Electro-Unity Theory

[Unity+]

Here is a video I made about my theory.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ef0QIsBXxNs

 

 

 

 

More videos coming. Hope to hear some comments.

 

 

[ACG52]

One comment is I don't go looking at videos.

 

If you're posting here, it's considered good form to at least give a brief overview of your WAG. (wild ass guess). This is a discussion site, not an extention of youtube.

 

And this should certainly be in Speculations.

Edited October 10, 2012 by ACG52

[Unity+]

One comment is I don't go looking at videos.

 

If you're posting here, it's considered good form to at least give a brief overview of your WAG. (wild ass guess). This is a discussion site, not an extention of youtube.

 

Well repetition isn't a good form of presenting an idea, so I thought the video would explain enough, but if you really want I will add more info.

 

 

 

[swansont]

Well repetition isn't a good form of presenting an idea, so I thought the video would explain enough, but if you really want I will add more info.

!

Moderator Note

Yes, we prefer written info.

 

Moved to speculations.

[illuusio]

Here is a video I made about my theory.

 

 

 

 

Based on purely seeing that video clip first frame... How object knows that it shouldn't go faster and dangering itself? Sounds weird to me, can you answer that? I didn't watch the video (I'm too lazy and I have too short attention spin).

[Ophiolite]

You argue that protons are made of 2048 electrons and neutrons from 2049 electrons. The extra electron balances the charge, causing the neutron to be neutral.

 

Can you explain how 2048 electrons with negative charge avoid repelling each other?

How does the negative charge from 2048 electrons yield a net positive charge?

How does the addition of a single electron cancel out that charge?

[Unity+]

You argue that protons are made of 2048 electrons and neutrons from 2049 electrons. The extra electron balances the charge, causing the neutron to be neutral.

 

Can you explain how 2048 electrons with negative charge avoid repelling each other?

How does the negative charge from 2048 electrons yield a net positive charge?

How does the addition of a single electron cancel out that charge?

Well, maybe I forgot to mention this, but in theory the electrons are actually Energy particles both having a positive and negative charge, which is what allows these protons and neutrons to be formed. The addition of a single electron cancels out any of the charges because the fact the outer field has both a positive and negative field, which causes conflict in both fields creating a non-charge effect. 2048 energy particles would not repel each other because since they both have a positive and negative charge the particles pull towards each other is stronger than the repelling force. However, since this is unstable, especially for neutrons, they can be broken apart.

 

Based on purely seeing that video clip first frame... How object knows that it shouldn't go faster and dangering itself? Sounds weird to me, can you answer that? I didn't watch the video (I'm too lazy and I have too short attention spin).

Basically the Schafftarian field is a field that acts almost like an attraction force, but is not an attraction force. It allows these energy particles to become relative to that Phesron. What happens is when these energy particles transfer between Phesrons, this affects the Schafftarian field. However, there is a certain speed that this transfer can occur at, being the speed of light.

[illuusio]

W

 

 

Basically the Schafftarian field is a field that acts almost like an attraction force, but is not an attraction force. It allows these energy particles to become relative to that Phesron. What happens is when these energy particles transfer between Phesrons, this affects the Schafftarian field. However, there is a certain speed that this transfer can occur at, being the speed of light.

 

Right... can I have definitions for those terms? or link? please.

[Unity+]

Right... can I have definitions for those terms? or link? please.

Sure.

 

Schafftarian Field: a radiation field that enables Phesrons to absorb energy. In a sense, it is similar to an electro-magnetic field, but the difference is it is not an energy field but a radiation field.

 

Phesron: a type of particle that has no energy or mass, but exists and consists of the Schafftarian field.

 

 

[ACG52]

Well, maybe I forgot to mention this, but in theory the electrons are actually Energy particles both having a positive and negative charge, which is what allows these protons and neutrons to be formed.

 

Your 'theory' applies to what universe? Because it isn't this one.

 

This is complete and total nonsense.

[Unity+]

Your 'theory' applies to what universe? Because it isn't this one.

 

This is complete and total nonsense.

 

Everyone has their opinions on subjects, yours is an opinion, though I do thank you for giving criticism.

 

 

 

[ACG52]

Everyone has their opinions on subjects, yours is an opinion, though I do thank you for giving criticism.

 

 

 

 

 

It's not an opinion that electrons do not have both positive and negative charge.

[Unity+]

It's not an opinion that electrons do not have both positive and negative charge.

 

Nice to know you have an opinion. That is why it is called "Atomic theory"

 

 

I am coming out with another video to explain more of the theory.

 

Okay, now to provide the math for everyone.

 

 

 

 

So, there is one constant to be aware of which is the Schaffter's constant, which is equal to

 

The Schaffter's constant is the theoretical width of a Phesron, for clarification.

 

Now there are two other equations that determine reactant time and fluctuating energy.

 

 

 

 

Which, graphically, is displayed like so:

 

 

This graph and equation represents the reaction time of a Phesron due to interaction with other particles or Phesrons. This gives the prediction of how long it takes for a particle to give chemical or physical changes to its state. For example, for this particle, it would take 0.5 seconds to each the density or energy state of reaction to the other particle or Phesron.

 

The next equation represents the stable state of a Phesron.

 

This also can be represented graphically:

 

 

This graph shows that Phesron's energy fluctuates and is not always constant. With fluctuation, energy loss and energy gain is so slight that it isn't detectable by the human sense.

The next equation represents the maximum density a Phesron can reach before change chemically and physically.

 

 

 

 

More mathematics to represent the theory is coming.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Unity+

[Bignose]

More mathematics to represent the theory is coming.

 

I hope 'more' means actually defining what symbols in equations mean and posting graphs that are actually titled and have axes that are labelled.

[ACG52]

Nice to know you have an opinion. That is why it is called "Atomic theory"

 

 

It's not an opinion. It's a well established fact. We have an entire civilization built on our understanding of electromagnetism, and it works very well.

[Unity+]

It's not an opinion. It's a well established fact. We have an entire civilization built on our understanding of electromagnetism, and it works very well.

and it works very well.

This just means that our current understanding of things allows us to interpret how things MAY work with our Universe, but it isn't an actual truth till proven otherwise.

 

For example, 1 + 1 = 2, but 3 - 1 = 2 as well. Both ways are different understanding of things, but yet they equal out to be the samething.

 

As for the math variable definitions, here is the list:

 

 

 

 

In this equation, g represents gravitational acceleration. ρ, in this instance, represents density.

 

 

In this equation, g represents gravitational acceleration. ρ, in this instance, represents density. Note: G and x are actually the samething, it was an equation error that I made.

 

 

λ Represents, in this case, the maximum density a particle can have before changing state. S(G) and W(G) represent the values of the other two equations.

 

Here are the improved graphs.

 

Note: In this graph, I forgot to say that time is measured in seconds.

 

 

Sorry I forgot to include the rest of the information. I was in a rush at the time and wanted to at least get somethings added on.

 

 

 

 

EDIT: Another equation to reference to is the Time Constant equation:

 

 

 

 

 

In this equation, t^i is the time constant variable of a specific area of space-time, g represents gravitational acceleration, and ρ represents density of that area of space-time. This equation could even be modified to determine the density of a black hole in a theoretical sense. Here is the graph for this equation which represents proportionality of the time constant and gravity.

The Schaffter's constant cann also be defined as

Which means the other equations could be written as so:

Edited October 12, 2012 by Unity+

[swansont]

I thought the phesron had no energy?

 

Phesron: a type of particle that has no energy or mass, but exists and consists of the Schafftarian field.

 

 

Phrases like "reactant time", "it is not an energy field but a radiation field" and "Schafftarian field" are indistinguishable from gibberish until you define/explain what they (or you) mean, in terms of concepts that are already defined. Otherwise I could ask how this fits in with the Fetzengru matrix and pretend that the question had meaning.

[Unity+]

I thought the phesron had no energy?

 

 

 

 

Phrases like "reactant time", "it is not an energy field but a radiation field" and "Schafftarian field" are indistinguishable from gibberish until you define/explain what they (or you) mean, in terms of concepts that are already defined. Otherwise I could ask how this fits in with the Fetzengru matrix and pretend that the question had meaning.

A Phesron initially has no energy, but has the ability to absorb energy. The graph represents a Phesron with energy and how energy fluctuates for Phesrons with energy.

 

The Schafftarian field is the radiation field of the Phesron. Reactant time deals with reaction or change due to exposure to other Phesrons with energy. For example, when one Phesron with energy comes in energy contact with the other Phesron, the reactant time determines how long it takes for both Phesrons to react towards each other due to energy particle that each Phesron has interacting with each other.

 

Though, with the fact that Phesrons initially having no energy but coming into contact with energy to absorb brings the all time problem of being able to extract that energy from the Phesron, unless one has the capability to have to Phesrons react with each other. Problem with that is energy would transfer from one Phesron to the other. In any case, it would require the radiation "energy" to interact with the Schafftarian field to cause the energy to be released from the Phesron, making the Phesron massless and having no energy.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Unity+

[Ophiolite]

So during an interaction of two Phesrons is energy exchanged via a process of Schaffting within the Schafftarian field? I take it then, that in your view of the world there is a great deal of Schaffting going on? Is this Schaffting exclusively on the nano scale, or can one get macroscopic Schaffting? For example have you ever been Schaffted? Are all the members reading this being Schaffted at the moment? These seem to me to be important questions.

[Unity+]

So during an interaction of two Phesrons is energy exchanged via a process of Schaffting within the Schafftarian field? I take it then, that in your view of the world there is a great deal of Schaffting going on? Is this Schaffting exclusively on the nano scale, or can one get macroscopic Schaffting? For example have you ever been Schaffted? Are all the members reading this being Schaffted at the moment? These seem to me to be important questions.

1. Two unstable Phesrons through interactions would cause what we call a chemical reaction, where the energy of Phesrons transfer until either the energy involved causes both Phesrons to become stable or energy from other Unstable Phesrons(or Phesrons with extra energy) have their energy transfered to the other unstable Phesron.
2. With unstable Phesrons, yes there is a lot of "Schaffting" as you call it. This is viewed a lot of the time in the chemistry world.
3. In many cases, most Schaffting occurs on the nano scale, with exceptions to cases that Schaffting could occur on the macroscopic scale where Schaffting occurs between more than 2 Phesrons.
4. Depends what you mean by that. If Phesrons are unstable and are able to absorb more energy could become Schaffted with other energy is available.
5. Could be if the Phesrons are unstable and need more energy particles.

[swansont]

A Phesron initially has no energy, but has the ability to absorb energy. The graph represents a Phesron with energy and how energy fluctuates for Phesrons with energy.

What is the spin of the Phesron?

 

The Schafftarian field is the radiation field of the Phesron.

What comprises the radiation?

 

Reactant time deals with reaction or change due to exposure to other Phesrons with energy. For example, when one Phesron with energy comes in energy contact with the other Phesron, the reactant time determines how long it takes for both Phesrons to react towards each other due to energy particle that each Phesron has interacting with each other.

What is this energy particle that mediates the interaction between Phesrons? What properties does it have? What interactions can it undergo?

[Unity+]

What is the spin of the Phesron?

 

 

What comprises the radiation?

 

 

What is this energy particle that mediates the interaction between Phesrons? What properties does it have? What interactions can it undergo?

 

1) In any case, a Phesron has the spin trajectory that of the electro-magnetic field, depending on the amount of energy that is absorbed into the Phesron consistent with the Schafftarian field, or could be known as "relative mass or energy"

 

 

2)The make up of the radiation is similar to energy, but is unlike energy in the way that we think of. This radiation is similar to the electro-magnetic field except for the fact that it is not comprised of energy, but a different form. It is hard to explain what kind of radiation energy it is because of the understandable vocabulary that would not give a basic understanding of the idea of radiation energy, but to give some try at it by describing it as an electro-magnetic field not formed with energy, but radiation.(sorry if my answer is not as 'good' as it should be.

 

3) The energy particle that mediates the interaction between Phesrons could be related with the electron, except its properties refer to both having a positive and negative charge. With this property, the Schafftarian field has the ability to absorb this electron-like particle to form the basic fundamental Phesron with energy.

 

 

 

 

EDIT: To complete the math, here is a make up of the equations(not necessary, but just to give some form to the equations).

 

 

 

 

Edited October 12, 2012 by Unity+

[Phi for All]

These seem to me to be important questions.

You forgot to ask how this fits in with the Fetzengru matrix.

[Unity+]

You forgot to ask how this fits in with the Fetzengru matrix.

If that is a question that you want answered, what do you mean by fit? Elaborate on the Fetzengru matrix and what specifics you want explained in the fitting of this and the Fetzengru matrix.

[swansont]

1) In any case, a Phesron has the spin trajectory that of the electro-magnetic field, depending on the amount of energy that is absorbed into the Phesron consistent with the Schafftarian field, or could be known as "relative mass or energy"

So their spin is not quantized? Interesting.

 

2)The make up of the radiation is similar to energy, but is unlike energy in the way that we think of. This radiation is similar to the electro-magnetic field except for the fact that it is not comprised of energy, but a different form. It is hard to explain what kind of radiation energy it is because of the understandable vocabulary that would not give a basic understanding of the idea of radiation energy, but to give some try at it by describing it as an electro-magnetic field not formed with energy, but radiation.(sorry if my answer is not as 'good' as it should be.

No, it's quite circular. For starters, energy is not a substance, it's a property. So this is like saying the field is made entirely of tall.

 

3) The energy particle that mediates the interaction between Phesrons could be related with the electron, except its properties refer to both having a positive and negative charge. With this property, the Schafftarian field has the ability to absorb this electron-like particle to form the basic fundamental Phesron with energy.

Exchange particles are typically Bosons. But at least we know that the exchange particle is massive, which, of course has implications for the range of the interaction.

 

EDIT: To complete the math, here is a make up of the equations(not necessary, but just to give some form to the equations).

Yeah, you posted these earlier. About them —

 

Schaffter's constant is unitless, so how is that the "width" of the phesron?

 

In an equation like W(G)=gsin(G) + g + p, it implies that W and g and p have the same units, but g and p obviously do not. Also, sin(G) implies G is unitless, but I don't see where you've explained what G is.