about content. This kind of baseless, made up nonsense is all that these posts contain.

This is a completely baseless comment, from a guy who spends all of his time insulting other members . Acj it's ok if my knowledge of physics is greater than your own and my ideas are beyond your reach insulting me won't prove your point. It only proves your lack knowledge and your jealousy of my popularity.

Ajb did message a member and tell then to avoid my content . I guess your opinion is I'm delusional mig, although I was right about light becoming matter at below c. My iq is in excess of 120 , and I see your comments are defensive in nature so I won't take you seriously.

I realise we are not likely to get him to see sense, but he's funny.

"although it really lacks any reality my physics knowledge is way beyond many members of this forum"

 

I still want to see him explain how he "predicted" something from 1992

 

Over to you Pure G.

I predicted light would become matter at below c John, I know your response no you didn't etc this is getting redundant. Also I thought Canadians were nice , mig makes me wonder if that's just a misperception . I think not everyone has the vision to step beyond the norm and reach for the proverbial stars, I may be confusing and at times incorrect but all of my material is based on current scientific knowledge . Also there is mounting evidence I'm right about the black hole in the center of the universe, I'm thinking Nobel prize.

Does Ajb really need or want to discredit you?

At least I have received no such message from Ajb.

And, well, I feel he's really patient and even-tempered.

You have every right to your opinion, but Ajb did in fact do exactly what I said and he is desperately trying to discredit me this thread is proof enough of that.

I predicted something you couldn't I guess that's funny John. Ajb is so desperate to discredit me he messages other members privately and tells them not to read my content. I think this says allot about ajb so lol indeed .

Arguing I don't know enough to know what I predicted interesting spin Ajb, although it really lacks any reality my physics knowledge is way beyond many members of this forum, also I did predict light would become matter just admit I'm right it'll be ok why can't you be honest and admit my ideas are physics and your not sure what I'm talking about because I may know more than you. This open ended you don't know anything argument just makes you look je alous , it's not even an argument and it's definitely not intended to help . Thisis why I un friended you Ajb you are very, desperate to discredit me, even though I've never done this to your threads .

Well brad it's a matter of creating a plasma tunnel, this entails the creation of an electromagnetic vortex, in a stable field it has the potential for instant time transfer. This device will open a wormhole in the fourth dimension . It's really just a matter of having the right data brad , and applying it.

I agree that mass can be viewed as a kind of energy in the sense that we can have mass defects in bound systems and so on. In this respect they are equivalent, but this needs to be treated carefully.I am saying that you don't really know what such a statment means and that you in no way predicted the experimental results in the paper you quote.

I don't understand why your so sure I didn't when this whole thread proves beyond a doubt I did in fact predict the outcome of a study that concluded light becomes matter ie gravitationally bound photons when slowed by super cold atoms. This wasn't the intent of the study it was a side effect of the experiment and thus my prediction is even more amazing.

The units don't make sense for a start. It is just not physics, I really don't know how to explain that to you.

Do we agree all matter can be converted to energy using e=mc2 ? I'm just stating I knew light would become matter at below the speed of light, are you saying I didn't ?

Maybe I should be considered for a science award for stating what would happen to light if it was slowed down enough , the forming of matter the gaining of mass just as I predicted.

LOL, good luck I hope that works out for you.

Thanks Ajb I doubt anyone with the resources would take me seriously but it's worth a try I'm 95 percent sure I could do it which means I probably already have , and this is the point when people realize I'm the guy who changes the world, only time will tell.

Is the study not clear, were my multiple statements in advance of the study, stating light was matter at below the speed of light not enough. I'm not sure why you say these simple equations are nonsense . 1 ie mass accelerated to the speed of light equals zero mass. Light which has zero mass at the speed of light gains mass as it slows below the speed of light. That is exactly what I was trying to present, this study indicates I'm correct Ajb.

Traveling forward or backward through time is possible, the mechanics involved are complex, but not impossible. If anyone wants to know how to build a time machine I would be willing to explain it for say 2 million US dollars. Poorly drawn diagrams included free of charge or I will supervise the project for six months and accept 500 thousand dollars plus 1.5 upon completion, I also will not be using the device until it's been tested with qualified volunteers, of course we can run camera box tests first. I think the team should include one electrical engineer 2 metal fabricators one of which I will choose, also I wouldn't mind one math expert as long as they can work under direction. 5 square miles of open space one or two functioning Tesla coils, and or a 2.5 million volt generator. The climate has to be moderate to mild . I can explain why I can build this in one word Destiny, and deep contemplation on the space time construct . The fluid nature of time combined with, the theory of relativity, tells us time is a variable within nature not a constant. There will be no physical danger , from the electromagnetic vortex .

Within the scope of this conversation, I meant powerful when compared to say the gravitational force being exhibited by our Sun on the planet's within our solar system, as the electromagnetic spiral arms have enough gravitational potential to keep all the matter in our galaxy Within narrow bands . This potential is most likely a simple percentage of our central black holes gravitational pull ie number of spiral arms divided by the gravitational force of our central black hole, so six spiral arms would each have one sixth of the gravitation of the central black hole . This would fall under the definition of extremely powerful, I'm sorry I failed to put that into some reference frame earlier in thread.

I'm referring to what you wrote earlier, which is wrong. The energy in 1 atom of Hydrogen is equal to the energy in 1 atom of hydrogen, and not 34.5 billion Hydrogen atoms worth of energy. What you wrote doesn't make sense.

I'm sorry I meant 1 atom converted using e=mc2 to its energy potential, I'm not sure if I was clear enough in my explanation

1 atom c2= 34.5 billion energy. 34.5 billion e= Mc2=1 or are you saying, I'm using the conversion formula incorrectly ?

Try reading what you just wrote and see if it still makes sense. Now let's just narrow down the type of atom you are talking about to just a plain old, ordinary isotope of Hydrogen. Do you really think the energy contained in the mass of this Hydrogen atom equates to 34.5 billion Hydrogen atoms worth of energy?

 

The energy conversion formula was created by einstien not me , according to my interpretation yes einstien was right , this ratio of energy to mass is accurate.

There really isn't an infinite amount of energy in an atom. There are [math]10^{80}[/math] atoms in the observable universe and none of it equates or sums to infinity.

 

And light is not mass at subluminal speeds, All you can do is alter the medium in which light moves, but the light particles always moves at the speed of light.

One atom equates to 34.5 billion atoms worth of energy, also the study clearly indicates the velocity of the photons was below the speed of light , although the exact velocity escaped my attention. The velocity of photons is variable dependent on the medium in which they travel . In a vacuum the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second, in other mediums this velocity is not maintained.

Mass at c2 equals energy content as in a definition of the energy within an object at the velocity of light squared. An atom is mass e=mc2 this conversion represents a infinite ie an almost infinite amount of energy, within each atom.

I have furthered this theory with the following.

 

I will say this I think I may have figured out a way to incorporate higher speeds into relativity .

 

I will state some new postulates.

 

No object can attain infinite velocity.

 

No object can attain infinite mass.

 

Light equals mass at below the speed of light

 

The Mass of any object is equal to zero at the speed of light

 

Mass equals electromagnetic field strength at the speed of light. M c = e=mc2. Xs5 = New e.m field

 

The calculation is this. M= e at c or m=0mass at c = e= Light equals mass at 0 velocity

 

Moving at 1c electromagnetic fields strengthen by 5 times

 

Mass is reduced by 100 percent at the speed of light

 

Time dilation is equal to electromagnetic field strength increase ie 5 times base time Time period at c Xs5= expanded timeframe

 

Exceeding the speed of light, converts mass to energy slowing down below c energy returns to mass so when objects slow below c one reverses all postulates. I am Shawn j. Thanks for reading

Thank you big nose it's understandable that others are frustrated with my inability to mathematically demonstrate my ideas. I do think that my ideas are important , and I'm very glad you took the time to go over all of that. I will try to get enough mathematics to back up my theory but as I'm looking at possible destitution. I can't imagine when I'll have time. I did look over the information you provided I'm just not able to use it without a map to correlate it with as I don't have the. Math to figure it out without a visual reference. I only started working on theoretical physics in the summer of 2012, before that I had many ideas about black holes etc I just never wrote them down. This progress has all been made in less than two years, I do think my theory is going to be proven right in my lifetime. I just hope some one gives me credit as I'm 35 years old and would love to work full time on scientific investigation.

I'm an amateur , and I've presented my ideas to the best of my ability, I will continue to try and find more evidence to support my ideas. Ireally do appreciate the feedback I just don't know enough mathematics to conclusively explain why my theory makes the most sense. The electromagnetic spiral arms of galaxy's are emitted by the central black hole. These arms are extremely powerful lines of electromagnetic and gravitational potential. I have almost unraveled the inner workings of black holes , once this is finished I believe my theory will be easier to explain.

Do you really have a clear prediction here? I mean a mathematical model that gives some mechanism for dynamical generation of mass and it looks like you need a dynamical mechanism for the disposal of mass.

Ajb I predicted light would become matter at below c. So you want 0m+ c =1m. 1m-c=0m. Matter at the speed of light attains zero mass as matter slows below the speed of light it gains mass and in effect becomes matter. The translation is from light ie energy em propagation, to matter ie the combining of photons to form matter or mass, within the definition of the study I've presented within this thread. I think my prediction is well within the scope of science as this study was recently undertaken, and my theoretical prediction was accurate.

This is the paper I was referencing.

 

I will say this I think I may have figured out a way to incorporate higher speeds into relativity .

 

I will state some new postulates.

 

No object can attain infinite velocity.

 

No object can attain infinite mass.

 

Light equals mass at below the speed of light

 

The Mass of any object is equal to zero at the speed of light

 

Mass equals electromagnetic field strength at the speed of light. M c = e=mc2. Xs5 = New e.m field

 

The calculation is this. M= e at c or m=0mass at c = e= Light equals mass at 0 velocity

 

Moving at 1c electromagnetic fields strengthen by 5 times

 

Mass is reduced by 100 percent at the speed of light

 

Time dilation is equal to electromagnetic field strength increase ie 5 times base time Time period at c Xs5= expanded timeframe

 

Exceeding the speed of light, converts mass to energy slowing down below c energy returns to mass so when objects slow below c one reverses all postulates. I am Shawn j. Thanks for reading

I think I was right about this one Ajb as far as light becoming matter,i did predict this was the case.

.

 

Probabily because the "rest" mass of a free photon is simply zero and that is what anyone would usually mean by rest mass. We know that there are such situations. For example the Meissner effect and the London penetration depth can be understood in the context of an abelian Higgs model. There are situations where we have dynamical generation of mass for gauge fields. I think you are strethching your claims to fit established physics. You would be better off looking closer at what we do know and know well.

I think the parameters of my definition exactly fit the outcome of the experiment, matter at c is energy, light at below c is matter. I'm not aware of any discrepancy between the clear prediction made within my high velocity relativity idea. Also Ajb I'm aware of were we are scientifically with photons, although I may not have as much knowledge as you I do understand the principles of light well enough to have made an accurate prediction.

There is a high probability that I'm not going to expand on my theories, beyond the scope of what I've already posted. Based on pictures of deep space and cmbr there is obvious evidence of some rotational velocity.

What is more difficult for me to ascertain is the reason for the stabilization of this electromagnetic field , why do galaxy's and thus our universe maintain electromagnetic stasis and are not in a constant state of constant and unstable motion, without the gravitational force provided by the spiral arms, that are inside and outside black holes our galaxy's matter would not be stable enough to support life, i.e. the formation of solar systems etc.