Merlin3069

The only tag i used was a quote tag, no colors or anything... thats weird there seems to be a bug in the forum software, when i redid it and previewed it did the same thing... Were smashing atoms to try and find gravitons it wouldn't make much sense to do that if atoms did not contain gravitons let me change *some* of the original idea and see if i can put it in a different light idea rewritten: What if, and bear with me here, the reason that physics breaks down when you look at particles, is because those particles do not represent the forces your trying to calculate. What I mean is, we know that the photon represents ElectroMagnetic energy (light waves) and were pretty sure there is a particle that represents gravity and were looking into the possibility of other particles representing other forces. it makes sense that when your looking at *other* particles, they would not be affected by those laws of physics, but only by the forces which they represent For example, if we break apart an atom, splitting its the particles that represent gravity out of it and putting it back together without them (or, if the gravity particles are not part of the atom then if we were to disassociate the atom and the particles *they have to be linked _somehow_*), then we could not expect the atom to have any mass (no effect of gravity on the atom), or to respond to gravity as it would have before. In summary, once we break apart the atom, we cant expect its smaller peices to behave like smaller versions of the atom itself, each particle type should and will have its own laws of physics because each particle is only going to respond to one force or represent one energy. an analogy for this: an office of 100 people consists of two I.T. guys to fix the computers, (the I.T. guys are the gravity particles), remove the I.T. guys and theres no one there to react to the issues that the computers would have, in the same way the atom would not be able to react to gravity if we removed (or disassociated) the gravity particles. <---> The following was a thought that came up after the above, the above (now that im awake enough to think about it rather than just write my thoughts, seems pretty obvious to anyone that has any common sense) <---> When we study statistics, we say that the larger a sample size, the closer the group of objects were studying approaches a normal value. <example numbers used> lets say a hydrogen atom, on average, because of its size, contains 50 particles that represent gravity (im not sure the technical name, i think its gravitrinos), but some contain less and some contain more, just because the universe is not perfect. the more hydrogen atoms we have, the more it will look like they ALL have 50 gravitrinos, and the more stable our calculations of gravity on the atom will be but if were only looking at a few hydrogen atoms, or even one, the likelyness of getting the 50 gravitrinos on average is very low because of this our calculations would be skewed and it would *look* like the laws of physics break down, when in fact its not the laws that break down, but rather our methods for using them a more detailed example, the average atom stated above has 50 gravity particles, were looking at a group of 10 atoms that contain between 45 and 55 of those particles each, the average for a sample size so small would likely not be exactly 50, and so our calculations would vary from one set to the next if we took a group of a thousand of those atom, and the *actual* average number of those particles is 50, then we would expect the average of our group to be 50 and then our calculations according to the standard laws of physics would be quite accurate. when we take just one atom, which may have anywhere from 45-55 gravity particles, and try to use the normal calculations (as we would on an object containing millions of atoms) then our calculations are going to likely be way off. to summarize this entire idea the reason that normal physics does not apply well to atoms is that the universe is not perfect. the reason that normal physics does not apply well to particles is that not ALL particles are affected by ALL laws of physics. removed a lot of the line breaks, it should work ok now

Were smashing atoms to try and find gravitons it wouldn't make much sense to do that if atoms did not contain gravitons let me change *some* of the original idea and see if i can put it in a different light idea rewritten: What if, and bear with me here, the reason that physics breaks down when you look at particles, is because those particles do not represent the forces your trying to calculate.<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">What I mean is, we know that the photon represents ElectroMagnetic energy (light waves) and were pretty sure there is a particle that represents gravity and were looking into the possibility of other particles representing other forces.<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">it makes sense that when your looking at *other* particles, they would not be affected by those laws of physics, but only by the forces which they represent<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">For example, if we break apart an atom, splitting its the particles that represent gravity out of it and putting it back together without them (or, if the gravity particles are not part of the atom then if we were to disassociate the atom and the particles *they have to be linked _somehow_*), then we could not expect the atom to have any mass (no effect of gravity on the atom), or to respond to gravity as it would have before.<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">In summary, once we break apart the atom, we cant expect its smaller peices to behave like smaller versions of the atom itself, each particle type should and will have its own laws of physics because each particle is only going to respond to one force or represent one energy.<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "> an analogy for this: an office of 100 people consists of two I.T. guys to fix the computers, (the I.T. guys are the gravity particles), remove the I.T. guys and theres no one there to react to the issues that the computers would have, in the same way the atom would not be able to react to gravity if we removed (or disassociated) the gravity particles. The following was a thought that came up after the above, the above (now that im awake enough to think about it rather than just write my thoughts, seems pretty obvious to anyone that has any common sense) <br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">When we study statistics, we say that the larger a sample size, the closer the group of objects were studying approaches a normal value.<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><example numbers used><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">lets say a hydrogen atom, on average, because of its size, contains 50 particles that represent gravity (im not sure the technical name, i think its gravitrinos), but some contain less and some contain more, just because the universe is not perfect.<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">the more hydrogen atoms we have, the more it will look like they ALL have 50 gravitrinos, and the more stable our calculations of gravity on the atom will be<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">but if were only looking at a few hydrogen atoms, or even one, the likelyness of getting the 50 gravitrinos on average is very low<br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); "><br style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; background-color: rgb(248, 250, 252); ">because of this our calculations would be skewed and it would *look* like the laws of physics break down, when in fact its not the laws that break down, but rather our methods for using them a more detailed example, the average atom stated above has 50 gravity particles, were looking at a group of 10 atoms that contain between 45 and 55 of those particles each, the average for a sample size so small would likely not be exactly 50, and so our calculations would vary from one set to the next if we took a group of a thousand of those atom, and the *actual* average number of those particles is 50, then we would expect the average of our group to be 50 and then our calculations according to the standard laws of physics would be quite accurate. when we take just one atom, which may have anywhere from 45-55 gravity particles, and try to use the normal calculations (as we would on an object containing millions of atoms) then our calculations are going to likely be way off. to summarize this entire idea: the reason that normal physics does not apply well to atoms is that the universe is not perfect. the reason that normal physics does not apply well to particles is that not ALL particles are affected by ALL laws of physics.

What if, and bear with me here, the reason that physics breaks down when you look at smaller particles, is because those particles do not represent the forces your trying to calculate. What I mean is, we know that the photon represents ElectroMagnetic energy (light waves) and were pretty sure there is a particle that represents gravity etc. it makes sense that when your looking at *other* particles on the same scale, they would not be affected by those laws of physics. For example, if we break apart an atom, splitting its gravity particles out of it and putting it back together without them (this is just an example), then we could not expect the particle to have any gravity, or to respond to gravity as it would have before. In summary, once we break apart the atom, we cant expect its smaller peices to behave like smaller versions of the atom itself, each particle type should and will have its own laws of physics because each particle is only going to respond to one force or represent one energy. When we study statistics, we say that the larger a sample size, the closer the group of objects were studying approaches a normal value. im going to make up some random numbers. lets say a hydrogen atom, on average, because of its size, contains 50 gravity particles (im not sure the technical name, i think its gravitrinos), but some contain less and some contain more, just because the universe is not perfect. the more hydrogen atoms we have, the more it will look like they ALL have 50 gravitrinos, and the more stable our calculations of gravity on the atom will be but if were only looking at a few hydrogen atoms, or even one, the likelyness of getting the 50 gravitrinos on average is very low because of this our calculations would be skewed and it would *look* like the laws of physics break down, when in fact its not the laws that break down, but rather our methods for using them So to summarize this whole idea Because the universe is not perfect, each atom is unique, you cannot do individual calculations on atoms with the *average* numbers and expect the calculations to be precise. I dont know if this is something new or if its something that has been well documented, i just thought of it the other day and wanted to post it.