Swansont the moderator....If am not wrong history will judge you harshly..that is,if you care... knowledge should be shared however uncomfortable it .....am referring to your closure of the thread.. Parameters of a theory of everything....such theory can't be created over night or in a span of a year and some few months... and a few thread page posts.

Quantum mechanics started a century ago...my thread;what's a mere year and a few months?.

I while tell you something in Swahili...among the native language that I come from....I won't translate for you;

..."Akufukuzae akuambii toka!"..

Your issue is more than knowledge...and don't bring issues of freedom of speech here since knowledge is universal regardless of language.

To the negative red mark:

Whoever posted the negative mark should elaborate to us what hubris has got to do with science...when you have uncontrollably power of shutting people down for mere misunderstanding or forcing corrections before you finish what someone is doing that is hubris.

Don't try to turn reality upside down to favor your mental status quo.

My writing style has proven unique to me..we are at the Age of AI... uniformity doesn't distinguish you from the rest of others or from an AI agent.

@swansont is extremely good intentioned and generally a very pleasant person, I suggest re reading whatever they wrote to you if that is what’s making you so angry

Also, someone could use DeepL translate on what you just wrote, using Swahili is not a power move

I recommending calming down and potentially DMing them, masking threads like this will not improve your reputation, take it from me

3 hours ago, Sohan Lalwani said:

@swansont is extremely good intentioned and generally a very pleasant person, I suggest re reading whatever they wrote to you if that is what’s making you so angry

Also, someone could use DeepL translate on what you just wrote, using Swahili is not a power move

I recommending calming down and potentially DMing them, masking threads like this will not improve your reputation, take it from me

+1 for improvement in attitude.

Yes @Sohan Lalwani is right.
@swansont Is also very patient.
I have experience.
I made a mistake multiple times as i was new,but he clearly explained and didnt rush.

6 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

Swansont the moderator....If am not wrong history will judge you harshly..that is,if you care... knowledge should be shared however uncomfortable it .....am referring to your closure of the thread.. Parameters of a theory of everything....such theory can't be created over night or in a span of a year and some few months... and a few thread page posts.

Quantum mechanics started a century ago...my thread;what's a mere year and a few months?.

I while tell you something in Swahili...among the native language that I come from....I won't translate for you;

..."Akufukuzae akuambii toka!"..

Your issue is more than knowledge...and don't bring issues of freedom of speech here since knowledge is universal regardless of language.

To the negative red mark:

Whoever posted the negative mark should elaborate to us what hubris has got to do with science...when you have uncontrollably power of shutting people down for mere misunderstanding or forcing corrections before you finish what someone is doing that is hubris.

Don't try to turn reality upside down to favor your mental status quo.

My writing style has proven unique to me..we are at the Age of AI... uniformity doesn't distinguish you from the rest of others or from an AI agent.

Ah yes but first you have to share knowledge. Not ballocks. There is a distinction.

These science forums (I've been a member of several for some years now) attract posts by cranks and nutters, writing ballocks while thinking they are the next Einstein. Some of these can be quite instructive: I have learnt quite a lot from reading some of them - usually where the writer has got wrong some piece of science I did not previously know about. But in the end moderation has to close them, once it has become clear they are going nowhere, otherwise the forum becomes full of angry people arguing repetitively against nonsense. You've been given a very good run for your money, it seems to me.

There is a relevant aphorism attributed to Carl Sagan: "Sure, they laughed at Galileo. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown". Everyone putting forward a new theory should ask himself at intervals which of the two he is, just as a reality check. (I say "he" because women are generally not so egocentric as to fool themselves they are more brilliant than they actually are.🙂)

Can you elaborate on what actually happened.

20 minutes ago, Dhillon1724X said:

Can you elaborate on what actually happened.

His thread got closed, after running for 11 months and 8 pages.

2 minutes ago, exchemist said:

His thread got closed, after running for 11 months and 8 pages.

It may hurt,but when theres no point to continue conversation then it is supposed to close.

As far as i can see,It had no mathematics.
Without it we call topics,''Ideas'' or sometime even worst ''fantasies''.

10 minutes ago, Dhillon1724X said:

It may hurt,but when theres no point to continue conversation then it is supposed to close.

As far as i can see,It had no mathematics.
Without it we call topics,''Ideas'' or sometime even worst ''fantasies''.

Almost invariably what we get with these guys is a lot of fancy talk about "Christoffel symbols", "Riemann geometry" and all the other sexy buzzwords, but without an understanding of even 1st yr undergrad physics. (That hogwash about Planck's constant and virtual particles is one example.) What they miss, with their grandiose ideas about pushing forward the frontiers, is that the real innovators in science first master the current science, before embarking on new thinking. Trying to criticise or replace something you yourself don't properly understand is an idiot's approach, doomed to failure. The unpalatable fact is there are no short cuts. You have to learn the stuff and be good enough at the associated maths used in the modelling before you can contribute. (I'm not, by the way. I can just about hack the maths of quantum chemistry but that's my limit. In fact, one of the insights I got from quantum chemistry was to start thinking in maths rather than in pictures. That gave me a glimpse of how people at that level of physics have to operate.)

My great fear today is that, with the advent of chatbots that are programmed to tell the user how brilliant they are in order to keep the chat going, a new generation of cranks will be spawned, implacably convinced they are all geniuses and thus impervious to reality. Ballocks will reign supreme, if we are not careful.

Edited July 28Jul 28 by exchemist

3 minutes ago, exchemist said:

My great fear today is that, with the advent of chatbots that are programmed to tell the user how brilliant they are in order to keep the chat going, a new generation of cranks will be spawned, implacably convinced they are all geniuses and thus impervious to reality.

I agree with you.
The AI isnt good for the ones who know nothing.
They keep thinking they are right even if they are wrong.

5 minutes ago, exchemist said:

real innovators in science first master the current science

That can be done without formal degrees.

12 minutes ago, Dhillon1724X said:

I agree with you.
The AI isnt good for the ones who know nothing.
They keep thinking they are right even if they are wrong.

That can be done without formal degrees.

It can, in principle, but it's tough going. Generally you need someone to check your understanding is good at intervals and ways to test your knowledge. It also requires great commitment to do it all without the chance to discuss issues with other students. That's a big part of the learning process for most people: having to re-explain something to another person is the best way to check you understand it yourself. Also the excitement of discussion and argument helps a lot with motivating you to continue. And with mathematical science you need to work through a lot of problems to make sure you can manipulate the maths confidently without screwing it up. Hard to do that all on your own. In chemistry at uni those of us doing the quantum chemistry option had a maths tutor throughout the 3 years, in addition to tutors in the 3 branches of chemistry themselves.

2 minutes ago, exchemist said:

It can, in principle, but it's tough going. Generally you need someone to check your understanding is good at intervals and ways to test your knowledge. It also requires great commitment to do it all without the chance to discuss issues with other students. That's a big part of the learning process for most people: having to re-explain something to another person is the best way to check you understand it yourself. Also the excitement of discussion and argument helps a lot with motivating you to continue. And with mathematical science you need to work through a lot of problems to make sure you can manipulate the maths confidently without screwing it up. Hard to do that all on your own. In chemistry at uni those of us doing the quantum chemistry option had a maths tutor throughout the 3 years, in addition to tutors in the 3 branches of chemistry themselves.

Yes,you are right.
It is a persons choice,for eg-I personally dont like academic system.
Maybe its different in your country but its messed up here.
The one of reason i am bad at maths is that they dont teach where to implement and use it in real life.

Just now, Dhillon1724X said:

Yes,you are right.
It is a persons choice,for eg-I personally dont like academic system.
Maybe its different in your country but its messed up here.
The one of reason i am bad at maths is that they dont teach where to implement and use it in real life.

If a person hates a thing from childhood then he will continue hating it.

35 minutes ago, Dhillon1724X said:

Yes,you are right.
It is a persons choice,for eg-I personally dont like academic system.
Maybe its different in your country but its messed up here.
The one of reason i am bad at maths is that they dont teach where to implement and use it in real life.

If a person hates a thing from childhood then he will continue hating it.

I don't think that's true. My son hated history at his first school but at secondary school there was a charismatic teacher that brought it alive. He ended up studying Ancient History and Archaeology at university - he graduated this summer. So much depends on how a subject is taught. I had a chemistry teacher who inspired me in the 6th form - and there were some beautiful girls I think I was trying to impress.

And on the issue of maths, I didn't much enjoy it until the 6th form, at which point it started to get interesting. I suppose calculus was the first breakthrough. It seemed both quite easy and tremendously powerful. And then complex numbers suddenly struck me as cool: I loved the idea that you can just invent a square root of -1, even though there isn't a real one, and build a whole extra dimension (literally) of "imaginary" maths on that invention. And conic sections were also cool: the connection between a circle, an ellipse, a parabola and a hyperbola, all in rather beautiful curves. So in fact, from doubtful beginnings I really quite liked maths by the time I got to uni - at least, enough to get by in physical science. But you are right that seeing where to apply it helps. I was delighted that complex numbers suddenly cropped up in physics, in AC theory. So there was an immediate application in the science block for what I was learning over in the maths dept. My strong advice would be to hang in there with maths. There is a theory that the human brain only gets comfortable with such abstractions in the mid-late teens for a lot of people. Part of the problem may be trying to force it before the brain is ready.

1 minute ago, exchemist said:

I don't think that's true. My son hated history at his first school but at secondary school there was a charismatic teacher that brought it alive. He ended up studying Ancient History and Archaeology at university - he graduated this summer. So much depends on how a subject is taught. I had a chemistry teacher who inspired me in the 6th form - and there were some beautiful girls I think I was trying to impress.

And on the issue of maths, I didn't much enjoy it until the 6th form, at which point it started to get interesting. I suppose calculus was the first breakthrough. It seemed both quite easy and tremendously powerful. And then complex numbers suddenly struck me as cool: I loved the idea that you can just invent a square root of -1, even though there isn't a real one, and build a whole extra dimension (literally) of "imaginary" maths on that invention. And conic sections were also cool: the connection between a circle, an ellipse, a parabola and a hyperbola, all in rather beautiful curves. So in fact, from doubtful beginnings I really quite liked maths by the time I got to uni - at least, enough to get by in physical science. But you are right that seeing where to apply it helps. I was delighted that complex numbers suddenly cropped up in physics, in AC theory. So there was an immediate application in the science block for what I was learning over in the maths dept. My strong advice would be to hang in there with maths. There is a theory that the human brain only gets comfortable with such abstractions in the mid-late teens for a lot of people. Part of the problem may be trying to force it before the brain is ready.

I am in 10th and in next year i will have to choose a stream.
In some countries, like India (with the CBSE and ICSE boards), students in Class 11 typically choose a stream after completing their tenth grade. These streams often include Science, Commerce, and Arts/Humanities, each with distinct subject combinations. 

I will probably choose Commerce.It have very logical and real life usable Maths.
We can say that its last year in which i have to bear this.I will get a degree related to programming or software development next.
I will try to become a powerlifting athlete(If i get chance),
I am thinking to start my own business as main source of income.

I have some wierd tech ideas which i will share soon.

9 minutes ago, exchemist said:

I don't think that's true. My son hated history at his first school but at secondary school there was a charismatic teacher that brought it alive. He ended up studying Ancient History and Archaeology at university - he graduated this summer. So much depends on how a subject is taught. I had a chemistry teacher who inspired me in the 6th form - and there were some beautiful girls I think I was trying to impress.

And on the issue of maths, I didn't much enjoy it until the 6th form, at which point it started to get interesting. I suppose calculus was the first breakthrough. It seemed both quite easy and tremendously powerful. And then complex numbers suddenly struck me as cool: I loved the idea that you can just invent a square root of -1, even though there isn't a real one, and build a whole extra dimension (literally) of "imaginary" maths on that invention. And conic sections were also cool: the connection between a circle, an ellipse, a parabola and a hyperbola, all in rather beautiful curves. So in fact, from doubtful beginnings I really quite liked maths by the time I got to uni - at least, enough to get by in physical science. But you are right that seeing where to apply it helps. I was delighted that complex numbers suddenly cropped up in physics, in AC theory. So there was an immediate application in the science block for what I was learning over in the maths dept. My strong advice would be to hang in there with maths. There is a theory that the human brain only gets comfortable with such abstractions in the mid-late teens for a lot of people. Part of the problem may be trying to force it before the brain is ready.

But i will keep learning for sure.

8 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

Parameters of a theory of everything....such theory can't be created over night or in a span of a year and some few months... and a few thread page posts.

And this is not the place for you to develop a theory. It’s not something the rules accommodate, and you don’t get special treatment.

Plus, you don’t even see the contradiction here: you “know” that you’re right, but the idea hasn’t been developed. But if the idea hasn’t been developed and tested there is no way to know this!

3 hours ago, exchemist said:

Almost invariably what we get with these guys is a lot of fancy talk about "Christoffel symbols", "Riemann geometry" and all the other sexy buzzwords, but without an understanding of even 1st yr undergrad physics. (That hogwash about Planck's constant and virtual particles is one example.) What they miss, with their grandiose ideas about pushing forward the frontiers, is that the real innovators in science first master the current science, before embarking on new thinking. Trying to criticise or replace something you yourself don't properly understand is an idiot's approach, doomed to failure. The unpalatable fact is there are no short cuts. You have to learn the stuff and be good enough at the associated maths used in the modelling before you can contribute. (I'm not, by the way. I can just about hack the maths of quantum chemistry but that's my limit. In fact, one of the insights I got from quantum chemistry was to start thinking in maths rather than in pictures. That gave me a glimpse of how people at that level of physics have to operate.)

My great fear today is that, with the advent of chatbots that are programmed to tell the user how brilliant they are in order to keep the chat going, a new generation of cranks will be spawned, implacably convinced they are all geniuses and thus impervious to reality. Ballocks will reign supre

Which people? don't bundle me with other crack pots....you seem to know physics a lot...you could have helped joigus in your understanding of 'metric emerging'...you don't even have a clue...there was enough reason why I enquired about residential expert before i went back to the thread...simple mathematics but not enough understand it...I don't engage in fancy talks...go back to my threads.

3 hours ago, exchemist said:

(That hogwash about Planck's constant and virtual particles is one example.)

Please stop these nonsense....am deriving A TOE..then you say I don't know Planck's constant....which virtual particles off shell particles...start a thread on the virtual particles you are talking about an you how far we go....pliz stop accusing me with weird things without evidence,In the thread i was barely starting...and I could have explained all those issues.

9 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

Which people? don't bundle me with other crack pots....you seem to know physics a lot...you could have helped joigus in your understanding of 'metric emerging'...you don't even have a clue...there was enough reason why I enquired about residential expert before i went back to the thread...simple mathematics but not enough understand it...I don't engage in fancy talks...go back to my threads.

Please stop these nonsense....am deriving A TOE..then you say I don't know Planck's constant....which virtual particles off shell particles...start a thread on the virtual particles you are talking about an you how far we go....pliz stop accusing me with weird things without evidence,In the thread i was barely starting...and I could have explained all those issues.

It's not me who has had his thread closed down, after 11 months of posting stuff that the resident experts here can't make any sense of.

I dont expect a Theoretical Physicist who is developing so called Theory Of Everything by waving hands in air,to loose his calm.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

And this is not the place for you to develop a theory.

I have already developed the theory...and published a book using simple layman language that even if another less developed civilization come about they would update themselves to the current level rather quickly.I was patiently outlining critical issue before all the picture come out...for instance if I tell you those virtual particles have a connection to the rotation curve of Galaxy what will you say...just laugh and say am hallucinating.

I was barely scratching the surface...I was laying the ground work...I came to these place coz it is a community of mostly scientist...I never thought personal issues will be put upfront...like someone has pride... what's that? Am from humble background....where I am, getting time to chat all the day is not a cup of tea.

3 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

I have already developed the theory...and published a book

Can i get to read that,wheres it published?

3 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

I have already developed the theory...and published a book using simple layman language that even if another less developed civilization come about they would update themselves to the current level rather quickly.I was patiently outlining critical issue before all the picture come out...for instance if I tell you those virtual particles have a connection to the rotation curve of Galaxy what will you say...just laugh and say am hallucinating.

I was barely scratching the surface...I was laying the ground work...I came to these place coz it is a community of mostly scientist...I never thought personal issues will be put upfront...like someone has pride... what's that? Am from humble background....where I am, getting time to chat all the day is not a cup of tea.

Do you have mathematical proofs?

7 minutes ago, Dhillon1724X said:

I dont expect a Theoretical Physicist who is developing so called Theory Of Everything by waving hands in air,to loose his calm

Am a simple man..not the description your are using,in our culture arguing with a young person is bad...all the same,personal traits like calmness has nothing to do with reasoning to everyone.

Just now, MJ kihara said:

Am a simple man..not the description your are using,in our culture arguing with a young person is bad...all the same,personal traits like calmness has nothing to do with reasoning to everyone.

Calm down,
I also dont argue with Elders,
But here we all argue,thats how science grows.

I understand your feeling,its not end.

1 minute ago, Dhillon1724X said:

Can i get to read that,wheres it published?

Go Amazon and search for it there...if you are able...go through it patiently then it will give intuition to a lot of things.

My idea related to light broke,actually i pushed it until it broke.
But that light showed me whole path.

1 minute ago, MJ kihara said:

Go Amazon and search for it there...if you are able...go through it patiently then it will give intuition to a lot of things.

Does it have maths?

23 minutes ago, exchemist said:

posting stuff that the resident experts here can't make any sense of.

1 minute ago, Dhillon1724X said:

Does it have maths

25 minutes ago, exchemist said:

posting stuff that the resident experts here can't make any sense of.

...mmm...

Is this yours?

FASTER AND FURTHER THAN SPEED OF LIGHT-BASIC UNIVERSE THEORY.

by MJ KIHARA | 2 March 2023

Edited July 28Jul 28 by Dhillon1724X