Amazing Theory of Everything

[Mordred]

Of course you have to be able to observe something in order to measure it, but you also need to make predictive calculations to confirm a theory matches observations. I have yet to see any calculations that relate to making any predictability of any of your claims.

Edited June 11, 2018 by Mordred

[Phi for All]

Also, for discussion, videos are terrible. I'm not about to keep playing it over and over to catch what you said so I can quote it here. 

I really dislike that you spent so many years making up your own terminology for words that are well-known. I agree with everyone here, to call everything energy is worthless. 

I also don't see any reason to treat time as a language. Math as a language is great, but you really have to torture either time or language to make them perform the same. It's too bad you didn't put such effort into understanding spacetime.

[Eugenio Ullauri]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

Universe.

people will understand it has having matter, energy, dark matter, dark energy, time space, fields and the list goes on what im trying to say is that the universes has only one component

15 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Of course you have to be able to observe something in order to measure it, but you also need to make predictive calculations to confirm a theory matches observations. I have yet to see any calculations that relate to making any predictability of any of your claims.

In the video to make a predictive calculation just use a future frame index, like frame #12343212 and that is how you get a predictive calculation but what my theory says is that it is implementation specific

[Mordred]

No unless you can perform any of the calculations we requested no one will ever use your model. Its useless to do so unless it can make predictions. For example I can predict how our universe evolves in expansion rates over time. I can also calculate the number density of particles from a blackbody temperature using the Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics. I can also calculate the range of a force. Every question I posed to you I can answer using mainstream physics.  Can you claim the same with your model?

 

I am asking for specific calculations not contained in your videos answer the questions for the specific calculations I requested . Your videos are useless to calculate the range of a force for example or lepton degeneracy etc or even the Chandreskar limit.

 

Edited June 11, 2018 by Mordred

[Eugenio Ullauri]

7 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Also, for discussion, videos are terrible. I'm not about to keep playing it over and over to catch what you said so I can quote it here. 

I really dislike that you spent so many years making up your own terminology for words that are well-known. I agree with everyone here, to call everything energy is worthless. 

I also don't see any reason to treat time as a language. Math as a language is great, but you really have to torture either time or language to make them perform the same. It's too bad you didn't put such effort into understanding spacetime.

Yeah videos are not good this is the first time i publish videos in youtube.

If you come up with a better name i can accept it i mean i don't know

Ok here i disagree with you, a unit of time is the same as saying one second is defined as how fast i can move my finger, or how much distance does light travel, or by x amount of revolutions of a wheel of certain size and speed, so it is language to represent a frame of reference of an event that was focused by a "focuser", so time is language please think about it.

Spacetime is just a concept einstein invented to give sense to the behaviours he observed which are useful for most of the local events, but any constant like einsteins speed of light all is doing is putting a limit into the equation.

The same with newton because newton does not say how to determine the mass of an object, so what im trying to say is that to imagine you create a simulation in a computer or even a perfect simulation and you create to worlds exactly the same and you introduce an object  on the same mass at the same location so that everything is the same at that time but when you run the simulation you start noticing that the simulations are behaving different and the reason is because the two particles were not the same they had the same mass and for newton were the same but what im trying to say here is that two objects that have the same mass and seem to be exactly the same may are not because in order to know if two objects are the same you need to know their energy organization.

To clarify this experiment is only possible in a simulation of two "worlds" because it is impossible to have two particles that are the same in the same simulation

[Sensei]

11 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

Well as my theory says there is not possible to destroy energy so annihilated is at least a bad term to refering to what happens

Quantum annihilation is absolutely correct word. It has been misused in sci-fi movies.. and laymen started to use it to describe state of non-existence..

Even if somebody destroys/burns something in the real world, there are remaining (at least) carbon dioxide and water.

15 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

when particles like a proton and antiproton interact, so annihilation is not possible,

Annihilation happens when particle is interacting with its antiparticle..

15 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

So you can get a lot of flavors of particles depending on the system's energy organization,

I am asking for precise data and calculations how did you get to it. What particles are created during annihilation of proton-antiproton, in what quantity for each branch, with what probabilities of happening for each branch, with what energies for each annihilation branch, what are allowed modes, what are disallowed modes, etc. etc.

So stop avoiding answering question. You asked for it by yourself couple posts ago..

23 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

Again if you need clarification just ask for it

Did not I ask "what are annihilation branches (modes) of proton-antiproton?" already.. ? And got nothing in reply...

So let's make it a bit easier: proton-antiproton prior annihilation are at rest..

If I would ask e.g. Mordred I wouldn't get much either (unless he would be busy searching the net for on-line answers), even though he is expert here. Because it's actually very very tough question. And not many quantum scientists remember details (unlike e.g. annihilation of electron-positron as it's relatively easy question)..

 

[Eugenio Ullauri]

9 minutes ago, Mordred said:

No unless you can perform any of the calculations we requested no one will ever use your model. Its useless to do so unless it can make predictions. For example I can predict how our universe evolves in expansion rates over time. I can also calculate the number density of particles from a blackbody temperature using the Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics. I can also calculate the range of a force. Every question I posed to you I can answer using mainstream physics.  Can you claim the same with your model?

 

I am asking for specific calculations not contained in your videos answer the questions for the specific calculations I requested . Your videos are useless to calculate the range of a force for example or lepton degeneracy etc or even the Chandreskar limit.

 

Well they are not, i am learning i will do alot and a lot of calculations of all topics in the future.

But you can predict any just any kind of behaviour by using the method of looking at it and creating an completness of how should that system be organized in order to behave in this was

[Mordred]

W

6 minutes ago, Sensei said:

 

If I would ask e.g. Mordred I wouldn't get much either (unless he would be busy searching the net for on-line answers), even though he is expert here. Because it's actually very very tough question. And not many quantum scientists remember details (unlike e.g. annihilation of electron-positron as it's relatively easy question)..

 

Well a Resident expert doesn't make me an expert in every aspect of physics lol, the methodologies I learned for those pairs are geared to cosmology applications of the Bose_Einstein statistics through the canonical partition function which ties in the chemical potential of each with the degrees of freedom. However no one can memorize every formula under physics. Its enough to know where to get the appropriate formulas and how to apply them correctly for each question. For example I certainly don't have the Grand canonical partition function memorized.

Edited June 11, 2018 by Mordred

[Eugenio Ullauri]

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Quantum annihilation is absolutely correct word. It has been misused in sci-fi movies.. and laymen started to use it to describe state of non-existence..

Even if somebody destroys/burns something in the real world, there are remaining (at least) carbon dioxide and water.

Annihilation happens when particle is interacting with its antiparticle..

I am asking for precise data and calculations how did you get to it. What particles are created during annihilation of proton-antiproton, in what quantity for each branch, with what probabilities of happening for each branch, with what energies for each annihilation branch, what are allowed modes, what are disallowed modes, etc. etc.

So stop avoiding answering question. You asked for it by yourself couple posts ago..

Did not I ask "what are annihilation branches (modes) of proton-antiproton?" already.. ? And got nothing in reply...

So let's make it a bit easier: proton-antiproton prior annihilation are at rest..

If I would ask e.g. Mordred I wouldn't get much either (unless he would be busy searching the net for on-line answers), even though he is expert here. Because it's actually very very tough question. And not many quantum scientists remember details (unlike e.g. annihilation of electron-positron as it's relatively easy question)..

 

Ok im not avoiding anything that is what i said if you need clarification ask for it ,

The particles that are created during that process depends on how those particles collide and in their environment, yeah all of what you sak for is possible to know for a given focuser with a limit precision but it depends on the actual case

proton- antiproton prior annihilation can be at rest if they are far away enough that they dont interact, like a magnet with metal.

Again if you still need clarification ask me, i need to learn more math to apply my theory in those kind of calculations, but the nature of my theory is correct as far as i can tell, someone asked how do i determine when a system becomes unstable and to do that again it depends on the environment so you look at it and create energy organization models until you get one that matches what you see

[Phi for All]

5 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

Ok here i disagree with you, a unit of time is the same as saying one second is defined as how fast i can move my finger, or how much distance does light travel, or by x amount of revolutions of a wheel of certain size and speed, so it is language to represent a frame of reference of an event that was focused by a "focuser", so time is language please think about it.

Spacetime is just a concept einstein invented to give sense to the behaviours he observed which are useful for most of the local events, but any constant like einsteins speed of light all is doing is putting a limit into the equation.

All words are conceptualizations of the natural world. Why do you pick out time as different? Why does time being a word for what we use to denote movement remove any of that meaning? Rock, happiness, and quantum are also words we've given special meaning. I think you're hung up on trying NOT to learn mainstream science. You think you've found something that makes more sense, because you don't know what you don't know.

[Eugenio Ullauri]

2 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

All words are conceptualizations of the natural world. Why do you pick out time as different? Why does time being a word for what we use to denote movement remove any of that meaning? Rock, happiness, and quantum are also words we've given special meaning. I think you're hung up on trying NOT to learn mainstream science. You think you've found something that makes more sense, because you don't know what you don't know.

Yes if you see that time exist that is ok but it is a way of looking it just a way which is not universal, that is why mainstreamers dont know what happened before the bigbang or how th universe will die, because they believe in time

[Mordred]

6 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

 

Again if you still need clarification ask me, i need to learn more math to apply my theory in those kind of calculations, but the nature of my theory is correct as far as i can tell, someone asked how do i determine when a system becomes unstable and to do that again it depends on the environment so you look at it and create energy organization models until you get one that matches what you see

You will never be able to learn the proper math if you don't use the proper physics terminology in the first place. For example the descriptive above won't work with Newtons laws of inertia as energy has a specific meaning. Newtons laws also has a specific meaning for mass.

mass is resistance to inertia change. It is the ability of an object to resist acceleration. this is the literal meaning behind f-ma. This is true regardless of what peer reviewed professional physics theory is involved including GR, QFT, and string theory.

Edited June 11, 2018 by Mordred

[Eugenio Ullauri]

I am here also to ask for help on how to do more precise calculations, i dont know math but i know the behavior of the universe, if someone wants to help me i am not searching enemies im searching friends so in plain english i can answer any problem,

Just think of what i have said i have said that time doesnt exist that the universe does not have a beginning and wont have an end because it is a simple chemical reaction that loops, that solves the problem of what happened before the big bang and how the universe will die i have also said why do charges exist, that black holes are not holes are just regular energy but denser that when they cannot become denser they give its energy away in order for other black hole to become denser for example ,

I just want to get help from someone to translate my theory in a formal language

I will keep answering the questions you made

[studiot]

5 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

But you can predict any just any kind of behaviour by using the method of looking at it and creating an completness of how should that system be organized in order to behave in this was

 

So please explain these two system behaviours, you must have seen before.

1) Why does an arch not fall down?        (So the system is the arch and the bahaviour is that of self support)

2) Muscles can only pull, they cannot push. So how do the bodies of humans and animals create pushes?

 

[Sensei]

2 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

proton- antiproton prior annihilation can be at rest if they are far away enough that they dont interact, like a magnet with metal.

I limited the case to "annihilation of proton-antiproton at rest" not without a reason. Because it considerably limits number of possible answers e.g. higher energy particles can be omitted in answer.. But you completely didn't understand it..

I am expecting precise answers.

After all, you came here with "ToE" and wanted questions from quantum physicists, which will prove or disprove your theory..

So far, no answers.

 

[Eugenio Ullauri]

5 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You will never be able to learn the proper math if you don't use the proper physics terminology in the first place. For example the descriptive above won't work with Newtons laws of inertia as energy has a specific meaning. Newtons laws also has a specific meaning for mass.

mass is resistance to inertia change. It is the ability of an object to resist acceleration. this is the literal meaning behind f-ma. This is true regardless of what peer reviewed professional physics theory is involved including GR, QFT, and string theory.

Yes but newton did not say an object is able to change its ability to resist acceleration in all the ways it occurs

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

I limited the case to "annihilation of proton-antiproton at rest" not without a reason. Because it considerably limits number of possible answers e.g. higher energy particles can be omitted in answer.. But you completely didn't understand it..

I am expecting precise answers.

After all, you came here with "ToE" and wanted questions from quantum physicists, which will prove or disprove your theory..

So far, no answers.

 

Ok so i should have asked you what do you mean ? what do you want me to explain about the proton-antiproton anihilation? yes i agrre that the problem is that i didnt understand the quesiton

[Sensei]

5 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

Ok so i should have asked you what do you mean ? what do you want me to explain about the proton-antiproton anihilation? yes i agrre that the problem is that i didnt understand the quesiton

Let's make question even simpler: what are annihilation branches of electron-positron.. ? Do you have any idea? What energy is released in this event.. ?

ps. The thing is, you have no idea about quantum physics..

Edited June 11, 2018 by Sensei

[Mordred]

2 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

Yes but newton did not say an object is able to change its ability to resist acceleration in all the ways it occurs

Correct he didn't handle what became termed relativistic mass which is nowadays formally called the variant mass where the rest mass is the invariant mass. Science didn't stop with him however, we now know mass involves all inter particle interactions. There is multiple sources of mass for a given particle depending on the particles interactions with the four forces. This involves the appropriate coupling constants. The Higg's field is not a force field as per se but still contributes to mass for certain particles. All of this is defined under QFT which involves the relativistic treatments using the Klein_Gordon equation. QM uses Schrodinger which is not relativistic.

The definitions of mass and energy are still the same though just the influences to those terms are of an increased understanding.

[Eugenio Ullauri]

8 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

So please explain these two system behaviours, you must have seen before.

1) Why does an arch not fall down?        (So the system is the arch and the bahaviour is that of self support)

2) Muscles can only pull, they cannot push. So how do the bodies of humans and animals create pushes?

 

Well this kind of thing is because of the arrangement of their component pieces.

1)Well first an arch can fall down, a well done arch does not fall down because the interaction between the floor and the arch energy distribution, but mainly because the material if you make it with a good material it will just stay up, i mean is a simple structure is like organizing energy in the correct way to make it stable for a given environment

2)Pulling from the right side with a point of support or something

These questions are kind of sarcastic i think.

Energy can be organized so programmed, like you can do multiplications with additions

[Mordred]

Actually they are not sarcastic at all, A good physicist could calculate when a given material will buckle under pressure despite the design. (more accurately a good engineer which applies the physics.)

[studiot]

7 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

These questions are kind of sarcastic i think.

Are you going to be immediately rude to someone who was following your stated order of deduction?

 

This was that you start with observation.

Then move on to a deduction.

 

Then you made what I thought was a sensible statement of how the deduction might proceed so I quoted it and asked two questions.

Edited June 11, 2018 by studiot

[Eugenio Ullauri]

8 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Let's make question even simpler: what are annihilation branches of electron-positron.. ? Do you have any idea? What energy is released in this event.. ?

ps. The thing is, you have no idea about quantum physics..

Energy is not released, energy just changes its organization they reorganize into photons because photons are less denser so the system decreases its density, this is saying the system is unstable , but it depends on how it is organized because it can produce a certain type of photon in some conditions, is like making an explosion

Yeah i dont know about quantum physics but i will learn

2 minutes ago, studiot said:

Are you going to be immediately rude to someone who was following your stated order of deduction?

 

This was that you start with observation.

Then move on to a deduction.

 

Then you made what I thought was a sensible statement of how the deduction might proceed so I quoted it and asked two questions.

Sorry if it was not sarcastic

[Mordred]

Why would photons be less dense than fermions when you can stack an infinite number of photons in the same space but no two fermions of the same state can occupy the same space? aka Pauli exclusion Principle.

Edited June 11, 2018 by Mordred

[Eugenio Ullauri]

1 minute ago, Mordred said:

Why would photons be less dense than fermions when you can stack an infinite number of photons in the same space but no two fermions of the same state can occupy the same space?

Because photons are more wavy behavior they are like a cloud so that is why they seem to occupy the same place, and fermions are denser and its energy organization in other words a photon is more dynamic more flexible due to its energy organization, a photon is like a cloud and a fermion is like a rock, kind of

[studiot]

6 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

Sorry if it was not sarcastic

In which case you should be able to offer a proper case for why the arch stands up.

I agree that it is

16 minutes ago, Eugenio Ullauri said:

because of the arrangement of their component pieces.

But the point is that your #TOE should be able to explain this in a proper scientific manner , and even calculate some facts and figures about the arch.

But all you said was hand waving waffle. What energy is involved in a standing arch?

I seriously recommend you work on some simple examples before you tackle the Universe.

If I want to use a complicated formula I often work out a simple already known example to check it out before applying it to something difficult and important.