Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I've already stated this in my other topic and am still speculating how this really makes sense. Thus a universe is finite and beyond the edge of a universe there will be no space pockets to contain matter until the next lump of space viz a viz another universe.

Posted

If "space is a form of matter", then what with antimatter? ;)

 

Do you realize that matter-antimatter annihilate when they meet each other.. ?

Posted

I've already stated this in my other topic and am still speculating how this really makes sense.

 

 

Easy, it makes no sense.

 

If space is a form of matter, is 1 foot made of the same matter as 1 metre?

Posted

I've already stated this in my other topic and am still speculating how this really makes sense. Thus a universe is finite and beyond the edge of a universe there will be no space pockets to contain matter until the next lump of space viz a viz another universe.

 

 

What are its measurable properties? Are we moving with respect to it, or are we stationary, and how would we test this?

Posted

Relative to why reality exists, I don't believe matter exists

 

In which case you don't exist. So maybe you should stop posting and proving yourself wrong.

Posted

Relative to why reality exists, I don't believe matter exists (it only exists prior to the reason reality exists).

 

!

Moderator Note

If you have extraordinary supportive evidence for this extraordinary claim, feel free to start another thread. Otherwise, please don't hijack one speculation with another. This is against our rules for obvious reasons.

 

Don't respond to this in thread, but Report it if you disagree.

Posted

I've already stated this in my other topic and am still speculating how this really makes sense. Thus a universe is finite and beyond the edge of a universe there will be no space pockets to contain matter until the next lump of space viz a viz another universe.

 

What you say appears to be true. What is space? Space is really nothing by itself. What is inside of space are gravitational waves and electromagnetic waves. the properties of space are really the properties of the waves themselves. Beyond the waves there is nothing at all as far as we are concerned. Thus we have a finite universe and beyond our universe other universes could exist but they are no concern to us. At the big bang the entire universe was tiny and has expanded to the present size which exists from an absolute center and extends in dark energy to over 27 billion light years.

Posted

 

Beyond the waves there is nothing at all as far as we are concerned. Thus we have a finite universe and beyond our universe other universes could exist but they are no concern to us.

 

!

Moderator Note

Guess who gets to take a vacation for hijacking the thread right after a warning about not hijacking threads? You do, jerrygg38.

 

You haven't found any supportive evidence for your old hypothesis in over seven years, so please stop bringing it up here.

Posted

If "space is a form of matter", then what with antimatter? ;)

 

Do you realize that matter-antimatter annihilate when they meet each other.. ?

I don't think that such phenomenon takes place just the way it is.

 

 

 

 

If space is a form of matter, is 1 foot made of the same matter as 1 metre?

You are getting it wrong. I don't mean to say that the tiniest space particle builds up the universe but rather the space pockets holds and binds every form of matter in a universe.

Posted (edited)

I don't think that such phenomenon takes place just the way it is.

 

What?!

You are rejecting existence of antimatter and rejecting annihilation?!

 

Annihilation of electron-positron is responsible for 7.64% of energy released during fusion in the Sun..

 

If you have vacuum pump,

cost of building device making pair-production and antimatter to see annihilation on your own eyes, is within couple hundred dollars.

Edited by Sensei
Posted

You are getting it wrong. I don't mean to say that the tiniest space particle builds up the universe but rather the space pockets holds and binds every form of matter in a universe.

 

So space is not a form of matter. Why did you say it was?

 

You haven't yet provided any evidence for these "space pockets". In fact you haven't explained what you mean in a coherent way. It almost sounds like something you made up.

 

Please show the mathematics behind this model.

Please show how the predictions of this model differ from other theories so that it can be tested.

 

If you can't do that, please explain why we should take this seriously.

Posted

 

 

What are its measurable properties? Are we moving with respect to it, or are we stationary, and how would we test this?

It does not entirely influence the behavior of a matter as the condition and other forces also do come to play in the movement of a matter. There are some ideas to test this but since it is still on the process to be implemented.

Posted

It does not entirely influence the behavior of a matter as the condition and other forces also do come to play in the movement of a matter. There are some ideas to test this but since it is still on the process to be implemented.

 

 

 

Wow, that's incredibly vague.

Posted

 

What?!

You reject existence of antimatter and annihilation?!

 

Annihilation of electron-positron is responsible for 7.64% of energy released during fusion in the Sun..

Yes of course when the fuel burns, the energy and the residue would be left up and and what you say "annihilation" simply means the conversion of fuel to energy and residue. So that's that but you speak of antimatter as a black hole like entity that sucks matter or energy or whatever you mean to oblivion.

Posted

So that's that but you speak of antimatter as a black hole like entity that sucks matter or energy or whatever you mean to oblivion.

 

No one said that. Where do you get the idea that antimatter is like a black hole? That is just nonsense.

Posted (edited)

Yes of course when the fuel burns, the energy and the residue would be left up and and what you say "annihilation" simply means the conversion of fuel to energy and residue. So that's that but you speak of antimatter as a black hole like entity that sucks matter or energy or whatever you mean to oblivion.

 

Learn something from this thread how it's calculated:

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/85656-solar-fusion-neutrinos-and-age-of-solar-system/

 

Annihilation happens only between matter and its antimatter particle.

Pair production creates equal two particles of matter and antimatter, with just couple properties like charge, opposite each other.

Edited by Sensei
Posted

 

So space is not a form of matter. Why did you say it was?

 

 

It is a form of matter but just not the four states of matter as we generally know.

 

You haven't yet provided any evidence for these "space pockets". In fact you haven't explained what you mean in a coherent way. It almost sounds like something you made up.

 

Please show the mathematics behind this model.

Please show how the predictions of this model differ from other theories so that it can be tested.

 

If you can't do that, please explain why we should take this seriously.

 

All in good time.

Posted

 

No one said that. Where do you get the idea that antimatter is like a black hole? That is just nonsense.

Then I guess antimatter or annihilation are just phenomenon that occurs when a matter is reacting to another force via the presence of space pockets.

Posted (edited)

Pair production does not create matter-antimatter from nothing.

Photon with enough energy (at least double energy-mass of what is created), neutral charge, is converted to pair of matter and anti-matter (one with positive charge, other one with negative charge).

 

While annihilation also does not destroy for eternity like you said "obviation".

It just converts pair of matter and antimatter to bunch of photons,

or other bunch of particles with opposite charges,

it's especially complicated while proton-antiproton annihilation.

 

Sum of energy prior reaction is equal to sum of energy post reaction.

Sum of charges prior reaction is equal to sum of charges post reaction.

Edited by Sensei
Posted

 

If you aren't read and able to explain your idea, then why did you start this thread.

How can you simply show me some super nerdy mathematics that does not have any real base and then claim that everything is worthless just because I didn't do some drawings and charts.

Posted

 

All in good time.

 

 

!

Moderator Note

Well, no. If your discussion is not ready, then there is no point in having it. We have guidelines that these kind of discussions need to follow, and this is not up to par. So, at such time that you are ready to provide the kind of model and evidence that is required, you can report this and ask the staff to re-open the thread.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.