M theory, String theory, Theory of Everything

[Joshua MacDonald]

1 minute ago, Kartazion said:

The advantage of this forum is that we can do science. The toy, for example, can be made of plastic or metal. What about your ball?

Nothing more than a visual aid so I can get my point across and you can understand what I see in my head.

Just now, Joshua MacDonald said:

Nothing more than a visual aid so I can get my point across and you can understand what I see in my head.

The Tesla ball has very little to do with my idea but gives a great visual aid so people can understand what I mean say or picture.

2 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

Nothing more than a visual aid so I can get my point across and you can understand what I see in my head.

The Tesla ball has very little to do with my idea but gives a great visual aid so people can understand what I mean say or picture.

Have you seen the odderon particle? It looks very similar only without an outer ring or glass ball still with the lightning strings.

 

36 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

The advantage of this forum is that we can do science. The toy, for example, can be made of plastic or metal. What about your ball?

Or what is the difference between your ball, and a quantum particle?

No spin! I think! I'm not really talking about a ball.    The Tesla ball is nothing more than a visual aid for your mind to help you picture what I see.

[MigL]

Odderon particle is the odd charge parity counterpart of the pomeron class of particles; postulated in the 60s and 70s to explain the rising cross-section of proton/proton soft collisions at high energies.
I fail to see how you can have a 'visual' of that particle.

Can you also visualize a proton, an electron, or a Higgs boson ?

[joigus]

4 hours ago, MigL said:

Spain is the same time zone as Italy, so 4:00 am ?
Get some sleep, or you'll be grumpy in the morning.

Yeah, it must have been about that time. But the theory put me to sleep almost immediately. 

 

4 hours ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

However there are multiple types of Fields I believe space to be a field.

Fields are entities that vary in space/time. Is space an entity that varies in space?

The metric is a field, matter and radiation are fields, etc. They are because they sit in space time. But 'space-time sits in space-time' doesn't make a lot of sense.

I wanted to upvote MigL's last comment, but the voting function is not working for me.  

[studiot]

I'm guessing a "Tesla Ball" is one of these

[Joshua MacDonald]

6 hours ago, studiot said:

I'm guessing a "Tesla Ball" is one of these

Yes and it's basic form toy!

[studiot]

44 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

Yes and it's basic form toy!

That's a heap more helpful than any of your other posts. +1

Now perhaps you would like to describe your idea using the ball ?

[swansont]

16 hours ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

Laws of physics are broken all the time  

 

No, they are not.

 

[Phi for All]

16 hours ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I believe if I worked closely with somebody who knew what they were talking about I could define and get the mathematics for this idea I have

This is actually what you're doing now. Have you been able to take any of the comments on board, and adjust your hypothesis accordingly? A representation of what an odderon particle might look like reminds you of a toy you're familiar with, so it seems like a pattern to you, but it's not. 

[Joshua MacDonald]

21 hours ago, Phi for All said:

This is actually what you're doing now. Have you been able to take any of the comments on board, and adjust your hypothesis accordingly? A representation of what an odderon particle might look like reminds you of a toy you're familiar with, so it seems like a pattern to you, but it's not. 

I have been taking the things said here and using them in a positive way.   

I do believe we need to research fields in a different way unfortunately I don't have insight into how.

I also believe there has to be more negative matter out there so where is it?

I also believe that time travel is nothing more than energy echo travel.

I also believe that worm holes and black holes have the same construct.

I also believe that the big bang has yet to actually be explained.

I also believe that there is sources of power on our planet we have yet to figure out how to use.  (Quartz)

I have also been pondering about a connection between Astro and macro.

I am looking for a connection to all of these things under one set of physics law.

[Phi for All]

52 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I have been taking the things said here and using them in a positive way.   

Good.

52 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I do believe we need to research fields in a different way unfortunately I don't have insight into how.

Do  yourself  a huge favor then, and focus study on fields so you understand more about the research we already do. You're assuming the research necessary isn't being done. Remember that much of what you don't know relies on how much you understand. Focusing on learning as much as you can will help you avoid learning a little bit and guessing at the rest.

52 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I also believe that time travel is nothing more than energy echo travel.

Other than the 1:1 ratio of time travel we observe, it sounds like you can safely cross this off your list of concerns then. You have more important things to focus on.

52 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I also believe that worm holes and black holes have the same construct.

You should choose a better term than "belief" for things you can't possibly know the answer to. You aren't doing science if you're firmly convinced you're right about guesswork.

52 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I also believe that the big bang has yet to actually be explained.

I believe you say this because you have not understood the λCDM model it's based on. I think you're making the mistake of assuming something is wrong because it's not easily intuited. The universe has no obligation to make sense. This is hard stuff, and it requires focused study.

52 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I have also been pondering about a connection between Astro and macro.

These are not familiar terms. What do you mean by them?

52 minutes ago, Joshua MacDonald said:

I am looking for a connection to all of these things under one set of physics law.

You can't find it by dismissing accumulated mainstream physics knowledge. If you don't understand something, it's MUCH better to ask questions than to make stuff up based on a lack of understanding.

[Butch]

On 7/5/2021 at 9:18 PM, MigL said:

It's not too late to do some studying and learning.
Before you get too deep into the mess you've presented.

This forum is a wonderful place to learn, the lessons may be harsh at times, but almost always valuable.

[StringJunky]

19 hours ago, Butch said:

This forum is a wonderful place to learn, the lessons may be harsh at times, but almost always valuable.

The perception of harshness is easily avoided if one doesn't become emotionally invested and realise ones idea is being critiqued and not the person. In scientific discourse, emotion is generally left out in responses, and this austerity of feelings is not usual in the  social intercourse we have in our daily lives. Once one realizes this, it shouldn't be an issue anymore.

Edited July 11, 2021 by StringJunky

[beecee]

On 7/6/2021 at 10:59 AM, Joshua MacDonald said:

I believe if I worked closely with somebody who knew what they were talking about I could define and get the mathematics for this idea I have

As an now elderly retired  tradesman, with a similar interest in science, particularly cosmology, one of the first things I learnt, was that anyone that believes he or she has an alternative hypothetical, must first understand what mainstream theories entail, and why they are generally accepted. The theories pertaining to the evolution of the universe/space/time, the BB, BH's etc, came about because of the preponderence of observational data...they were not just the result of guess work.

 

On 7/8/2021 at 1:40 AM, Phi for All said:

You can't find it by dismissing accumulated mainstream physics knowledge. If you don't understand something, it's MUCH better to ask questions than to make stuff up based on a lack of understanding.

This is the same message that is being presented to you in the following...

On 7/8/2021 at 1:40 AM, Phi for All said:

You can't find it by dismissing accumulated mainstream physics knowledge. If you don't understand something, it's MUCH better to ask questions than to make stuff up based on a lack of understanding.

My advice? besides listening to the advice of the reputable outlets on this forum, try some reputable reading...Kip Thorne's "Black Holes and Time Warps" or "Gravity's Fatal Attraction", by Mitch Begalman and Martin Rees, or  "The First Three Minutes" by Stephen Weinburg. Don't give up though...Cosmology is the most awesomest of subjects!!

[Butch]

On 7/5/2021 at 3:41 PM, Joshua MacDonald said:

Any mathematicians willing to help me put my theory into an equation?

 

Have you met desmos? I have found it quite helpful for developing mathematical models, I can help you to learn to use it.