ronnie33

I have been attempting for several weeks to post my ULTIMATE UNIFYING THEORY? on the SCIENCE FORUM website which seems not to be able to recognise a paste from WORD. I am desperately in need of the opinion of my peers because the concept seems so elegantly logical. The Eureka moment came when I inverted on of sciences assumptions? and everything seemed to fall into place. This inversion, if it 'carries', brings the elusive definition of gravity, and by association what black-holes probably are. It leads on to a further proposal of Time before the big-bang and thus how the big-bang got its near infinite material to furnish the universe in which we have evolved. Replies to previous comments are now incorporated in the Preface. Since I, and a few others, have been unable to publish Word Pastes on the Forum I am obliged to offer to forward a copy to anyone who is interested on aka Ronnie33 and Conway2.

Thanks for those who replied with suggestions about the Science websites' inability to accept Word pastes which makes intelligent communication difficult.

Still unable to Paste from Word or allowed to append an attachment. Isn't it about time the Science Forum caught up with the 21st Century?

Preface Is science today blinkering itself with complexity? black holes, bent space/time, string-theory, multiverses and the search for a God particle. Possibly, are the answers more simple? Below is the only proposition I am aware of that postulates what gravity is, and therefore what Black holes possibly are, and hypothesizes 'Time' before the Big Bang. The Eureka moment came from an inversion of one of science's assumptions. If this inversion is proven correct, then out comprehension of our universe is also upside down. The proposal may contradict an accepted unchallenged theory, but it is provocatively logical' A UNIFYING THEORY There cannot be nothing. There was always something. It is proposed that 'something' was an infinite, endless force field operating on all frequencies and in every direction oscillating at light speed like a multi-layered surface of the sea. Within this environ, atoms became created from the precise collision of frequencies from every direction which momentarily arrested light speed. A precise collision of frequencies at the positive peak spewed out a proton. A precise collision at a negative peak created an electron and a precise collision at zero peak produced a neutron. Observation noted electrons streaming towards protons and the obvious conclusion was that protons attract. What is more difficult to explain is how this attraction somehow reverses into repulsion in close proximity and directs electrons into orbiting protons to create hydrogen. The proposal is that it is electrons that attract, but with relatively insignificant mass, it's the electrons that do the moving and in close proximity are repelled by protons into orbits creating hydrogen. The above inversion leads logically to the proposal that gravity is the attraction of a mass of electrons, modest from the molten interior of Earth, massive in our Sun. Within infinity's billions of years, hydrogen gathered into a cloud of explosive potential. It is proposed that within infinite space and infinite time, the continual and unrestricted growth of this concentration of hydrogen led inevitably and eventually to cause the core temperature of this cloud to heat from its own gravity, from minus 173.15 degrees C (the temperature of a single hydrogen atom) to reach the flashpoint of hydrogen, plus 500 degrees C. This Big Bang, fuelled with material from a hydrogen cloud of near infinite size, spewed this near infinite matter into space; enough material to furnish our universe. The resultant interactions from heat, gravity and velocity caused more complex assortments of matter to evolve into suns, residue material formed planets, et cetera, et cetera. The above suggests the Big Bang was not the beginning of the universe as we know it, but a logical event within infinity and therefore was not the creation of some superior intelligence but the logical and inevitable creation of a force field operating within infinite space and infinite time. Ronnie33.

I am trying to paste in a download from Word for some time. My Eureka moment came from inverting one of sciences assumptions which provided the missing definition of Gravity which led toward what Black-holes probably are, followed by proposing Time before the Big Bang and how this event managed to spew out enough matter to furnish the universe in which we have evolved. The proposal also disposes that creation was not the invention of a superior intelligence but the logical result of a force field operating within infinity. If I was able to publish the paste from Word to show the entire argument I would very much like the opinion of my peers. If my basic 'inversion' is wrong, then the proposal collapses, but if it carries, then our understanding of our world also turns upside down. Ronnie33

Magazines New Scientist, BBC's Focus and Astronomy Now had no problem accepting my post uploaded from Word. Word is a fairly commonly used, and you have accepted my Word uploads in the past. There seems to be something wrong with your website programming unless you are deliberately blanking me. Are you?