photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 A book of analytical geometric terms can be described in one image. The nature of the universe can be perceived when all its properties are represented and set into motion as an image. Let the image speak for itself. I invite your criticism or approval. see attachment jd page 4.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Why can't you post your ideas (*) on the forum? Why do you have to post pdfs of illegible scribble and meanignless diagrams? (Although, to be fair, it doesn't detract in the least from the quality of the ideas which appear to be quite meaningless and contradicted by reality.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 A book of analytical geometric terms can be described in one image. The nature of the universe can be perceived when all its properties are represented and set into motion as an image. Let the image speak for itself. I invite your criticism or approval. see attachment jd page 4.pdf Some diagram ! Are you going to explain it ? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 Why can't you post your ideas (*) on the forum? Why do you have to post pdfs of illegible scribble and meanignless diagrams? (Although, to be fair, it doesn't detract in the least from the quality of the ideas which appear to be quite meaningless and contradicted by reality.) the scribble isnt illegible, but I will type it out for you. As for meaningless, the image is extremely meaningful, try to absorb it. The Universe is a scalar energy field. It is a particle wave medium of complex transforming energy. It is comprised of simultaneously interacting gravitational, electromagnetic and quantum vacuum subfields of various properties and magnitude. Interactions result in variable energy density while total energy density remains constant. Gravity gyroscopically concentrates energy and light is liberated as subfields mediate potential differences. Aether structure is spectral, harmonic, gyroscopic, and hydrodynamic in nature. It resonates frequencies which amplify and interfere. Its matter is distinguished by its angle of incidence to the intertial point of equilibrium and its magnitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 How do you test the idea? How is it falsifiable? IOW, how do you show that this isn't just a string of buzzwords, which is what it appears to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 the scribble isnt illegible It doesn't help that it is upside down, I suppose. Gravity gyroscopically concentrates energy Except it doesn't. Unless you can cite some evidence for this? Aether structure is spectral, harmonic, gyroscopic, and hydrodynamic in nature. There is no aether. Or at least, there is no eveidence for an aether. Unless you would like to rpesent some? It's a pretty picture, but I think you should lay off the drugs before they do some permanent damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) How do you test the idea? How is it falsifiable? IOW, how do you show that this isn't just a string of buzzwords, which is what it appears to be? The terms are expressed by the image, do you see its motion? Do you see the simultaneous field orientation? I believe these are the basic field dynamics of any sphere of any scale. When an artist paints a picture he envisions the idea he wants to convey. It is up to the observer to decipher his work. Edited November 12, 2013 by photon propeller -3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 The terms are expressed by the image, do you see its motion? Do you see the simultaneous field orientation? I believe these are the basic field dynamics of any sphere of any scale. When an artist paints a picture he envisions the idea he wants to convey. It is up to the observer to decipher his work. In other words, it is not testable. Therefore it is not science. Maybe you should post it on an art forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) It doesn't help that it is upside down, I suppose. Except it doesn't. Unless you can cite some evidence for this? There is no aether. Or at least, there is no eveidence for an aether. Unless you would like to rpesent some? It's a pretty picture, but I think you should lay off the drugs before they do some permanent damage. The aether is the one dynamic energy unmultiplied. It is the least common denominator of energy. It multiplies itself as it concentrates and divides itself as it dissipates . Gravity is the initiator and light is the liberation of multiplied(bound) energy from mass. Edited November 12, 2013 by photon propeller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) the scribble isnt illegible, but I will type it out for you. As for meaningless, the image is extremely meaningful, try to absorb it. The Universe is a scalar energy field. It is a particle wave medium of complex transforming energy. It is comprised of simultaneously interacting gravitational, electromagnetic and quantum vacuum subfields of various properties and magnitude. Interactions result in variable energy density while total energy density remains constant. Gravity gyroscopically concentrates energy and light is liberated as subfields mediate potential differences. Aether structure is spectral, harmonic, gyroscopic, and hydrodynamic in nature. It resonates frequencies which amplify and interfere. Its matter is distinguished by its angle of incidence to the intertial point of equilibrium and its magnitude. It is rather poetic. I suppose, if you are trying to convey something that is at the very heart of things , like light, matter, energy, gravity, electromagnetism, it is likely to be pictorially beautiful and visually stunning. Like plasma at the heart of nuclear fusion, lightning, radio frequency light generation in a galaxy lamp. You are an inspiration PP in the gloom of pure mathematics! Visually is as good if not better a medium to convey understanding. After all we are endowed with sight which seems to have been a prime sense in our arsenal of communications. If I can get my head around it , I might try to paint it! P P . Yippee! Mike Edited November 12, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 The terms are expressed by the image, do you see its motion? Do you see the simultaneous field orientation? I believe these are the basic field dynamics of any sphere of any scale. When an artist paints a picture he envisions the idea he wants to convey. It is up to the observer to decipher his work. This is a science forum, not an art forum. It's incumbent on you to at least present the idea in a form that is amenable to testing, if not already tested by comparing to experiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 It is rather poetic. I suppose, if you are trying to convey something that is at the very heart of things , like light, matter, energy, gravity, electromagnetism, it is likely to be pictorially beautiful and visually stunning. If I can get my head around it , I might try to paint it! P P . Mike This is a science forum, not an art forum. It's incumbent on you to at least present the idea in a form that is amenable to testing, if not already tested by comparing to experiment. Is this image not scientific? Of course it is. So is the text. Do you find it interesting? Intrinsic field geometry is crucial for cutting edge technology like magnetic confinement fusion. My goal, if I can properly refine this idea, is to produce a three dimensional periodic chart of elements using the mass hyperboloid as a platform. Placing each element in its rightful vector and establishing an underlying "sacred" geometry which correlates all the properties of matter. -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Is this image not scientific? Of course not. Do you know what science is? Clue: it isn't just making stuff up. It is about making testable predictions. Something you have admitted you cannot do. (Ignoring the fact that your claims are contradicted by existing evidene.) Intrinsic field geometry is crucial for cutting edge technology like magnetic confinement fusion. You really think your doodles are going to help design fusion reactors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 ! Moderator Note Photon Propeller 1. This topic is being moved to speculations. Please do not post such wildly unfounded ideas in the main fora. 2. You have been asked for explanations in this thread and I note in numerous other topics; no sensible or comprehensible explanations have been provided anywhere. For your guidance a paragraph of seemingly randomly chosen scientific words bound together with a few new age ideas does not constitute an explanation. Your ideas may (or may not) be difficult to grasp, highly groundbreaking, and expressible only in recondite language but your answers to questions must be accessible to the "educated layman" - at present they are not. Start to provide serious answers to questions asked - and ensure the answers given are in terms that may be understood by those with a mainstream science background; if you do not start providing answers this thread and others will be closed. Strange No personal comments and suggestions of drug use please. Many thanks Everyone Do not respond to this moderation within the thread. You may report this post if the moderation was unjust. Back to the topic please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Is this image not scientific? Of course it is. So is the text. Do you find it interesting? Intrinsic field geometry is crucial for cutting edge technology like magnetic confinement fusion. My goal, if I can properly refine this idea, is to produce a three dimensional periodic chart of elements using the mass hyperboloid as a platform. Placing each element in its rightful vector and establishing an underlying "sacred" geometry which correlates all the properties of matter. It's not useful if one can't understand it, and even less so if it's wrong. How do you objectively confirm that it's right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 Of course not. Do you know what science is? Clue: it isn't just making stuff up. It is about making testable predictions. Something you have admitted you cannot do. (Ignoring the fact that your claims are contradicted by existing evidene.) You really think your doodles are going to help design fusion reactors? The tokamak reactors are already online. Ever here of ITER? Understanding intrinsic field geometry is key to creating stable magnetic fields. They are shaped like a torus and similar to spinning mass of any scale. My "doodles" are an application of this geometry to the macroscopic world to help visualize the simultaneous interaction of fields. Was not every aspect of science mere theory until it was proven? Could it even be considered if no one ever posed the question? I do better than that, I pose an image of my thoughts. What tangible thoughts do you offer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 I believe these are the basic field dynamics of any sphere of any scale. Just because you believe it doesn't make it true. Science has to be testable. Your picture isn't. When an artist paints a picture he envisions the idea he wants to convey. It is up to the observer to decipher his work. That is fine for art, but it is no use in science or engineering. The tokamak reactors are already online. Yes, without your pictures. Was not every aspect of science mere theory until it was proven? Theories are not proved. "Mere theories" are as good as it gets in science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) Next time look deeper into that reflection of sunlight, do not focus on its center for you will be blinded. Look to either side and see the pattern of light bent in a cone opening towards you. Look at the repetative pattern of colors. Is it not real? Of course it is, and all of its architecture is relevant. Creation has painted its masterpiece. It is up to every individual to decipher its wonders. Edited November 12, 2013 by photon propeller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Poetry has its place, but here is not that place. The rules of the forum (this is a science forum, after all) demand you provide evidence or a way to test your idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) Poetry has its place, but here is not that place. The rules of the forum (this is a science forum, after all) demand you provide evidence or a way to test your idea. Yes it is poetic, but it describes a real scientific observation anyone can make when the suns out. And so the scientific method begins. Edited November 12, 2013 by photon propeller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ophiolite Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Yes it is poetic, but it describes a real scientific observation anyone can make when the suns out. And so the scientific method begins. Meanwhile we wait patiently for you to move to the next step of the scientific process and provide one or more of the following: 1. An explanation for why some of your claims are contradicted by evidence. 2. Justification via reasoned argument, or peer reviewed research justifying your claims. 3. Suggested means of testing or falsifying your hypothesis. In the absence of one or more of these what you have offered is not science and takes on the appearance of word salad. As such it has no place in a science forum. Will you offer us any of the three actions I have proposed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 Meanwhile we wait patiently for you to move to the next step of the scientific process and provide one or more of the following: 1. An explanation for why some of your claims are contradicted by evidence. 2. Justification via reasoned argument, or peer reviewed research justifying your claims. 3. Suggested means of testing or falsifying your hypothesis. In the absence of one or more of these what you have offered is not science and takes on the appearance of word salad. As such it has no place in a science forum. Will you offer us any of the three actions I have proposed? Lets take care of all 3 and all you have to do is respond to my last post on the unified spectrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 ! Moderator Note Lets take care of all 3 and all you have to do is respond to my last post on the unified spectrum. Last chance in this thread. You have been asked direct questions (look back through the thread and take note) - you do not get to reverse the burden of proof. Do not respond to this moderation. Do start providing meaningful responses to questions and requests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon propeller Posted November 13, 2013 Author Share Posted November 13, 2013 (edited) Most of my statements on the big picture are known "mainstream" principals of physics. Some are speculation.There association to one another is stated in the image. The evidence of their existence is in every rainbow and every spiraling galaxy. Hence real life scientific observation available to any laymen who looks. Nature itself is the inspirational motivator, just as it has been for other thinkers in the past. I gave a sound answer to swansonts question of incompatibility firmly grounded on a rational basis and you completely disregarded it and closed the thread. What we see is an interference pattern, our vantage point is critical, we do not see the scale. I submit my hypothesis is incomplete and not exactly refined. I also assert that exact refinement is difficult to achieve without discussion. Swansont has more or less accused me of forging my own work with his statement, "I doubt its yours." My other thread was unjustly closed and I predict this one will be also. The good ole boys school has prevailed again and stymied their own progress. My statements are meaningless to you imfataal because your knowledge is based on your faith in your comrades and not on your own education. So I shall hoard the rest of my knowledge as the powers that be do, capitalizing on it and looking down from the mountaintop. The big picture is incomplete without the little one but you will never see it because your eyes and ears are closed, and i shall not present it for any more of your unjustified ridicule. Edited November 13, 2013 by photon propeller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 ! Moderator Note ..So I shall hoard the rest of my knowledge as the powers that be do, capitalizing on it and looking down from the mountaintop. The big picture is incomplete without the little one but you will never see it because your eyes and ears are closed, and i shall not present it for any more of your unjustified ridicule. No worries - thread closed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts