Lightmeow

Relativity has been proven. Time dilatation has been proven through experiment. It is not pure imagination.

The thing is, he can't. You need a way to test it. And you apparently don't know the meaning of charged particles. And the reason why we can't accelerate something to the speed of light is theoretically you would need an infinite amount of energy, not because the charge gets low.

But he's saying the UDP decays into an electron

We are, the contents is junk. It's another crackpot theory that will never be proven, because it is wrong in a lot of ways. Like the decay of his particle into an electron. He saying that is saying that the electron is the building block.(As I understand it, I might be wrong) Edit:clarified something I said

I have tried a ad blocker, but that slows down my computer even more than having the ads on.

Hello, I am at the moment, my home computer is a 2004 dell computer with a Pentium D processor and a half gig of ram... Is there a way that a mod could turn off ads for me. I know its the ads, because at the bottom I can see it trying to connect to the Google ads, then Google anylitics, then Firefox crashs Thanks Could a mod move this to the comments, questions and support part of the forum... Forgot we had that... Thanks

Welcome... I am also dyslexic, but that doesn't stop me from being good at the maths(just makes it take longer)... Just make sure you don't badly screw up something you are saying because you will have some peoples asking them self, "did I just read that?", and you could get flamed... And it's easy grasping the full picture of stuff once you get the hang of it. The maths behind the picture is the tricky part. But you should like this forum... Joshua

I'm starting to smell a troll

Thanks for clearing that up John

I looked into getting the Hall and Knights Algebra and the SL Loneys books. I'm sure I will get them some time, but I don't currently have the money to buy the books. They look like good books though I never knew that MIT had those courses... And for free .pdf(I can print them out!!!) I also like that he has the videos. And also, I have run across Pauls Online Notes, when I need to reference something. I will use those as well to see what I know and don't know(for my programming, I learn what I need to know, so I have holes in my knowledge of the maths) Thank you peoples for being such a help!

The earliest mention of a sun-centered universe actually dates back to 200 BC by a man named Aristarchus of Samos. Then someone well respected said "oh, that's wrong", and changed it back to the Geocentric modal. Then the Christan's thought that they were special and thought that the same thing, they were the center of the universe, and did all sorts of nasty things to people who opposed them. I don't wish to high jack the thread, but what I said is a fact.

It also contradicts the theory of general relativity. Now, relativity, unlike super string theory, has been proven... You cannot throw out something that works, for something that doesn't work. Everything builds on itself. Einstein didn't disprove Newtonian gravity, he just built upon it... This theory wants to say that our reality is flawed, then goes to say, 100's of years of past observation is junk, and I developed a theory in 20 years that disproves everything else...

Where are the resources? I didn't find anything... This theory contradicts Superstring Theory, saying the Union-Dipole Partical is the Universal Building Block. Then it goes on and says that the spheres are infinitesimal. It also claims, and I quote Then it says that positive and negative charges are the same. Then what it says about gravity doesn't even work... Here is what I said about the professional speech that is half crack pot: Oh, and on page 304, his calculation of the golden ratio is wrong. And I will stop there.

I agree. I got through the first twenty pages, and it wasn't written professionally. i.e., it was written in a way that someone uneducated would agree with it, but when I read it, it made no sense. I also did a few Google searches, and some of the things it claimed were true were already proved false. Like the particle that it claimed was discovered. I did a few searches, and found nothing other than what the theory said about it.

I will do that. Is there any books that anyone would recommend? What I like about books is I can take notes in the book and book mark pages that I might not remember fully, unlike videos.

I have been trying to accelerate my math education, but I have found it difficult because most of the resources that I have been using haven't been to the point at all, or haven't been teaching just the concept. An example would be Khan Academy. I have been using them for a while but gave up because the videos are extremely slow for me. Are there any math books/resources out there that are to the point, maybe like a reference book, but not like a workbook? I also asked some of my teachers for some higher level books, but the same thing happened, they were slow, and had a lot of talking that was not related what so ever to the math.(I really couldn't care how high the empire state building is, or "fun facts about pi") And yes, those two examples were out of a high school books, a Algebra 2 book, and the "pi" one was out of a Trig book. Please Help

Why is there so much dark energy in the universe if we can't find any naturally? Where is it all? Why is regular energy so special. Why are we so special that we have regular energy?

Ok, so I read that and it makes sense. This graph that is on the Multiplicative inverse kind of says that you can never get to zero.Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplicative_inverse And due to this graph, you can never get to 0, because you can't divide by zero. Instead, the number can get closer to zero, to a point were it is 1/infinity. But, isn't there a way to prove that .9999...(repeating) is equal to 1. I think it goes something like this: x=.99999... 10x=9.9999... 10x-x=9.999....-.999 9x=9 x=1 Couldn't you do the same thing for zero, because it is on the other side. What I mean it to prove that 1 over infinity is 0.

Then how is zero a real number. If you can't get it, then what is it. Is zero even a real number. I have always been taught that it is on the number line, so it must be a real number. But because it can not be divided in any way, what is it? Why is it on the number line if it isn't a real number? Is it being used as a metaphor as something more? If zero is nothing, then what is it?

I watched the video at school today. So basically what you are saying that zero is like infinity, it is a concept, not a real number?

Today in science class we were talking about waves, you know, sound waves and radiation and other types of waves. So, the science teacher was saying that sound is basically just a mechanical latitudinal wave. So then, I asked him if sound travels in a vacuum. He said no, because there is nothing in a vacuum. No air or nothing. I asked him why, and he said that he didn't know. I understand that space doesn't have any air in it, but how can there be nothing at all? There must be something in the vacuum like air, right? Can you tell me, I was mind blown today. I always thought that in space there was a different form of air, or something that sound could go through, but nothing is crazy!!! Please Explain, I hope you can... Joshua

So according to the story, is knowledge the first sin, or free will? I don't think of this that way. Adam and Eve realized they were naked, as the story goes. Wouldn't you say them and the cloths was more of an act of them leaving the animal kingdom, because they were aware. I don't think any animal other than the human covers up their body. Of course, you could say we do it for warmth, but that argument is invalid when I have to sit in a hot classroom full of smelly peers during the summer months, and I don't see anyone naked. Come to think about it, isn't their a law about walking around in public is not right and you will get in trouble if you do? So I agree with you on that stringJunky

Sometime someone asked what zero divided by zero was. Someone answered if 0x=0, then 0/0=x. That's all fine in good, but isn't there a rule that anything divided by itself is one? So wouldn't you technically be turning nothing into one? How does that work? Can someone give a mathematical explanation on what is right? I don't get how 0/0=x, but how can that be true. Wouldn't 0/0=1, so x would equal one? But 0 does not equal one. Thanks for your thought and time.