mephestopheles

Reply to Strange -

Bignose, Your test would prove me wrong I already know that. Your saying that the Photons ( because it can act as a particle or an Energy ) , when projected on one side of the brick wall IF it passes through will be detected at the same levels on the opposite side as if it were passing through glass, correct ? When light passes through glass it is unchanged because glass is not Opaque. Glass Is just as solid as a Brick wall though . When light, in this theoretical state strikes the wall ( you suggested a Floodlight ) you are sending a very high level of Light in the form of Photon bundles against one side of the wall . The area affected radiates light back too you and even radiates heat due to the molecular excitement which is set up by the bombardment and it's conversion as it passes through the wall . Again consider dropping a pebble in a pond . Now consider billions of trillions on that same smooth surface . There is an Energy expenditure as it passes through. one side will radiate because of that energy expenditure , the other will not for the same reason. What will be detected on the other side of the wall will be the same level of light because it will be vibrating at the same frequency as the color spectrum normally emitted by the brick wall . The energy which is quite evidently expended on the other side of the wall will not be there because it was spent . Therefore the light exiting will not be detected at higher levels because t lacks the energy to be detected. I have thought about for many years . Now I have a question for you, Bignose . Is there an equation that can show what is happening when a Photon stops, reverses direction or changes angle ans "reflected" at the same speed it was traveling before the Collision. You ask for specifics. I ask for specifics. Not what is happening before or after the Impact but only what happens in that Infinitesimally small amount of time the light is striking and being reflected. What energy level is created ? For how long ? This page tells a lot about the whole process as it is believed to occur but does not specify what is happening precisely at the moment of reflection . http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/PY106/Reflection.html

Ophiolite As I see it disagreement is a function of misunderstanding . Not only do I not have the Mathematical language but I do speak Chinese either. So, I'm going to assume this is a situation like that, I assume you don't speak Chinese either ? So, why would you ask that I describe something in Chinese when you know I don't speak it ? I described a Very large concept , a concept normally being things seen in the mind, understood in the mind , And conceived in the mind. I have a mind. You have a mind . Mathematics may be the language of Physics but, I stated clearly I am not a Physicist. I am a Lay person trying to share an idea I have, as a Theory of an alternate Possibility to the Big Bang theory and consequently all that follows after that happened. I will give another example of an Idea that I have long held and described to others who caught on to it right away. How can a Photon ( which possesses both the attributes of a Particle and Energy ) traveling at the speed "c" strike an object (lets say a brick wall ) stop, turn, and continue ( sometimes at a 180 degree angle) in the Opposite direction. My take on it is that it does NOT stop. I goes right through the Brick wall . What is "seen" and is called Reflected light is not. It is a Vibration set up in the material of the Brick wall ( like dropping a pebble into a pond ) a Harmonic vibration which radiates excited Photons from the area of impact. But the Original Photon passes through and DOES not stop, like a Neutrino or Gamma ray .

Sorry, but , I seem to have misplaced my Collider . Experimentation of this nature would be Impossible without one. However, in the reports I have read about the Collisions of "Hadrons" or Proton bundles at CERN in the LHC , there are many wordy descriptions of what happens during the Explosions, how that various particles are produced and how long the "decay" period is for each , But no information as to where they "Go" what happens to them after the explosions . Do they just Disappear or do they then become Dis Integrated Particles ? Perhaps an equation for something like that might look something like -E=(square root of "c")/m ? I am am not a physicist. I don't have the maths . I can however describe an object in basic terms Height, width, depth and duration . Unless I am mistaken that describes a 4 dimensional object . So lets try describing a "D Particle as H^-infinity x W^-infinity x D^-infinity x ( T ( duration ) =1^infinity ).Without the "1" for duration I believe I would have described a physical state that doesn't exist as in ( T^ -infinity ). Now you have a mathematical "idea" or general concept of what I mean by a Dis Integrated particle . It isn't connected to anything else except Time. Now multiply that particle enough times to fill an area the size of the Universe and you have the state I see as being before the Conversion of these particles into "Normal" matter began . Perhaps a description like this [ H^-infinity x W^-infinity x D^-infinity x ( T ( duration ) =1^infinity ) ] x infinity ? Now can you have a "little" understanding as to what I am trying to get at ?

E=mc2 | Albert Einstein This expression appears tangentially in Einstein's 1905 work "Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?" Based upon the work of Heinrich Hertz and the equations of Maxwell, the document did not describe a general derivation for E=mc2. In other words, it did not provide a comprehensive description of mass energy equivalence starting from the equations of motion that in this case would be the Lorentz Equations. Rather the 'miracle' paper was torn apart by the famous scientist Planck and others who noticed deficiencies in the original formulation. In fact, it expresses the results of a simple analysis of pulses of light to the right and to the left of a radiating object given equal energy pulses of L/2 in opposite directions. Passing the equations through momentum computations the change in an object's lost mass is the energy L/(c^2). Thus, Einstein, did not originally provide a generalized, decisive and conclusive description of mass-energy equivalence. http://www.relativitycollapse.com/e=mc2.html General Relativity Predicts Space-Time SingularitiesSpace-time singularities and event horizons are a consequence of general relativity, appearing in the solutions of the gravitational field. Although the "big bang" singularity and "black holes" have been an topic of intensive study in theoretical astrophysics, one can seriously doubt that such mathematical monsters should really represent physical objects. In fact, in order to predict black holes one has to extrapolate the theory of general relativity far beyond observationally known gravity strengths. Quoting Albert Einstein shows that he was quite aware of this conceptual problem: "For large densities of field and of matter, the field equations and even the field variables which enter into them will have no real significance. One may not therefore assume the validity of the equations for very high density of field and of matter, and one may not conclude that the 'beginning of the expansion' [of the universe] must mean a singularity in the mathematical sense. All we have to realize is that the equations may not be continued over such regions." [2] http://aether.lbl.gov/www/classes/p139/speed/fgr.html

xyzt , I don't pretend to know everything . I do "see" things in my mind , though . I stated clearly that I did not expect acceptance . What I say flies in the face of everything I have read about "how" everything came to be as it is today . Yet I see it as a distinct possibility . The common theory in existence say's that from an infinitesimally small space heat and gravity caused so much excitement in the plasma that existed then that it ignited and the Proof of it is "gravity waves" that have been recently discovered And the " Residual Microwave Background Noise " . It expanded very quickly ( nanoseconds ) and then in a very short time things began to cool and coalesce into larger and larger clumps of matter and then made Stars, and Galaxies , and Dark matter and Normal Matter and Anti Matter , etc . All of this according to some is a Hologram or the Universe is Flat like Pizza. Some say it's rolled up like a Tube . Depictions by Artists ( whose hand is guided by the Knowledge given to him by a Scientist I am sure ) are in most cases I have seen like a long narrow Bell . But , what do we See when we look out into the Universe - 360 degrees Cosmic East to West and 360 degrees Cosmic North to South ? The depictions I have seen of the Cosmic Microwave background don't support a Flat Universe or a Tube or a Hologram and no Strings to support the "String" theory have been found YET either. These are all accepted as Possible Viable Theoretical ideas and people work very hard to make the math show what they want to see. Calculation after calculation is thrown out till Viola' the problem is solved. What type of Mathematics do you use for an Idea that is so far "Out there" and so much BS that the math hasn't even been invented yet to describe it properly ? What formula would YOU use to describe a particle that was broken down into it's smallest possible constituent parts ? Can you expand that to show an entire Universe FULL of them and nothing else ? Can you describe Vortices that may have formed and grew and caused particles to bump into each other and some of them to stick together in one way and some to stick in another ? You may know how to do this , I don't . In Mathematical terms what would show proof of a catalyst that started a chain reaction so large that it filled that universe with "Normal" matter ? Which when mapped Now looks like an Ant farm with Tunnels going in all directions ? Surely you keep up with the latest news enough to be able to recognise this specific thing I am speaking of. It is a Mapping of the Dark Matter in our observable Universe and where it is thought to be. I can take criticism. Speak your mind. But while you're at it consider that Many of Einstein's equations have been found to be flawed . How many have you put to the side as not Viable ? Mathematics might be the way to describe something to someone who knows nothing but mathematics. But, that's not everyone. Sometimes you just have to talk. Cladking see " Phaneron " . There is no reality ( literally outside of YOU ) everything that exists is as you perceive it to be. This is " YOUR " reality. Specific to you, and no one else will experience it Exactly the same way.

So many people have commented. I am amazed at the outpouring of information . My Theory : Maybe something unthought of , Maybe Not. All things are made up of smaller constituent particles. This has been demonstrated in so many different ways it hardly needs proof I would like to think. The LHC has shown us that "things" can be broken down into their smallest constituent particles . I blows very tiny things up . When these Objects collide at a nearly the speed of Light they Dis integrate. By that I mean the individual constituent particles are separated from each other. Each particle then has it's own set of Properties that describe it as being a different object or type of object than the others in the Integrated Object. For instance a quark is not a Proton it is a part of a Proton but is not the Proton. What happens to the Particles after they have been blasted apart from the bonds that hold them together Do they find a Proton with missing quarks and bond to it or remain dis integrated ? This what my theory is based on, the dis - integration of particles in a medium of infinite size, Height, width, depth, and duration . I contend that in the beginning , everything that exists now, existed then, it just was not "integrated" in larger pieces than the smallest possible particle of the various elements that exist now. The medium I can do some math on - Or Universe is about 13.7 Billion years old. It has expanded in that time to be roughly 100 billion light years in diameter. This is what we can "see" , what we can detect with the current technology available. Of that roughly 5% is "normal" matter. The rest is Dark Matter and Dark Energy which has only been quote detected unquote because of the gravitational field it has. Some "lensing" has even been observed. I would submit that this Dark Matter and Dark Energy IS the disintegrated elements that make up all of our Universe and since only 5% is Normal Matter the Conversion is still an active process. I calculate that at the current rate of expansion this Universe would run out of dis - integrated materials when it is 2.74x10^15 years old. But, due to Stephen Hawking's theory explaining what is now called Hawking Radiation it has been shown that a possible lengthening of that would be in order. Why, Black holes are not compressing matter into an infinitesimally small space , they are dis- integrating it back into the state where it is no longer "normal' Matter and Energy but Dark Matter and Energy and expelling it back into the Universe. Black Holes - Are the most massive at the center of Large or what used to be large Galaxies. I submit that the reason for this is simple / compounded Gravity. Not inside the Hole so much as Outside . What is in the hole is in the form of a Vortex, a Gravity vortex fed by the gravity of Billions of Trillions of stars circling it at varying distances but ALL of which have gravity. consider how much ( like the moon causes tides ) compounded gravity there would be in a 1 degree section( like a pie slice) of a Galaxie 280 million light years in radius. Draw that to a pinpoint central target and there would be NOTHING in the Universe that would not be dis - integrated to very smallest possible state . Now compound that by 365 degrees. Unimaginable force pulling on the center of the black hole from every direction. Gravity so strong that Photons have the Radient energy stripped from that which does not radiate. This is dis integration. Re - integrating - I am working on this. it is the founding action ALL of this is based on. Particles that belong together being thrown Light years apart from each other. How do they rejoin to each other ? Do they rejoin to each other or do they fall into place where they fit like Micro-Cosmic Sub-Atomic Sub Particulate Tetris blocks ? How fast does it occur ? Has this rejoining been demonstrated at LHC or are there ONLY explosions and detection of that and the study stops there? Galactic shapes and other vortices -- When ( for the sake of less typing I would like to call Dis-Integrated Particles " D particles" ) D Particles combine to form a Proton, Neutron, etc. what process system is followed - how Geometrically does it proceed ? I submit that it all follows a specific pattern and one of, if not The, most common Pattern in nature. Fibonacci numbers . It is seen in Galaxies as it is also in water, In snail shells and in Tornadoes , even in DNA . The test for me will be to see at some point galaxies which are reversed in rotation from what is Normally seen . Like water swirls one way in the Northern Hemisphere and the other direction the Southern. To me this would greatly gratifying . Same for Black Holes. There you have it some of the Theories I have worked out mentally, like in a thought experiment , ruling out one action and trying another, ruling it out and trying a third, etc. MY main BURNING question I would like to prove is that there was no Big Bang . Everything was not blown apart but just by as yet some unknown catalyst ( perhaps gravity ) started joining together, quickly . Like blowing up a surgical glove with a gas. The expansion is quick but "controlled" and proceeds in a specific manner after a set pattern. This would be on a Universal scale . Fibonacci numbers.

INow -- "^Bravo. The posts in this thread should be pinned somewhere for future reference. So clear and accurate and accessible. Well done! " mephestopheles -- " I see that iNow appreciates not having to endure the tedious practice of understanding language as opposed to pure logical mathematics." iNow -- " Wait, What ? " I suppose "somewhere for future reference would be the * Trash Bin * , iNow ? I did not come to this forum for my health. Nor did I come looking for Immediate acceptance . I expect ridicule and disbelief and criticism . As I said at the outset , I have taken a look at quite a few other forums where discussions concerning Physics and "how the universe works" was the Prime topic of discussion . I did think that I would at least be able to present my belief in layman's terms and there would be Some degree of understanding within a group of individuals who are probably of the "upper crust " intellectually rather than of a more base nature and lacking in abilities to visualize concepts mentally. I will at this point ask if the Mathematical portion is so important then why....... are graphics used with virtually every new discovery to allow visualization of the subject matter ? Surely E=mc ^2 should be sufficient to explain that the increased relativistic mass (m) of a body comes from the energy of motion of the body—that is, its kinetic energy (E)—divided by the speed of light squared (c^2) without ever translating it into terms which could be expressed linguistically . Wouldn't ya think ?? So, at this point I am a little disappointed at the reception I have received and feel perhaps I should just start over . Possibly elsewhere,.... that remains to be seen. Hello, my name .... doesn't matter , you can call me Mephestopheles ( misspelling IS intentional ) . I am interested in presenting ideas to this group. Not necessarily for acceptance but rather to test the waters and see if the Ideas "float" or not . ​I will try to use mathematics where I can and where I can't I would beg your indulgence in trying to mentally visualize just what I am trying to say.

I submit to not having the education many if not all of you do on this forum. I am incapable of performing the mathematical functions to satisfactorily arouse your interest. I will bow out and close / delete my account. Thank you for your time and patience with my ignorance . I had written a LONG explanation of many of the things I wanted to discuss but after thinking about it I just deleted it. I see that iNow appreciates not having to endure the tedious practice of understanding language as opposed to pure logical mathematics. Bignose thanks for the advise , I am excited about my theory, now I just need to take the time to learn Geometry, Trigonometry, Calculus, all the various form of Mathematical theory and come back with something you guys can sink your teeth into. Disintegrated means not integrated, integrated being a state in which things are together and joined by some bond or common force such as Gravity or Magnetism or the Higgs field. Something that is so broken down that there are NO connections between particles / antiparticles / dark matter-energy , etc, this is a state in which "normal" matter does not exist because it is not joined with any of the forces ( gravitational, electrical, magnetic, higgs .... ) in this state it is dis integrated. That's what I meant by that term - Disintegrated. I have no mathematical proofs of this. However Stephen Hawking has just published a paper on what is known now as Hawking Radiation. His theory basically states that at the edge of the Event horizon of a Black Hole matter is literally torn apart to the point where it's energy is radiated away from the Black Hole while it's mass is drawn into the hole. It disintegrates. I have not been able to find a way to delete or unsubscribe from this Forum so I will just Sign out . Again, Thank you for your time.

Bignose & Klaynos, I would like firstly to Thank you for your responses. Second though I have to repeat that what education I have is mostly self taught. "I have an IQ of nearly 160. I do not have any advanced classes in Mathematics or Physics." I suppose to be most accurate in this quest for knowledge and recognition of my Idea I need collaboration. ​So, without further adieu I will try to verbalize my Ideas and if someone is interested in commenting OR helping by way of mathematical proofs I would appreciate it Very much . And Please remember , NO ONE has ever just sat down and written out a complete fully fleshed out Theory with Mathematical and Physiological Proofs in one sitting. Some have a gift - an Eidetic memory. Some have other gifts and are called Savants because the one thing they can do is done with no training and yet is done flawlessly. One instance I might cite is a young Gentleman ( I forget his name ) who was flown over NY City and afterwards sat down and drew a picture of the City and every window was where it was supposed to be every building scaled to proper height, width and depth in perspective as they got further away from his chosen vantage point to begin the drawing, Streets, street signs, window banners etc. were in the perfect places as they were seen from the air in his fly over. I mention this because Science isn't all about equations , mathematical formulas, and so many things that cause great ideas to be rejected because the person couldn't do the math. Science is first and foremost about Ideas. DaVinci had an Idea, Lister had an Idea, Galileo had an Idea, Einstein had an Idea. From there the rest was fleshed out but first there was the raw mental picture of things as they are and not as someone says they should be ( i.e. "the Earth is flat " ) . With your permission i hope to do just that. Present a raw idea. I see it in my mind and I can try to express it in the most clear and succinct manner of which I am capable. Your permission to be heard is all I seek. I may be a fool, I may be onto something that will change everything or I may not have the foggiest concerning what I want to express. But, until I do so, neither you or I will be able to determine if this has merit or if it is just so much "Hogwash". Here in a nutshell is the Idea of which I speak, disintegration. Disintegration being defined as breaking a thing let's say a Proton down into the smallest possible pieces ( I use pieces instead of quarks or muons or any of the other sub-sub atomic particles because those particles in disintegration would be broken down into their smallest constituent "pieces" ) to the point that they would no longer retain the properties of either matter or energy. For instance - in the LHC single protons collide at almost the speed of light and explode. Out of this there are many different particles generated which make up a single proton. Among them a very special particle that at first was only Theorised and now is known to exist - the higgs boson . It is 3:30 am here and I can hardly hold my eyes open, I'll continue later.

Klaynos, I once had very smart guy, OK, maybe not the brightest bulb in the string ( He was a RadioShack District Manager ) told me that knowing everything was not what was most important , Knowing where to find it was though. I have to ask, so I know how to proceed , what idea was presented and what does a geostationary orbit that is based on centripetal force have to do with it. I'm sure I can Google the maths for a Geostationary orbit , but, I don't understand what that might have to do with an as yet unexpressed idea ? There are also unknown variables to the Geostationary orbit. What is orbiting ? How much mass does it have. What color is it ? I ask for color because over a period of time an orbiting object with a high reflective factor would get pushed out of its Geostationary orbit by Sunlight. Each pass in the direct path of the light would push it a little further and a little further into or out of the Earth's gravitational pull and it would eventually completely lose orbit and either ascend into space or descend into the atmosphere. Mass is needed as well due to the gravitational "pull" that the Moon would express on the object as Tidal gravity. Again each pass would pull on one side of the Earth away from it and on the other side it pull into the Earth's gravity at a higher level. So, the orbit might be temporarily Geosynchronous but it would eventually decay to a point where it would as I stated above ,fall into the Earths atmosphere or ascend out of orbit and "float" away into space. Knowing these variables would allow for intermittent adjustments to be made to prolong the orbit till fuel or electro / mechanical failure resulted in a Failure to adjust and the decay into the earth or ascension away from the Earth would again begin. So, given that the object would eventually fall or leave orbit outward in one way or another it would be safe to say that a True geostationary orbit cannot with total accuracy be calculated. Even the Moon is moving away a little each year. This still leaves the question in my mind , what has this to do with an idea or theory that I have as yet to express ??

I have looked at several Physics discussion site and I have tried to post to them with no success. ANY thoughts outside of the currently "known" or that which has been mathematically proven are Taboo. At least on those sites. I WANT / NEED criticism of the theory I would like to posit. After much thought ( experimentation ? ) I have a theory which I feel unifies everything. From the Beginning till now and onward for about 200+ Billion years. From beginning I mean what is called the "Big Bang" but, in mind was not, an almost entirely different process took place in my theory. I have an IQ of nearly 160. I do not have any advanced classes in Mathematics or Physics. I do not even have a Proper High School Diploma, just a GED. I think that perhaps my theory has some degree of plausibility because I see things from a different perspective than many people do. I see them in my mind. I hope I might have a chance to present my thoughts and have civil rebuttal concerning them , if that is allowed on this site. Thank you for the prompt replies I have already recieved and I look forward to hearing from you all again.

Someone, Possibly a Moderator , please tell me why New thoughts and new ways of looking at things are "Trash" ?