Jump to content

Are my findings scientific?


Retrograder
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

I have placed a pdf book online that is about mirroring well known cyclic phenomena within nature. I believe it is a mapping of the mirror side, and potentially, people a lot cleverer than me may be able to incorporate this mirroring technique into other types of formulas. I am primarily a musician, with fairly limited mathematical skills!

 

I have worked on this mirroring process for a good eighteen years now, mainly in spasms as and when the mood occurred. I haven't been able to find sources for a similar kind of work, but it is basically showing the mirror side to well known processes, like harmonics, Fibonacci numbers, musical scales, Phi ratio, Pi, prime numbers, etc. What has led me to continue with the work is that seemingly unrelated grids always give the one result when the two sides of the mirror are brought together and unified at a specific axis. This mirroring technique is not symmetry, where things hit a mirror and bounce back off at angles. The data is about journeying through the mirror. It may be a potential doorway into understanding the properties of a mirror universe for example.

 

Until a few weeks ago I have always deemed my research to be following the rules of science. Some people on another forum that said they were scientists were quite negative about it not being science, so I'd really like other opinions if possible. I have my own personal belief about what the results show, but there is also room for other beliefs, and one shouldn't need to reject it based on what I believe the results are showing. Either way, I've put the info into a pdf book, made a few animations as well, and offering it for free to anyone interested in checking out the mirroring process. Here is the link to the book:

 

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/lggl007/

 

Cheers,

and great to be here.

 

Retro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't open rar's at work so can't read anything other than your intro atm...

 

But you have some of the fundemental comments about electrons wrong, it is quite trivial to observe them as waves.

 

Also I don't quite get what you mean by mirroring an equation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't open rar's at work so can't read anything other than your intro atm...

 

But you have some of the fundemental comments about electrons wrong, it is quite trivial to observe them as waves.

 

Also I don't quite get what you mean by mirroring an equation?

 

 

Ahh right. I've been led to believe that an electron is a wave as well as a particle. Have tried reading up on it and understanding as much as possible. Saw a video by a "Dr Quantum" the other week that really made me think I undertsood about the behaviour of an electron. Could you explain about the triviality of the wave aspect?

 

Mirroring a formula, at least the ones in the book for now, is reversing the flow of that particular formula. What it has shown is that each side of the formula is only half of the pieces of the puzzle.

 

A researcher who is now a friend did mention this to me:

 

**********************

1. There is an inherent characteristic found in nature displaying mirror symmetry. One of these must be seen in light of particle symmetries and CP symmetries. We learn that the fundamental birth of all matter, apart for those odd-ball particles which are their own antiparticles, that matter coheres with a mirror substitute. In effect, they cannot pop into existence without leaving behind a mirror-counterpart. This seems to be an intrinsic property of the universe, and if my assumptions are correct, our goal to solve inconsistencies involving the Riemann Hypothesis and other long equations to discover particle behaviour, will and should without a doubt, be related heavily on the birth of 4 and 5, 1 and 9, and many other mirror-like componants. Take this fundamental attribute. There is renormalization, found in quantum electrodynamics. This would mean that you have a very high infinite number which can only be cancelled out by a corresponding mirror value. Also, there was an equal amount of antimatter created at big bang (or so theory goes). On small scales, it is easy to say that the electron or K-Meson have mirror-cousins, but when you take the scale of all matter into consideration, there is a fantastic mirror symmetry displayed. Even a mass renormalization of all the matter and the energy in the universe (E=Mc^2+E=-Mc^2=0). This means that there is yet another mirror like symmetry. Numbers, displayed throughout your book, highlight these importances with great detail.

 

2. Ekpyrotic Theory, which i am noy ready as of yet to totally dismiss, is also a theory of mirror-like behaviour. It basically states that our universe has a siemese twin, totally equal to our own universe. But the relationship does not cease their. Like two particle, one matter and one antimatter, they will collide and explode into gamma energy. Well, something along very similar lines occured between both these universes. Trillions upon trillions of years pass, before these two universes bounce off each other, exciting all over again the energy and matter used to create the universe, which was of course, gamma energy.

 

3. And last but not least, we have quantum entanglement to prove very special relationships at very long distances. This shows us that if a state of (i.e. a photon) is found to have a spin up (x,z=1) on observation, then the mirrored particle, possibly thousands upon billions of light years away will suddenly take form of a spin down photon (x,z=-1)

 

**************************

 

I doubt if I'll ever understand the Rieman Hypothesis.:) I've made a start by showing that the mirroring technique can be a valid tool that can apply to many more things than I have so far applied them to. I'm not suggesting that it hasn't been applied in various ways, I'm sure it has. What I think I've done so far is mapped out fundamental cycles that would evolve on the mirror side. Further, when the two sides of the mirror are brought together, what it shows is that information from either side swaps over to its opposite side, at a specific axis point continually. That is one of the fundamental charachteristics of exposing what seems to be the duality within a single formula.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it science? Easy way to tell: can it make predictions about the physical world, such that if the predictions were wrong, the theory would be wrong? Also, could you put up a piece of your idea for the benefits of those who can't read rar files at the moment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a note, you'd get better readership if you just hosted it as the actual pdf rather then a rar. Can't be that big, can it? lol.

 

But yeah, if your theory applies to Mr Skeptic's last post, then you can call it science, at which point you can test it out with actual experiments to prove it's validity :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a note, you'd get better readership if you just hosted it as the actual pdf rather then a rar. Can't be that big, can it? lol.

 

But yeah, if your theory applies to Mr Skeptic's last post, then you can call it science, at which point you can test it out with actual experiments to prove it's validity :)

 

Well thanks very much for the responses. I put it together in a rar file because there's about fifteen gif animations that go with the book. However, I could just put the book there on its own, and place the animations in a rar file maybe.

 

The comment about the Calabi-Yau had me looking around to find out what it is about. I'm aware of the superstirng theory regarding the extra minute dimensions, but had never heard the term Calabi-Yau. Anyway, it turns out that the little bit I did understand is regarding the idea of teleportation and wormhole travel. The only drawback seems to be that it is more of a sci-fi kinda way of looking at it. In all, that is one of my main reasons for putting the book on the internet. This idea of information swapping over from either side of the mirror; if one were to use the frequency structure concerned, it would allow information to ping pong accross the mirror point. If the information is there to build the anti-self, or mirror information regarding the frequency of a particular object, then the information can be swapped using what I have found to be specific frequencies that describe that actual unity. So I could say that is a prediction drawn from the results, and offer various ways in which it could be tested.

 

Well, I have placed a pdf version of the book online just now. It isn't going to be written in a scientific way, but hopefully you will find your way to the result I mention within the first few chapters. After that the other examples merely show other approaches that reach the same results.

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

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
 Share

×
×
  • 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.