absolute1

I don't know alot of things, so I can't do all cases. But let tell you the different in thinking and not thinking. I will demonstrate the case of 1+1= a chicken. So I write down 1+1. The ink are atoms and it start to obsorb energy from surrounding. Energy convert to mass. All the masses start to get bigger and undergo all form of nuclear decay yeilding differents atoms. The atomic process fuse these atoms together to form bonds and helix like structure. A chicken appear. Can it possible now from this process? This is the different between thinking and just saying things.

Hi all again, Yeah, probably surprise to see me. I just want to apologize to you guys. I let myself way too excited for new finding. This is what I believe. Spiritual came to me and reveal to me the logic of nature. I feel go great about this logic that completely determine the ultimate answer by myself without listening to the spirit anymore. They left me... and as I continue to expand to the new finding, I can't find the logic necessary. Sigh... all is gone. So I only retain some truth to this logic. The last post was my theory on the view of mass. Of course that made up by me without further listening to what spririt have to say so it's imcomplete. But that's, the crack point to nature. We need different view to find the answer. Back to this momentum problem. I can't complete convince you guys to believe me in this case because it involve so many parameter. Sound, heat, vibration, air. Even though it's a simple case, but internal it's not at all. Recall an object M trave at V hit another object half of its mass at rest. Let's say it's complete momentum transfer. The Object M now at rest and object 1/2 M moving at 2V. So the kinetic energy 1/2M possess is twice the amount of M when it moving. We have a net gain in Kinetic energy. Now plug that energy back to move M, you'll get M to a higher V. As the process continue, you gain and gain energy. However, how can you convert kinetic energy into some other form of energy? 1 of them is potential. Which we will ignore. The other is electric. Now maybe you don't believe Behdini motor, but that's the process that it use. Kinetic energy excess gain from wheel to electric, electric back to wheel. I can perfectly prove the mechanism in gravity, but I will choose to be selfish this time for the purpose of financial.

This is why modern science fail and never gets their head back. I understand that there are so many fraudulent claims that make the peer review system and all, but one good scientist can think about this theory and see it right or wrong in a few deeps thought. I guess you're not one of them. I'm sorry I'm out of this. There are more open minded people out there.

Well, I'm so right I don't need anyone to believe. This is my theory, if you want to make a break through, you come to me, I don't have to come to you. I don't need the Nobel Price. I'm for humanity. I don't care if someone take my work and rewrite it and becomes the most famouse ever. I .. don't...care. You probably haven't experience something this level of excitement. I think I'm calm by not running outside naked yelling Ureka. Having enough said, Newton doesn't need any proving on action reaction force, does he? Check back with everything you know about physics and put this in. It works perfectly. It already proven for me and you for centuries. You just don't have the right perception of it. What is escape velocity? The velocity so fast that mass is negative. At certain velocity, you can kick a baseball and make it rotate around the earth. If you go higher than that, the mass will becomes negative and start to departs the earth. That's the velocity require to be floating if you must. Why does particle accelerate near the speed of light take several city power and make little increaes in velocity. That's because they gaining infinite negative mass. We can rotate an object so high speed at it start to have negative mass and float out of this earth. Wake up... time to walk into a new world of science. We are not forgetting the old world, we're just improving it. Don't think that all the work of science shatter in vain. Matter of fact, we need modern science to help us develope further equation and possibility. This is a good event for quantum mechanic and relativity to fuse together with Newtorian. Can you feel the possibility? Let's walk down the path of glory.

The theory of everything!!!! A moving object will posses a certain extra mass depends on how fast it moves! The mass is not as one might think. The mass have direction! The direction of the mass is the same as the direction of its velocity. I did it!!!!!! UREEEEEKAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaa I'm so sorry................ IT'S MASS LOSS, NOT MASS GAIN. Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeyaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa One more time. It's mass gain, not mass loss. Anyway, there's a few things I like to address. First, this means the conspiracy theory is true, maybe not as harsh as they describe and it's because of a reason. However, we can work around this reason. Please do not contribute this to a chaos event. See this as our break point of the century and a new age for this planet. This theory can infact lead to overunity. That means alot of things to us. That means there are aliens and civilization other than us. That means we can also start making vehical traveling through space. If we drell on this theory a bit more, we could break the time barrier and be a superior race in the galactic. Please... again, I ask you to be calm and we proceed this as a good event.

Hi all, It's very nice for you all to join. Man, I gotta give it to you guys. It's beyond imagination for your cases. Well, none of can dismiss the philosophy still. That's not thinking. That's saying things you don't even know what you talking about.

"When you think of something, it exist and becomes possible." Welcome, join me to find cases to make this flaw. I've think of the earth blow up, or even bizzard as human grows wings and fly. It's still can't dismiss this philosophy. What's yours?

bullet mass m,velocity v. block mass M, velocity V. Imbeded, moved together. Energy method: Initial energy 1/2 mv^2 + 1/2 MV^2 . Final energy 1/2*Mtogether*(Vtogther)^2 + sound + imbeded energy momentum method: mv+MV=Mtogher(Vtogether) Vtogether=(mv+MV)/Mtogether final energy= 1/2 * Mtogether * Vtogether^2 Two different answer. Which one is better man? Which one is right man? Or use both method? How do I combind both method to use man? So what man? Law of Energy conserve is flaw or law of momentum flaw man. Oh and you may said the velocity in energy method must be lower. In reality, it moves at the velocity of the momentum case, so you have extra sound and imbedment energy. Don't bother ask me for proof, do the homework yourself.

What I said sorry about was that I don't have the appetize to bringing up discussion of other topic because more problems arise when I go into details at conservatioin of energy, but some people mistake that for the post. It probably because it put it in the same post. But does it matter? An issue is an issue and it doesn't matter if I'm interest or not. If you love science you should do it just because you love science. Anyway, first, I thank you for bring up the topic to discuss even though it already closed. I know you do it for science. Second, thank you for verifying my equation is correct, I doubt myself at first too. Momentum and energy is not the same thing, hm... OMG, i agree with you 101% . So let me ask you this, a bullet hit a block and imbeded. They move together after that. Determine the energy using the momentum, then energy method. Each method gives a different value. What value would you pick? Don't tell me it's two different thing. This case have only 1 answer. I'm waiting. The real experiment shows that 1 case is true, the other method is wrong. Tell me which case if you really know what you talking about. If that's the case, what's wrong with the other method? If it's too complicated, you don't have to do it. YOu can just answer me if energy can be calculated from both method, then why 1 wrong? You said this isn't a problem. It is a huge problem if you don't know which value to choose. This is your problem. You just say it's two differnt, unrelated quantity, then how the heck do 1 know what method to use when they have to pick? This is as logical as it can get.

Finally, someone that I could talk to. Actually, I have my reason for those lines. As you can see, I am not the one who started the fire. Drop my attitude, I've gave people sincerity and what do I get in return? Debate, proof? I've posted my debate, a phew try to gave some opinion which didn't made any good point. Then they close the post down with 2 problem still unsolve and open for debate. Ready for what? You bring it on. I know I am not the heavy type science person, but what I know must be solid. I believe in good strong foundation and not some 20 dimensions logic.

Good news guys, I just proved overunity in equations. Now I just need to verify it by a simple experiment. Then, going to to make the machine, sell it in the black market, then tell it to the world at a later time. Hahahaha, okay I laughed for you guys already. Happy?

Guys, all this crackpot thing boil down to "does the Law hold?" Mainstream is strong right now because the Law hold. So mainstream will only survive if the law continue to hold. The key answer to this would be a perpetual machine. If you look for the answer, you will find it. I remember the quantum father always rip their hair out because "this can't happens!, electron will spiral toward the center". They go so hard on themselves for the law of Energy conservation. If they just run over the law instead of go around it, they would be so much happier. Science would explain better and much more things with sense. By the way, I'm not talking about "the absolute Law of Conservation of Energy", I'm talking about what if there is another undiscover form of energy? The law of energy would still valid, it just our ignorance that made that law relative instead of absolute. Anyway, I thank you all for participate in this post. I have proved to myself enough time that the current Energy Law of conservation is incomplete. I won't bother you guys anymore about this. I will find this out myself and hopefully, change your heart. Until then, I ask that you have sympathy for those who just trying to help. Sincerely, Absolute1

Sayonara, are you being serious? Don't you have dreams? Radical dreams? Or you do but you don't take it seriously? Truthfully guys, up to this point I don't exactly know if we can budge the Law of Energy Conservation. But can you feel it? Deep down inside of you, your heart really settle for this law? What ever you do is whatever you get? No more no less? No magic? No miracle? Just think how dull one heart would feel. I'm being sincere, just ask your heart.

ajb, So I can view energy as the ability to do work. What you saying is when I am unable to lift a car up, i'm exhausting my ability. I can view work as a change in energy. So by unable to lift a car, i am unable to do work, but I have a change in energy? Forget it for a bit, let's help me do this. This doesn't add up for some reason and it makes no freaking sense at all. Suppose I push an object with for F in space with mass m for period of time t. The impuse will then be Ft=mv1. The energy the mass gain is 1/2 mv^2. Suppose I push an object with force F in space with mass 2m for the same period of time t. The impuse will then be Ft=2mv2. V2 is now 1/2v1. The energy the mass gain is 1/2*2m*(v1/2)^2 = 1/4mv1^2 . What in the dead twightlight zone is that? Can someone tell me what am i missing in the energy momentum concept? God I surely hope this is not a special case in energy momentum principle. I'm sorry but I just lost all interest bringing up topics for discussion in here. I'll be unactive until this resolve. I'm stuck on a simple energy momentum problem, unable to give myself a simple answer. Obviously either momentum or energy is conserve and both cannot be at the same time. Maybe this is the answer I've been seeking. That scientist did have a point in his example after all. This is too crazy to comprehend, thus exciting. I must investigate this matter in details. Keep in touch, I know you will miss me. Take care all

Dang, now you're even bashing the philosophers. I'm not taking part in this.

Hi, A ton is a measurement of weight. Some country use it, some use kiloNewton, some use kips. Anyay, it's not mass, it's weight. Static force is force pushing against something, but they do not move that object. You're sitting on a chair, you're exerting a static force on the chair. You're describe the force of mass*gravity*height is the force needed to move the object. My point was that if you put all your might to lift a car, it doesn't matter if you lift it or not, you'll exhaust energy. The same amount of energy independant of the car lifted or not.

I invite all of you to discuss about this science topic. We'll keep this to high school level . The concept will be straight forward and let's keep it as straight as possible. If you feel like this interfear with your basic understanding and have negative effect on school. I advice you not to join the discussion. If you have a disagreement, please say I disagree and give reason. There's no need to get the seriousness to level 3. What's level 3? Just some point. lol The topic I'm currently thinking of is Work-Energy theorem. I think this is the most important topic in science and needs more attention and effort on. Let's kick off: Energy has many forms. Work is one form of energy. I have two extra clues. One is pointed out by a scientist (godless his soul, I forgot his name) that Work is a higher order of energy. What he meant was that work can transform 100% to heat, but heat cannot transform 100% to work. Well, the second clue already said, heat engine can never be 100% efficient. Let's take a case on static force. The great question would be "Can static force do work?" . No? That's right, static force can not do work. Work is force times displacement in the same direction. No displacement, no work. The first great question lead to the second great question. "Can static force generate energy?" I have to stop on this one. Let's think about the scenarios. Rock sitting on other rock. A small electric motor pushing on a house, magnet cling against gravity, statue spead arms, you holding a book. Do they generate energy? I know some do. Magnet will fall after a certain period of time. Statue arm will crack and fall. Your hamburger and 2 chicken wings in your tummy used up. Motor will burn. However, nothing will budge. So in a way, yes. Maybe the work we put in is the lower end portion of the heat engine, meaning the inefficient portion. Let's assume you're lifting up a car weight 1 ton by yourself. Being so strong, you lift it with half a ton force. Nope, no cigar. Let's use leverage. Hey it works. So the force I spend is not useless after all. I can sweat and do no work, or I can sweat and do some work. We can conclude that static force generate energy. How much? There's no formula for it? Force times distance? what distance? 100yard? 10 km? Yep, dunno, but one thing for sure is that force is proportional to energy generate. So let's ask time for help. Time will keep us tract of our energy. Whoops, we stepped energy from static force to power. So.. with a certain force, a certain power generate. Let's take a break... If you are not disagreeing with this, you might ask well wanna pack your stuff. We're going to see Alpha Centauri.

Wouldn't it? What is American policy? Democracy. Everyone enjoys freedom. So does science, so does molecules and this chaos universe. One may say how can any form or pattern be created if we're all chaos. Look again, the earth is round, universe spiral, many natual things have geometry. They're all made up of atoms, and all atoms are chaos. Wth, how did they form circles geometry. Yeah, so why doesn't one spend more time on finding out that answer instead of holding on to the concept that chaos can't create order? I feel bad and unfair for the one of get bashed of their new ideas and thoughts. Every science level have controversy. Even Eistein level. So if there are controversal, there must be 1 right, the other wrong, or both right or wrong. Either way, 1 of them is a crackpot if not both. However, at the same level of intelligent, they dare not to call each other crackpot because they know themselves well. Now days, even a kid can call a professor crackpot by jumping on the bandwagon. Seriously, 99% of the people comes up with new theory going to be wrong. I only know 1 person who could get it right. God. Science is like realigion where Catholic, Protestant, Buhhism, Taoist.... as Newtorian, Quantum, Reletiviy... Remember back in the old days where one say the earth is round will be chopped. Now a day, where one say the earth is flat will be chopped. Wave, particle, particle, wave, right wrong, wrong, right. Let's move on. For those who in crackpot category. I admire you. Not because you have come up with some radical theory, but because your heart is great and you just want to find out the truth and sharing it with others. Though at the time you might think that because you just want to get recognize and be a badazz, but it's ok, you'll find out the true reason is because you want to help. Let me help you to becomes a more helpful person. First, you must not give up yet. Second, you must change your attitude. See yourself as not a scientist or physicist, but a philosopher. Do not bother to try convincing anyone if it gets too hot. "refer to the grass is blue", if someone doesn't tune in with what you say, it doesn't matter what you say. Now let's move to the technical details of developing your theory. Actually one have plenty resources of developing a powerful theory that could beat any veteran scientist. Why? Not because you're smarter than them, but because you're born later than them. You witness many experiment result that they didn't. You know the truth of certain reality that they didn't have the chance to witness. So those are the clues... reality facts. Science is develope to describe and fuse these facts together to make sense, so if you can do that, you have succeeded. What are the facts? They are everywhere, they are phenominas. I will give you a list as many as I could for you as food for thought. If anyone knows more facts, let's list them. We'll have some fun and carefree time. These are the list that you can investigate. I'm not talking about the how, I'm talking about the why, then the how. 1) spining object - when object spin, they are stable. 2) terminal velocity - object achieve zero acceleration at certain free fall speed. 3) lift phenomena 4) attraction, repulsion phenomena 5) pyzoelectric, pyroelectric phenomenas 6) superfluid, superconductivity phenomena 7) resonance these are just a few. There are more that I don't know. Look for the one with high tech experiment, cuz that's our next clue. Careful on your sources. Wrong source means you'll mess up yourself and your work. Be open mind and don't be too serious. If it is the truth, you should explain most of not everything with ease. Good luck to you. Peace out.

Thanks for all comments, pioneer: Your is a special case of language. I mean all cases can related. sysiphus, DrP: You're right, if they're all consistance with themselves and establish well comunication amongs, it wouldn't be a problem. What if black is not known yet and they all discover it independently? That's right, they will all interpret their own way and fighting each other for the same thing. This is what happening to religions and science right now, matter of fact, it's an ongoing process until people understand this.

Me: which forces is the strongest? Gravity? Electro magnetic? Nuclear? myself: Nuclear me: science says they're all differnt:gravitational is not nuclear. myself: Yep, just like 5 pies and 10 pies. me: So they're the same, just different in magnitude. myself: Wtf, so what's your problem? me: can we have something in between? Something transitional? myself: you mean 7.5 pie and stuff? me: yeah myself: heck yeah, all forces is transitional. Black hole force is stronger than nuclear and they're gravitational. me: Wth, so what's your problem? why you keep trying to find theories to describe them as 1? They're the same stuff.. pie. myself: yeah, but all together they're not transitional, some is several orders more than another. Like a charge, they're hella smaller , but they pick up many of their kinds against the earth, obviously that's not gravitational type. me: so as long as we have a fix mass system that make transitional force and cover all ranges of magnitude, we can call it 1 force unification? myself: I guess... me: Ok, let's suppose I have a charge and I rotate it in a circle. They will generate a magnetic field, A metal type particle come over and will get suck in. myself: great, you got electromagnetic force. What's your point? me: So i keep increasing its orbiting speed, creating a larger magnetic force. Therefor, keep increase its rotating speed and achieve any magnitude I want. myself: What's so extra ordinary? If I can make the earth bigger and bigger, I can achieve the same and any force I want. me: But you said no change in mass! myself: oh... well, but magnetic force doesn't work on non ferrious. me: Skeptic A!@#$%#

If in Tom eye the grass is blue and Mary eye see it red. You as the parents see it green. So you teach Tom and Mary the world green when see grass. You say "green". Tom hear "Occccck", Mary hear "Baang". So each time Tom see blue color, he says "occcck", and marry see a red color, she says "Baang". You yourself just know that they pointed at the green color and say "green". Deceptions.... all deceptions!