Jump to content
Scott alan miles

An attempt at a unifying theory in 3 dimensions

Recommended Posts

I take Einstein’s equation e=mc2 and make it m=ec+ to c-    Basically the c is coalescence and that happens at the speed of light or slower. The particles become a wave at c+. 
if we take a normal helium atom

-1 for electron

0 neutron

and +1 for proton

and then convert it to a magnetic field strength calculation for attraction or gravity  

-25 electron

-+50 neutron

+ 100 proton

 

the neutron is both attracted and repealed to the proton and nuclear force takes place on a small and large universe.  
        The neutralizing force of the neutron removes magnetic attraction of the proton making the proton start out at 49-1 field strength and the electron -24 - -1 but after -1 it becomes +1. This sets a moment of singularity for the electron that now rolls around the magnetic field and spin is created as the particles are attracted on the dark side (farthest away part of the electron) and spins toward the possitive proton. This makes a perpetual motion and spin.  I can explain almost all in-unified forces to explainable. I last posted all 23 pages but I’m dyslexic so it was not acceptable. I hope this brief summation is more acceptable and my apologies if not. I’ve attached a diagram of a more complex atom at work. I hope this acceptable and apologize in advance if not. 
Scott A Miles, not a doctor. 

6537EAB4-A48C-46C1-9BD8-A6C5E55E79DC.jpeg

Edited by Scott alan miles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
!

Moderator Note

Moved to Speculations

 
2 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

if we take a normal helium atom

-1 for electron

0 neutron

and +1 for proton

and then convert it to a magnetic calculation like

-25 electron

-+50 neutron

+ 100 proton

Where do these numbers (-25, +50, +100) come from? Please show the calculations. 

Why isn't it -1, 0, +1?

3 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

the neutron is both attracted and repealed to the proton and nuclear force takes place on a small and large universe

The [strong] nuclear force has a very limited range. It doesn't really extend outside the nucleus to a significant extent.

4 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

The neutralizing force of the neutron

What is this neutralising force? What evidence do you have for it?

5 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

This sets a moment of singularity for the electron

What is a "moment of singularity"?

6 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

I last posted all 23 pages but I’m dyslexic so it was not acceptable.

It is not acceptable because is hard to read an impossible to quote from. It has NOTHING to do with your dyslexia (there are other dyslexic members, and they manage to obey the rules).

If you can write it on a piece of paper, you can type it here.

 

Most important question: what would prove your idea wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Einstein had the same problems when he first declared e=mc2 but he did not have the information at hand from CERN. You will have to break out of thinking that ALL scientific evidence is empirical.  The numbers are guess, science would have to analyze all parts of all particles for true strength weights of their natural magnetic state in a magnetic weight table. I don’t say this is law, but it’s 1 page of the full theory. It will take time for me to fully add it all so I started small as I didn’t post correctly the first few times. But your answers are all in the post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

I think Einstein had the same problems when he first declared e=mc2 but he did not have the information at hand from CERN.

He derived that from well-understood physics. 

19 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

You will have to break out of thinking that ALL scientific evidence is empirical.

Who said anything about experiments?

19 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

The numbers are guess, science would have to analyze all parts of all particles for true strength weights of their natural magnetic state in a magnetic weight table.

You claims to have a theory (of everything). But you can't use it to calculate anything, so it is just a guess?

20 minutes ago, Scott alan miles said:

But your answers are all in the post. 

You have't answered any of my questions. Why is that?

3 hours ago, Scott alan miles said:

I’m dyslexic so it was not acceptable

What about the visually impaired, who can't see you photos? Why are you excluding them? Why not just type your notes here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Scott alan miles said:

I take Einstein’s equation e=mc2 and make it m=ec+ to c- .

I don't get that at all.  What does c+ to c- mean?  What mathematical operation allows you to place c squared on the other side of the equal sign and change it to "c+ to c-", whatever that is.

4 hours ago, Scott alan miles said:

Basically the c is coalescence and that happens at the speed of light or slower.

The speed of light is coalescence that happens at the speed of light of slower?  How does that make any sense?  The speed of light can happen at less than the speed of light???

 

4 hours ago, Scott alan miles said:

The particles become a wave at c+. 

What do you mean particles become waves?  What kids of particles?  What is c+?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it's a good thing you didn't waste your time typing out all 23 pages of this garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.