Peter Dunn Posted August 18, 2003 Author Share Posted August 18, 2003 Hi Sayonara I would be delighted if somebody could inject a bit of math into my theory. Also computer viruses attack computers - a related question - what firewall have you installed? Mine lets it through. All the best Peter Dunn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 I am behind a hardware firewall and a gateway so I don't need a software firewall. If you have an up-to-date antivirus then it doesn't matter, because the worm will be killed. If you have an up-to-date windows installation, then it won't matter, as the worm can't scan or infect you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 Originally posted by Peter Dunn I'm a Brit could you run that by me again using mps instead of kps. Divide by 1.609. Originally posted by Peter Dunn Also there is no complete theory of gravity (the existence of the graviton is still to unproven) so why a constant for what is still conjecture. The G constant has been in since newton and is simply a constant of proportionality. Originally posted by Peter Dunn Also could you set out your argument in English as I do'nt speak math - I deal in concepts. The language of physics is mathematics. Without the mathematics, there is no physics. Originally posted by Peter Dunn How do you compute, to an exact value, the area of a circle? pi*r^2. Pi being defined as the ratio between the area of a circle and it's radius squared. Of course, there's no such thing as a perfect circle. Originally posted by Peter Dunn Pi is not the answer. Nope. Pi*r^2 is. Originally posted by Peter Dunn The universe is not reducible to an equation. You can't predict anything with accuracy or precision with words. Numbers are essential. Whilst you cannot reduce the universe to an equation, you can approximate it by them, and that is the point of physics. Originally posted by Peter Dunn Numbers are just another language ie agreed values. They do not invalidate other ways of seeing or understanding. Numbers are not just another language, they are THE language. Whatever you think, mathematics has superceded all other forms of communication in physics. How do you think we predicted antimatter? Upshots of equations that were made to predict other phenomenon. How do you think we predicted black holes? How do you think we predicted (etc etc etc) ps. Thread moved to pseudoscience, where it belongs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 Originally posted by Peter Dunn I'm a Brit could you run that by me again using mps instead of kps. I presume you meant miles per second btw, as I can't believe that someone would have difficulty changing from kilometers per second to meters per second. I also find it incredible that you don't know what a kilometer is. I'm english, and furthermore I believe the SI has been on the national curriculum for some decades. You also could have looked it up. 'Imperial conversion table' or similar on google would have taken you to the answer rather rapidly. Could you, pray tell, inform us of your age, and not just the day and month of your birth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Dunn Posted August 19, 2003 Author Share Posted August 19, 2003 Hi All I would just like to explain that my theory does not negate the invaluable contributions made to modern physics: such as the inverse square law and special and general relativity, by intellectual heavyweights such as Newton and Einstein etc. What I am trying to accomplish is to integrate all previous theories (theories that I understand in purely an interested layman’s terms) into one principle that explains the totality of existence in a single concept. My theory has a lot say about what I have termed oppositional forces but if you strip away, for a moment, the up-scaling force we are left with only the down-scaling force; it is this force that previous theories of gravitation are, in isolation, actually describing. Now we are all aware of the fact the present model has been seriously undermined by the discoveries that galaxies rotate faster at their rims than ought to be the case leading to the proposal that as much as 96% of matter is dark and not directly detectable (juxtapose this with the concept of critical density – i.e. there is just the right amount of matter in the Universe for it to exist in the first place) and that the expansion rate of the Universe is not slowing down as predicted - this has led to speculation that Einstein’s cosmological constant might, after all, be correct (when he knew, himself, that it wasn’t) or that there is a completely new force out there awaiting discovery. What we lay people, standing here watching from the side lines, are actually witnessing here is a desperate re-jigging of a theory that can no longer predict or account for the empirical evidence provided by the increasingly sophisticated and powerful observational tools being deployed. Who knows – if Einstein had lived long enough to have access to some of this evidence he might indeed conclude that there existed a counterbalancing up-scaling force. The jpeg that I have attached to this post is one that I chose not to include in my theory proper. This is because I could not justify the point I was trying to make with it - i.e. that Einstein’s famous equation could be illustrated in a purely physical manner within the framework of my theory. Perhaps there is, out there, someone who could. All the best Peter Dunn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Dunn Posted August 19, 2003 Author Share Posted August 19, 2003 Hi All I take it I'm under house arrest. As for kps to mps conversion Encarta (where I read about the speed of the solar wind etc) gives both - but as I've lost the disc I thought I'd tap into some of the enormous reservoir of grey matter out there and save myself a bit of bother. As for my age - well I'm a bit coy about that when talking to strange men over the ether. All the best Peter Dunn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted August 19, 2003 Share Posted August 19, 2003 House arrest? Your refering to the movement of the thread I guess, I can't be sure but I'm guessing it's that your theory dosen't really hold water yet. But there is obviously a whole bunch of effort going into it, why not pop across to Manchester Uni? They have this whole wacky idea about increasing knowlage that I've heard is all the rage. I can just see you getting really offended now, but I don't know if you have studied there or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted August 19, 2003 Share Posted August 19, 2003 Movement to pseudoscience doesn't necessarily mean the kiss of death Peter, in fact it's been known to stimulate more interesting discussions. If anything at least you know someone reviewed your work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PaulTee Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Reviewed your work? "Super Moderator's" a big joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 'Whatever'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 PaulTee said in post #34 :Reviewed your work? Super Moderator's a big joke. It's a job description, not him saying I'M THE BEST MOD EVER! That's me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Don't bother explaining to the troll who signed up with a vendetta in mind. He only has 5 points to go, so it's not worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 18, 2003 Share Posted September 18, 2003 Peter Dunn said in post #30 :What I am trying to accomplish is to integrate all previous theories (theories that I understand in purely an interested layman’s terms) into one principle that explains the totality of existence in a single concept. Good luck on that one. On a sidenote, the piccies are indeed pretteh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now