Moment Theory Basics

[MomentTheory]

Hi folks!

 

I'm in the process of putting together a single syllable universal model (theory of everything) based off of a discovery I recently made.

 

I have made a brief video in which I did my best to explain the very, very basics of the experiment I am building my work upon, Moment Theory. The experiment is relative simply based upon this quote found in the back of Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" where he states --

 

[see "Notes Chapter 2." The Elegant Universe. Boston: NOVA, 2003. 390-91. Print.]

“When light travels through a substance such as air or glass its speed is decreased in roughly the same way that a rock dropped from a cliff is dragged to a slower speed when it enters a body of water. This slowing of light relative to its speed through a vacuum is of no consequence for our discussion of relativity and is justifiably ignored throughout the text.”

Justifiably ignored!? I don't think so!!! NOTHING is JUSTIFIABLY ignored!

In the video I briefly address the main radius of the trion re of light (time) and suggest that we received knowledge of time from an outside source, whether God, alien, or evolutionary drive. I think it's very important we keep an open mind about how we actually derive any variable we choose to assign the universe, as men.

 

Here is a link to the video on youtube,

 

Keep in mind I was explaining this for the average facebook viewer so I took some liberties when explaining the metaphysical nature of y as it applies to strings, but I have alot more background work put together showing my findings for anyone else who is interested in more details. I know I'm just touching the tip of an iceburg here that has gone un-noticed by the entire scientific community. I believe this discovery is the key to unlocking zero-point energy, releasing us from the bonds of carbon fuel.

 

Beyond that, based upon the curve shown in the video, I have been able to apply at least one constant average velocity of light, which is universally true from all perspectives in space-time. This link allows for calculations of both quantum and relative values with in the same equation.

 

I hope you enjoy the video, feel free to ask any questions. Try not to beat me up too bad, I'm no rocket scientist, I've just got a very keen eye for geometric patterns and I'm sure there is more value here than meets the eye.

Much love,
Aaron Hobba

Edited January 15, 2015 by MomentTheory

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

Since this is a TOE, not mainstream physics, I'm moving it to our Speculations section. Please read the special rules we have there. We want to help you be as rigorous as possible in developing your idea, so we have guidelines that will help.

 

Please read the rules, really. Thanks.

[MomentTheory]

Please, accept my apology. This is my first time posting, I just wasn't sure where to start. Thanks for the help.

[imatfaal]

Hi folks!

 

 

Justifiably ignored!? I don't think so!!! NOTHING is JUSTIFIABLY ignored![/

But the universe has changed because I have decided to reply rather than sleep - extra power usage, more light! Etc. can this be justifiably ignored? Of course it can. Lots of things can.

 

You talk of the "main radius of the trion re of light". Can you explain this - btw I am allergic to YouTube so if you could keep it on forum and in text/maths

[MomentTheory]

My experiment shows that light is limited to 49 reflections through glass; when this is forced to occur, the resulting curve resembles that of a trion re, a singular point pulled into 3 dimensions. The curve and other data that can be derived from the experiment, allows one to calculate a definite average velocity of light which can be numerically expressed as:

((3x10^8)+1)/3

 

This finding frees light from its once thought single constant instantaneous value.

[Phi for All]

I know I'm just touching the tip of an iceburg here that has gone un-noticed by the entire scientific community.

 

Protip: Drop this kind of talk immediately. I've been discussing science with this community for 10 years now, and although I've seen a couple hundred people make this kind of claim, it never works out for them.

 

You're already claiming to have done what 100 years worth of experts haven't done yet. You have a lot of explaining to do, so stay focused and leave "the entire scientific community" out of it.

 

Also, always stay away from generalizations.

[MomentTheory]

I was alluding to the fact that if an entire book is based off of ignorance to data revolving around light (which is the current limit of all physics), then the book is infact ignorant to everything in the universe. Yes, I was being clever, but I found it astonishing to see that after feeling so much trust for the writer, sure that the avenue of light was not over looked.

 

Protip: Drop this kind of talk immediately. I've been discussing science with this community for 10 years now, and although I've seen a couple hundred people make this kind of claim, it never works out for them.

 

You're already claiming to have done what 100 years worth of experts haven't done yet. You have a lot of explaining to do, so stay focused and leave "the entire scientific community" out of it.

 

Also, always stay away from generalizations.

I will keep that in mind. I'm not trying to generalize, I've never really taken part in formal scientific discussion, I've always pursued an avenue of self education and as a result I'm not surrounded by many peers that even understand what I've been working on. But the few that do, recognize its importance.

Edited January 15, 2015 by MomentTheory

[Strange]

The experiment is relative simply based upon this quote found in the back of Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" where he states

 

One the few pop-sci books on my shelf. So I can actually check the context. (My copy doesn't have that note; presumably it was added in response to tedious pedants pointing out that light travels slower through a medium.)

 

Justifiably ignored!? I don't think so!!! NOTHING is JUSTIFIABLY ignored!

 

It is ignored in the book because it is irrelevant to the subject being discussed. If you failed to understand that simple point. then presumably you didn't understand anything much in the book.

 

The varying speed of light in different media is, of course, well understood and has been studied for hundreds of years. I would recommend Feynman's book QED for a non-technical explanation of the fact that, even in a medium, photons always travel at the speed of light.

 

In the video I briefly address the main radius of the trion re of light

 

What the heck is a "trion re"?

allows one to calculate a definite average velocity of light which can be numerically expressed as:

 

((3x10^8)+1)/3

 

What units is that in? If metres/second it is out by a factor of 3.

I was alluding to the fact that if an entire book is based off of ignorance to data revolving around light (which is the current limit of all physics), then the book is infact ignorant to everything in the universe.

 

Or, possibly, you have failed to understand what you read. (Based on your comments here, that sounds the more plausible hypothesis.)

[MomentTheory]

I'm not sure how to educate one on what a trion re shape is aside from telling you to research it, and your presumption that I didn't understand anything at all was quite rude and is most likely the entire cause for the repression of such claims when venturing down this avenue of discovery.

The unit of measure when alluding to the Average Velocity of Light is irrelevant because it is universally true and does not require a perspective point in space-time.

 

My experiment proves that while on average, photons always travel at the speed of light, a definite phenomena occurs at the 49th reflection, giving an ability to measure its average velocity(or curve). The problem is not that I am not understanding a book, because my results are not based off of his book, but rather actual data derived from my experiment.

Based upon your response, I would hypothesize that you aren't quite grasping the importance of what I've discovered. Familiarize yourself with the 5 basic string shapes and M-theory, take a look at the trion re, the schwarzschild blackhole equation, then return with such judgments.

The data is there.

 

Light always travels the path of a Trion Re with the average velocity of ((3x10^8)+1)/3 (units irrelevant) when viewed through the controlled curve created by this experiment.

The ability to leave the units irrelevant from a relative point, rises from the equalization of both energetic and geometric sources in this experiment. While this allusion is very hypothetical, one can not ignore such a link between geometry, light, and time. If the resulting curve of this experiment was an irrational number I would have thrown it out, but the fact that the two radii are so close to our representation of 12-hour time can not be numerical coincidence.

Edited January 16, 2015 by MomentTheory

[xyzt]

sigh.

[MomentTheory]

sigh.

 

Your jest is not at all appreciated. Of all places, I thought the best reception for this discovery would be here. If no one see's value in the data I am presenting then obviously this community is not ready, nor educated on a broad enough spectrum for the implications of such a discovery. Your strict adherence to the academic process of scientific discovery is your biggest folly. I am disappointed, I know you are automatically rejecting this as pseudoscience, because that is the easiest thing for you to do simply because I am asking tough questions about hard data and ignored facts.

[ACG52]

Nobodies jesting, simply expressing ennui at having to deal with another crank.

 

Trion Re is a term invented by an artist named Michael Evens, and purports to be something basic in 3 dimensional space. It has no scientific meaning.

 

from an alchemy blog: http://alchemyeggaumniverse.blogspot.com/2012/01/understanding-and-radiating-cosmic.html

 

 

 

 

Understanding And Radiating The Cosmic Frequency 432HZ Trion Re 6th Platonic Solid Vortex Mathmatics Energy From Whithin Your Divine God Self: Secret of Philosophers Stone

It's simply woo.

Edited January 16, 2015 by ACG52

[Mordred]

 

Your jest is not at all appreciated. Of all places, I thought the best reception for this discovery would be here. If no one see's value in the data I am presenting then obviously this community is not ready, nor educated on a broad enough spectrum for the implications of such a discovery. Your strict adherence to the academic process of scientific discovery is your biggest folly. I am disappointed, I know you are automatically rejecting this as pseudoscience, because that is the easiest thing for you to do simply because I am asking tough questions about hard data and ignored facts.

Look the term critical angle via Snells law. Refraction angles. You can hit an angle where the light will not exit the medium.

http://www.math.ubc.ca/~cass/courses/m309-01a/chu/Fundamentals/snell.htm

Keep in mind your mirrors have glass refraction index roughly 1.600 if I recall but that depends on the glass itself. Then you also have the air between the two glass plates.

 

 

I won't comment on your divine/alien source theory

Edited January 16, 2015 by Mordred

[xyzt]

 

Your jest is not at all appreciated. Of all places, I thought the best reception for this discovery would be here.

There is no "discovery". There is plenty of delusion, though.

[Klaynos]

How can units be irrelevant for a velocity. Measuring something in m/s gives a completely different answer to measuring the same thing in inches per decade. This kind of statement completely discredits you're whole idea.

[Strange]

I'm not sure how to educate one on what a trion re shape is aside from telling you to research it

 

 

I tried. I assumed it was one of the many things I was ignorant of. I couldn't find any information about it. Is it a term you have invented? If so, you had better explain it.

 

The unit of measure when alluding to the Average Velocity of Light is irrelevant because it is universally true and does not require a perspective point in space-time.

 

So I can assume you are providing the speed in feet per fortnight?

 

My experiment proves that while on average, photons always travel at the speed of light, a definite phenomena occurs at the 49th reflection, giving an ability to measure its average velocity(or curve).

 

Can you explain this experiment in detail then, and show us the curve. (I gather that this might be in your video but I don't watch videos for a number of reasons including the fact that I think they are very poor way way of presenting technical information).

 

Based upon your response, I would hypothesize that you aren't quite grasping the importance of what I've discovered.

 

I am sure it is exactly as important as all the other people who claim that about their new theories.

 

Familiarize yourself with the 5 basic string shapes and M-theory, take a look at the trion re, the schwarzschild blackhole equation, then return with such judgments.

 

Some of those are familiar but searching for "5 basic string shapes" or "trion re" doesn't get me anywhere. Perhaps you could educate us.

 

The data is there.

 

Then perhaps you could present it. If you can't be bothered, I don't see why I should do your work for you.

 

Light always travels the path of a Trion Re with the average velocity of ((3x10^8)+1)/3 (units irrelevant) when viewed through the controlled curve created by this experiment.

 

Light travels along an undefined path at a velocity of ((3x10^8)+1)/3 feet per yer when viewed through an undefined curve. Got it.

 

[ajb]

I don't want to watch the video, can you post some details of the 'theory' here. If possible a calculation of something interesting would be nice.

[swansont]

 

My experiment proves that while on average, photons always travel at the speed of light, a definite phenomena occurs at the 49th reflection, giving an ability to measure its average velocity(or curve). The problem is not that I am not understanding a book, because my results are not based off of his book, but rather actual data derived from my experiment.

 

Nothing magical happens on the 49th reflection. People build high-finess cavities with photon lifetimes of many milliseconds. You can get a billion reflections with a good mirror set.

[Strange]

My experiment shows that light is limited to 49 reflections through glass.

 

Light is reflected in optical fibres billions of times.

[Phi for All]

Your strict adherence to the academic process of scientific discovery is your biggest folly.

But it's in the rules you agreed to when you joined. I even pointed out the special rules for Speculations, and explained the value of this over sites that don't require any rigor. Why is this our folly and not yours?

 

I am disappointed, I know you are automatically rejecting this as pseudoscience, because that is the easiest thing for you to do simply because I am asking tough questions about hard data and ignored facts.

But we're not. Look back and read what's been written. You're getting specific reasons, not blanket rejection.

 

Open minds are easy to spot if you can find one in the mirror.

[MomentTheory]

Forget that I said anything about having a completed theory for just a moment, (as I'm well aware it's not 100% YET); bottom line, it's unsettling that the radii are not irrational numbers. I don't believe in numerical coincidence, as I do not believe in any coincidence. I'm not purposing anything outside of the observations I have made.

 

As for photons reflecting 1 billion +times, I'm well aware of that. I wasn't purposing that they can't, merely stating that when light travels from a single source, through two mirrors (including the glass medium) the trajectory itself is limited. I'm aware that this could be defeated by using front faced mirrors, but that would also remove the phenomena I'm trying to measure.

Mordred's reference to snell's law is awesome, and I'm glad he noticed! The reflective index of snell's law is an "average" of velocity, which is where I derive my entire theory from! Given that velocity is the only universal controller of light's trajectory; logically it becomes the only other way to measure light beyond its instantaneous speed. To do so one must find a universal curve that we can all agree upon as true. Which is exactly what I'm trying to show.

As for a trion re being "woo", I'm not really sure what that even means. Just because some blogger said some weird shit doesn't make a shape invalid.

You can see the trion re take form in nature, pretty much everywhere, so to deny its existence is ludicrous.

How can units be irrelevant for a velocity. Measuring something in m/s gives a completely different answer to measuring the same thing in inches per decade. This kind of statement completely discredits you're whole idea.

 

Not if the said average velocity is based upon this curve. If we can agree that this curve is always true, at that point the curve itself becomes the unit of measure, enter, "light radius". In doing so, we can agree upon an exact numerical average velocity of light, regardless of one's perception in space-time, getting rid of the need for such trivial things like time and distance. Quantum mechanics has already shown us that time and distance are in fact trivial, we just need a measurement to prove it. *Cough cough* this curve.

[Robittybob1]

How can you be sure the curve is not just an artifact of a curved glass mirror. Your apparatus looks interesting but relatively crude.

How can you prove to us that your mirrors are perfectly flat and parallel?

[MomentTheory]

How can you be sure the curve is not just an artifact of a curved glass mirror. Your apparatus looks interesting but relatively crude.

How can you prove to us that your mirrors are perfectly flat and parallel?

 

You are correct, it is VERY crude. The mirrors themselves are not curved in any manner and I used a table saw with a jig to ensure the slots were as accurate as I could possibly get them. I ascertained the idea that I would never be able to achieve a true parallel condition, but upon observing how light reacts( by rotating the laser), I made the observation that the geometric curve itself is independent from any variables in the experiment.

 

You can view this same phenomena of curvature when you hold a mirror under your eyes and look into another mirror. The reflections will repeat forever with a distinct curve into the perspective point.

 

While changing any aspect of the experiment has an effect on the shape of the curve, the curve is seemingly forced to occur by some external geometry. I plan to rebuild this using a micrometer and higher quality mirrors, but I am certain the results will be the same.

 

Considering that the curve limitation occurs on the 49th reflection, (@ point 7x7 ,and yes, I know I am generalizing), it seems to me that it is no coincidence that light would relate to a numeric value of 7, given that our metaphysical perception of sound is also based upon a group of 7 (do re me fa so la ti or ABCDEFG). Maybe I'm pulling coincidence out of my ass, maybe I'm not, but something fishy is going on here.

[Klaynos]

When dealing with visible light you need to be precise to tens of nanometers, this is not easy. I've not watched your video, could you post a schematic, maybe a photo of your kit and set of results from your experiment?

 

I suspect what you're seeing is a combination of an artifact of the set up and the job linearity of your eye.

[Robittybob1]

On the 49th reflection you show us it has split into two parts, (and then talk about black holes, which really sounds like a terrible exaggeration), but the two parts could simply be the difference parts that were reflecting from the top of the glass and that which has reflected from the mirror silver surfaces.Have you tried a real shiny surface rather than mirror glass?

25 from the top and 24 from the bottom so shouldn't the last one (reflection) be on the top?

You are right that the clock hands line up at 12 o'clock but they don't exactly line up at 6:30. In fact the minute hand will line up with the hour and approximately every hour, but exactly 11 times over a twelve hour period.

Edited January 17, 2015 by Robittybob1