I beleive I have re-written some of relativity/einstiens stuff.

[bascule]

Anyways yes my theory sounds exactly like this "final theory" book. Although I swear that it came to me as a completely original idea never really previously explained to me. Not only that but I was able to theorize how exactly I came up with the idea' date=' aswell as the person/team who wrote that book, and why many other people are now currently starting to think of this new more realistic simplier explanations.

I know my explanations have been less coherent as you said, but that is because I am trying not to reveal anything about it lol..

Thanks for telling me about that book, I find it interesting the summery runs off of the same fundementals mine seems to, although I was able to relate it to right here on earth before our eyes and take it much further into detail.[/quote']

 

"The Final Theory" is bullshit

[CPL.Luke]

funny thing about that arkain101 is that the final theory never says what its about

[bascule]

funny thing about that arkain101 is that the final theory never says what its about

 

Much like arkain101's theory which he doesn't want to reveal because he's worried about getting credit... much like The Final Theory guy just wants to sell copies of his book.

[arkain101]

I read the summery of the book. It talks about how things are actually more simple, As for the details "the final theory" contiains I have no clue. I only recognized it seemed to be talking about my thoery. The sort of way how everything is easier to understand, and also solves many problems currently involved in science. The summer sounded like it was talking about my thoery.

 

funny thing about that arkain101 is that the final theory never says what its about

Yah I wasnt able to find anything on the webpage that actually described how this finaly thoery is described to work.

 

Though my thoery is how it works and it sounds like hes talking about it but has no clue what it is you see..? heh..

 

(this is completly off topic, but since there is alot of members involved in this topic I thought Id just ask a quick question)

 

Light that enters the eye gets turned upside down. Then your eye sends that to your brain, then your brain makes sense of it to interpret it as right side up, leaving you with no realization of this process occurring correct?

Well I havnt read anywhere about the horizontal mirrorization of the light. If light gets fliped upside down when it enters the eye, what that should mean is the light is getting Mirrored onto the retina. Even the left and right should be swapped. Although i have never heard an explanation about this aspect of the light. I started to thinking about how reality is possibly reversed. Leaving the reason why Our right side of the brain fuctions the left side of the body and the left side of the brain functions the right side to actually unconciouslly make up for the fact we see everything Mirrored to how reality really exists.

This is a sub branch to the heart of the theory.

 

what do you figure about this?

[Dave]

I read the summery of the book. It talks about how things are actually more simple, As for the details "the final theory" contiains I have no clue. I only recognized it seemed to be talking about my thoery. The sort of way how everything is easier to understand, and also solves many problems currently involved in science. The summer sounded like it was talking about my thoery.

 

Why do you assume things have to be "more simple?" Just because they don't seem intuitive doesn't mean that they're incorrect.

[CanadaAotS]

You say you don't know high-level physics. Well there are some people here who do (definetly not one of them lol). But if you gave a general overview of what your idea is (hundreds of people have done this, and no one's idea's have been stolen from what I know), they can give you feedback as to whether your idea is plausible. Maybe it is some great new thing, but you'd need a little help in figuring it out it sounds.

[CanadaAotS]

Also, attaining to your upside-down-light thing, reality is not upside down lol.

 

I think it has to do with your concave / convex (dont remember which is which lol) that flips it. Its not like everything is upside down and we see it wrong lol. If you wore goggles that flipped everything upside down and wore them for 24 hours, everything would seem normal. but if you took them off then everything would be upside again lol. It has to do with your brain, not the light

[bascule]

I read the summery of the book. It talks about how things are actually more simple

 

I have no doubt that when we arrive upon a background independent theory of the universe through mathematical analysis of existing data and further experimentation, it will be dramatically simpler than the theories which are presently attempting to do this (i.e. string theory, loop quantum gravity, etc.)

 

However, this theory will come about from the good ideas in all of the various theories of quantum gravity being combined into one (for example, I've heard one of the leading proponents of loop quantum gravity is attempting to merge loop quantum gravity with string theory)

 

It will NOT come about by throwing all these theories away and going in a totally different direction because "modern science has lost its way" as thefinaltheory.com contends.

 

As for the details "the final theory" contiains I have no clue. I only recognized it seemed to be talking about my thoery. The sort of way how everything is easier to understand, and also solves many problems currently involved in science. The summer sounded like it was talking about my thoery.

 

Anyone trying to find a "common sense" explanation for the universe which doesn't rely on data-driven analysis is simply barking up the wrong tree. They're trying to create something false which appeals to the common man because quantum physics is too complex for them to understand. It may feel more correct to you that there's a simple explanation for everything, but that's not reality.

 

what do you figure about this?

 

I don't think extrapolations on biological processes are really going to give you any insights into physics which classical physics experiments won't. If you really want to look at something that gets your brain going, have a look at the double slit experiment. That alone pretty well demonstrates that the universe is a lot more complicated than it appears at first glance.

[arkain101]

Why do you assume things have to be "more simple?" Just because they don't seem intuitive doesn't mean that they're incorrect.

 

I dont assume anything needs to be "more simple." I simply discovered that it really is by using the laws of physics.

If you simply confuse a cirtain one small process of the way we look at physics today, it completly reverses the outcome of how to intepret the function of the universe. I can prove 1 part of it with E=mc^2.

[bascule]

Why do you assume things have to be "more simple?" Just because they don't seem intuitive doesn't mean that they're incorrect.

 

You should read some of the reviews on The Final Theory. There's a large number of people out there who have no knowledge of physics and look at quantum and go "Well, that's so complicated it must be wrong!" They want to know how the universe works in a "common sense" manner which is easy to comprehend. So naturally when someone comes along and tries to do that, however wrong they might be as long as their ideas have a certain degree of logical consistency (no matter how far off base they actually are) they appear to the layperson to be more correct than the complex and often incomprehensible ideas being put forth by modern science.

[CanadaAotS]

whats this one thing you "confuse"? Just curious

 

I admit it does sound interesting.

[arkain101]

About the light entering the eye. I did not mean to make it sound that reality is actually upside down. It enters our brain Mirrored, which is why the brain has to reverse it to make up and down correct, and is why I thought that the opposite sides of the brain have to control the opposite side of the body because the information it recieves from the eyes is flipped. So when somthing comes at you from the right side, your eye sees that and makes it look like its coming from the left side. So your brain knows left and right and has to swap that information to the reality so it tells the body that its actually coming from the other side sending the real signal to the correct side of the body to react to the ojbect coming from that side. It is just an assumption because somewhere in your brain you gotta make up for the Full mirror image not just up and down.

[arkain101]

whats this one thing you "confuse"? Just curious

 

I admit it does sound interesting.

 

That is the key that I do not want to reveal right now.

[arkain101]

After finishing my theory, I was on the net and came across this thing here. It comes from kind of difficult manuscript apparently. Anyways, it has striking resemblences of cirtain characteristics in my theory. In fact I have drawings of ____ that look alot like this. It is said no one has interpreted what this means, but I have a few ideas that can give it much new light.

It could be a coincidence and totaly irrelevant, but then again who knows.

 

Arch�om�tre' is it the measurement of the 'Arch�e' (Universal Cosmic Force) of which the Hermetists speaks.

Is it a process, a 'key' which makes it possible to penetrate the Mysteries of the Word.

The 'Arch�om�tre' is a measuring instrument of the first (primary) principles of the manifested universe.

[The Thing]

The Archeometre?

You do know that thing was created by an alchemist?

[[Tycho?]]

Post your freaking theory already so we can be done with this. If you want to go off topic, make new threads.

[Phi for All]

This thread can't retain it's ambiguous nature and remain in Relativity. If the OP is not willing to reveal his theory then I can either close it or move it to Pseudoscience where speculation and supposition can take over.

[arkain101]

I dont see a problem with that for now.

 

You dont know how badly I want to share this theory. I was just watching the PBS program about einstien and E=mc^2 and now the theory makes even more sense.

 

I agree, to put this in the Pseudoscience for now. It is just causing frustration with people right now.

[The Thing]

Why on earth would you make a thread about posting a paper, advertise all around the forums about your theory attracting tons of inevitable attention, drag on and on about how great it is (it maybe is!), and then still not post it? I don't get the logic behind this: you've been told that no one would steal your ideas, and you know there are physicists here more qualified than you are, and you know that we won't laugh at your ideas and all this frustration is caused by the fact that after 3 pages of posts in this thread, after about 80 posts in which you made some kind of reference to your fantastic theory, you still have not produced a tangible report.

I've done a complete and thorough search of your posts before I posted this, and I just want to say that your attention are focused on two things in this forum: 100% efficent machines and a superior-to-relativity theory. You hint heavily non-stop how they are very possible and we are all here to believe it, if only you could post your ideas and if it makes sense.

I don't doubt that you have the ability and the "insane IQ" to really think of a theory that CAN prove everything you've said, but again, you've only given very ambiguous hints about its nature. You use diagrams from alchemists, which bewilders me completely as to where your theory might take you.

Mark that no one here is flaming you, and I, again, believe that you CAN produce a fine theory. If you have any other discomforts other than the ones mentioned above about posting your theory, then please state them and we'll try to understand. But if you have none, please, for the love of god, STOP this tantalizing rant and just post the frigin thing!

[chemfreak]

Alright' date=' if I can get in contact with a physicists I will submit everything to him to get a reference on the paper, so I can get it submitted to some kind of magazine or media.

Can anyone refer me to someone? I dont have any local universities around me, they are about 4 + hours drive.[/quote']

you could alaways consult Einstein(S?) when you die

[padren]

His account reads "suspended" now so this may be useless but:

 

1) Take your paper, mail it to yourself by certified mail, do not open it, and place in a safety security box. If it becomes an issue, you can prove in court you wrote the original document by a certian date by having it opened in the presense of a judge overseeing the dispute. At least I think that works in Canada as a "poor man's copyright" and should give you basic protections I'd assume in the US too.

 

2) The fear of having an idea stolen is often the fear of having it torn apart in disguise. I invented lots of stuff when I was young, but all of which exceptionally basic. I "thought about inventing" many other things from perpetual motion machines to submersibles to rail gun systems etc, around when I was 12 or so I guess. In other words I drafted plans and schematics but never produced functional prototypes, and there is a huge difference between that and inventing stuff.

 

I assure you, when you say you "invented" a perpetual motion based car, you did no such thing. Either you don't understand the word "invent" or the term "perpetual motion" or you are just lying.

 

 

I am not saying brilliance cannot come about in humble ways, Tesla was apparently mocked and told he had dreamed up a perpetual motion machine that could never work by his professor when he designed the basic alternating current motor we still use today.

 

 

That said, beware the seduction of "seeing how things click" in your head as a sign of understanding how things simply work dispite a lack of education in a field. Chances are, its an abomnination that would make M.C. Esher pale.

 

The devil is in the details, and its brutally hard to get anything at all to work in this rather unforgiving physical universe. If you want to see it in practice, build an actual prototype of anything you've designed. Or, if you don't have the economic situation to do so, get into software design. Its free, only costs you time and research, and is a great example of how much the details can bog you down.

[Martian]

I beleive Einstien was close with E=mc^2... As far as it appears in this theory, C isnt speed.

 

This statement is proof that he may be onto something.