LoFi version for PDAs  Help Search Members Calendar 
Welcome Guest ( Log In  Register )  Resend Validation Email 
Pages: (2) [1] 2 ( Go to first unread post ) 
Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll 
BenRayfield 
Posted: Apr 23 2012, 09:14 AM

Newbie Group: Power Member Posts: 24 Joined: 3March 12 Positive Feedback: 0% Feedback Score: 0 
MAIN THEORY: The same way no observed thing moves faster than light, regardless of your inertial frame (you could be moving toward or away from light but it still looks the same constant speed relative to you), no observed particle is ever more than 1.0planck particles, and gradually between not observing and observing it varies between 0.0+planck particles and 1.0planck particles the same way speed varies between 0.0+planck and 1.0planck times the speed of light. This applies equally to mass, energy, and wavefunctioncollapse from different angles and is subject to Heisenberg Uncertainty at all extremes.
* Mass's relativity limit gets infinitely difficult toward space, since it takes infinite energy to move mass as fast as light. We thought mass could go the speedoflight, but instead we got Hawking Radiation and turbulence on the eventhorizon of blackholes, and on top of that all black holes must evaporate and/or explode before any of the particles get to the eventhorizon which happens from our point of view at the end of time. * Energy's relativity limit gets infinitely difficult toward time, since it takes infinite energy to slow light to a halt. At a large cost of creating fields for the light to move through, we slowed down light and put it in a container, but we couldn't prove it was completely stopped because of Heisenberg Uncertainty. * Wavefunctioncollapse's relativity limit gets infinitely difficult toward becoming exactly 1.0 particles, which we call observing. We observed a wave collapse into exactly 1.0 particles, but we couldn't prove its exactly 1.0 particles because of Heisenberg Uncertainty and not knowing if it was in superposition just after we approximately observed it. In all of these things, science has come very close, and in all such cases, the failure was categorized as Heisenberg Uncertainty. END MAIN THEORY. SECOND MOST IMPORTANT THEORY: Heisenberg Uncertainty becomes less uncertain as you view the same wavefunction from many angles at once, as a purely wave based model which denies the existence of quanta and explains the appearance of quanta as a generalization of special relativity. Regardless of your inertial frame, all light appears constant speed and all particles appear to be quanta. FACT: Escapevelocity at the eventhorizon of a black hole is the speedoflight. FACT: Density is maximized at the eventhorizon of a black hole. FACT: The smallest possible black hole is "planck mass" and all particles/waves can be modeled as blackholes that way, as recent experiments have created small blackholes that evaporate within a tiny fraction of a second. Of course these are not dangerous. FACT: An outside observer sees anything falling into a blackhole slow down as it nears the eventhorizon and never fall in. FACT: The speed of observed light is also the maximum speed of observed mass and all other known observed particle/wave types and is constant. FACT: The speed of unobserved light and other unobserved parts of the world has already been proven to affect eachother extremely faster than light, which we call quantum entanglement. FACT: The billions of lightyears of universe we've seen so far is 1 big quantum wavefunction. Everything is connected to everything else. FACT: The only way to observe a particle/wave is to throw a blackhole near it, which is proven by the fact that "all particles/waves can be modeled as blackholes". FACT: Throwing a blackhole near something causes it to be timedilated slower as viewed from an outside observer. FACT: Doubleslit experiment is when you throw a blackhole through 2 slits simultaneously and it waveinterferes with itself, as proven by "all particles/waves can be modeled as blackholes". FACT: Wavefunctioncollapse is what we call multiple superpositioned blackholes becoming individual blackhole(s), as proven by "all particles/waves can be modeled as blackholes", which are merged into a single quantumwavefunction which we call our shared reality, but we are only certain of this to the point of Heisenberg Uncertainty. (In other words, to proceed with us into our future, the 2 waves must start to agree with eachother enough that all disagreements are small, since we can't have contradictions build on top of other contradictions, because that is an exponential acceleration toward heatdeath.) FACT: Gravitywaves are what we call multiple large blackholes becoming 1 bigger blackhole. FACT: Quantumsuperpositioned blackholes do not affect our lightcone from positions they cancelout their own wave, which we call the dark parts of the back wall (and other cancelledout parts of the wave in the space between) on doubleslit experiments. FACT: Gravitywaves do not affect our lightcone until they reach us at the speedoflight. THEORY: Quantumsuperpositioned blackholes do not affect our lightcone until the closest part of their wavefunction reaches us at the speedoflight. THEORY: There is no difference between gravitywaves and quantumsuperpositionwaves. THEORY: Specialrelativity applies equally to particles/waves/blackholes accelerating up to the speedoflight in space and particles/waves/blackholes accelerating up to wavefunctioncollapse in infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace, in the context of our path through multiverse possibilities being another kind of space. THEORY: Heisenberguncertainty is a superposition of the "planck mass" view of all particles/waves/blackholes. FACT: MTheory is whats common between 5 different StringTheories which were found to say the same thing in 5 different ways, each having parts of the puzzle, with enough overlap to put it together. THEORY: All particle/boson/fermion/force types in the Standard Model of physics, and all the specific dimensions and behaviors of physics described by MTheory, are the local lawsofphysics, where each observed particle/wave/blackhole of each type (like observing an electron or graviton) are a superposition of the parts of physics which define that type (like a physical object which all electrons are a superposition of) as a particle/wave/blackhole of large mass located in infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace, and the mass of that particle/wave/blackhole representing the type is exactly equal to the mass of all examples of that type as its superposition, so in general the superposition and collapsed form of x are both simultaneously x and not 2 different things. FACT: In Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiments, part of the experiment which happens in the future appears to affect part of the experiment in the present. THEORY: The reason that "in Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiments, part of the experiment which happens in the future appears to affect part of the experiment in the present", is that "in general the superposition and collapsed form of x are both simultaneously x and not 2 different things", specificly the collapsed form in the present and superpositioned form in the future are identical. THEORY: Conditional on in general "the collapsed form in the present and superpositioned form in the future are identical" being true, the theory that time is a good model of how the world works at quantum sizes would be disproven, and time would only be an approximation of how the world works on a larger scale. FACT: MTheory predicts gravitons are what carries the force of gravity, and gravitons are closed manifolds. THEORY: In the context of this purely wave based model of the universe which denies the existence of quanta (its just another form of relativity), all closed manifolds are only approximately closed due to Heisenberg Uncertainty and are subject to heatdeath like everything else, and closed manifolds implement gravity in infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace because they are the only kind of structure that can survive moving through the variety of partsofwavefunctions which represent the variety of different kinds of things which gravity attracts together, and they both attract and repel depending on waveinterference of resonance between all things involved. Galaxies accelerate away from us, while closer things attract eachother, as a simple example of equal and opposite force in timeless wholeuniverse thermodynamics. It all has to cancelout to zero. THEORY: Because "Nonexistence is isomorphic to the set of all selfconsistent possibilities", which is my philosophy of the universe overall, all forms of relativity are caused by thermodynamics being equally spread in the set of all possible wavefunctions, therefore regardless of your inertial frame, light speed and quanta are always 1.0 (times the speed of light or number of observed particles at a time), so all of physics is formed from the simpler properties of math we call thermodynamics and quantumentanglement of waves in general. Space, time, mass, energy, particles, the Standard Model, MTheory, and all other specific observations of our local laws of physics, are an example of what can happen when specialrelativity happens recursively and in many combinations in an infinite space of quantum chaos that forms into the patterns we call reality. All forms of specialrelativity are purely a result of timeless thermodynamics in infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace. FACT: The Casimir Effect is the physical force on 2 very close parallel metal plates as absorbed from "virtual particles". THEORY: The Casimir Effect has only been observed to receive physical force from "virtual particles", similar to the metal plates acting as a radio, but it can also be used to transmit signals into these "virtual particle" waves if a bigger variety of inputs to the metal plates are considered, not just electricity or motion. What if we tried many combinations of our newest quantum technology, and new technology later, to oscillate the relativistic mass, timedilation, quantum phase, particle types, superposition, and oscillate other properties of physics in the parallel metal plates? Would it broadcast in a variety of ways into the "virtual particle" part of this wavefunction we call reality? Would it be a multiverse radio, in the space of "infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace" (as I explained above)? 
Send PM · Send email ·

BenRayfield 
Posted: Apr 23 2012, 10:37 AM

Newbie Group: Power Member Posts: 24 Joined: 3March 12 Positive Feedback: 0% Feedback Score: 0 
THEORY: Conditional on the CasimirEffectbased "multiverse radio" working as a simultaneous highdimensional (1 dimension for each property of physics you're oscillating), very spread out grids of such radios could be used for more accuracy, the same way a few telescopes can be used simultaneously to get some of the accuracy of one telescope the size of the distance between its parts.
THEORY: Conditional on using grids of such "multiverse radios", in a manydimensional way, you could put them in an approximate closed manifold (like a sphere or kleinbottle or petersongraph shape, depending on how you want to align to lightcones) shape in space, and gradually form the near space into a large closed manifold (which you may call a graviton, but more generally than MTheory's kind of gravitons), and that bubble of space would be a timeless solution to "Einsteins Field Equations" and able to travel through infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace (which includes space, time, and other laws of physics continuously) safely. In theory, this is how you would build a warp drive, time machine, and multiverse ship, all in the same ship. This ship would take very little energy because the grid of "multiverse radios" is a closed manifold, so it gets to slide through the multiverse as easily as gravitons. Do gravitons even need a power source? THEORY ABOUT WHY THIS IS SAFE: Conditional on the "multiverse ship" (which travels through space, time, and other laws of physics using very little energy, like gravitons do) working, the danger of such experiments is mostly in the local area of the ship, which may change the laws of physics and vaporize the galaxy into hawking radiation, while outside observers would see it disappear and experience waves, as if a drop of water had left a mostly still pond. The laws of physics would only change for those who navigate on continuous paths into parts of infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace with different physics. They and we would be a superposition of our shared history, but remember that "in general the superposition and collapsed form of x are both simultaneously x and not 2 different things". To summarize all of this, all inertial frames see waves as quanta, all parts of reality we know of formed from timeless thermodynamics and quantum entanglement between waves in general, and we should redefine the idea of lightcone to include the local lawsofphysics. This post has been edited by BenRayfield on Apr 23 2012, 10:38 AM 
Send PM · Send email ·

BenRayfield 
Posted: Apr 23 2012, 03:28 PM

Newbie Group: Power Member Posts: 24 Joined: 3March 12 Positive Feedback: 0% Feedback Score: 0 
THEORY: The Higgs Boson is all blackholes, and all particles/waves are blackholes. It is mass itself, not the part of physics which gives other parts of physics mass. This timeless infinitelymanyworldsmultiversespace we call reality is 1 big wave which cancelsout to zero. The amplitude of that wave is its mass, and since we're always inside it, we see that amplitude as 1.0 quanta, the number of realities which exist. You did not find the Higgs Boson in the CERN supercollider as expected because you refused to consider a timeless fractal universe where all particles/waves are blackholes and are inside and superpositioned outside and mixed many ways with eachother. To the question of "Does the Higgs Boson exist?", I must answer nonsequitur... The Higgs Boson is the universe itself, and the universe cancelsout to zero while its individual parts exist. The Higgs Boson is therefore the only particle which exists in superposition but not collapsed form (which is what I meant by "Nonexistence is isomorphic to the set of all selfconsistent possibilities"), therefore tips the scale of infinite balance into all possibilities of chaos (which together still cancelout to zero) which we call Heisenberg Uncertainty. Therefore, if you observed every particle in the universe except 1, Heisenberg Uncertainty would be absolutely forced to certainly tell you it is exactly the remaining possibility. That is the power of the Higgs Boson, also known as the universe. Scientists probably meant Higgs Boson in a more specific way about MTheory, but this is the closest I can translate to a purely wavebased model.
THEORY: The 2 most basic particle types are Higgs Boson (generalizes to the whole universe, a mobiuslike paradox because "Nonexistence is isomorphic to the set of all selfconsistent possibilities.") and graviton (generalizes to any closed manifold). Higgs Boson is to Graviton as Klein Bottle is to Sphere or Donut, and there are an infinite and continuous variety of higher dimensional combinations, which together cancelout to zero. A Klein Bottle is a circle on one dimension and a mobius on the other dimension. What do you get when you go at other angles and use many of them together? Irrational manifolds, something we're just getting started thinking about, like using an infinitely thin version of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_winding_of_a_torus instead of a mobius to create the Klein Bottle, but we don't need to get into that level of complexity to understand the most basic ways to use the Higgs Boson. But I would like somebody to verify the the proof of the Poincare Conjecture (1 of 7 millenium problems, million dollar prize each) also covers all possibilities of irrational manifolds, if any such manifolds apply. The "multiverse ship" described in theories above uses Higgs Boson to form a local area of space into Graviton. 
Send PM · Send email ·

Ed Wood 
Posted: Apr 23 2012, 03:49 PM


Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 877 Joined: 12September 06 Positive Feedback: 25% Feedback Score: 14 
I like this bit. I have suggested it before. I don't know what I think 'bout the rest of it yet. 

AlexG 
Posted: Apr 23 2012, 04:30 PM


Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 5651 Joined: 8September 06 Positive Feedback: 73.91% Feedback Score: 108 
Fact: This means nothing.
Fact: There have been no such hole made in any experiment. Fact: There are simply too many erroneous statements in the preceding posts to bother correcting them one by one. Word salad, served in the large, family size.  Its the way nature is!
If you dont like it, go somewhere else.... To another universe, where the rules are simpler Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy Prof Richard Fyenman (1979) ..... God does not roll dice with the Universe"  A. Einstein "God not only plays dice with the Universe, He rolls them where you can't see"  N. Bohr 

Send PM · Send email ·

BenRayfield 
Posted: Apr 24 2012, 10:55 PM


Newbie Group: Power Member Posts: 24 Joined: 3March 12 Positive Feedback: 0% Feedback Score: 0 
Every part of the universe is connected to every other part, which we call a wavefunction. Everything means something to everything else.
Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense, even though in this case there is evidence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_electron
If Einstein thought it could be true, isn't that a good reason to research until its proven or disproven, not just ignored because you don't have evidence? The evidence I speak of is various news articles I've read in the past which said such small black holes were created in laboratories, which probably meant they were solutions to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_field_equations or related math. A simple search finds so much of it I didn't think it would be challenged:
If you still want to challenge it, I'll find stronger evidence, but so far you have offered no evidence at all against my theory, only your opinion, very unscientific.
Then I'll be satisfied with the first error in my theory, not something you think is irrelevant, but something you prove is wrong with evidence of the opposite. This post has been edited by BenRayfield on Apr 24 2012, 11:17 PM 

Send PM · Send email ·

AlexG 
Posted: Apr 25 2012, 12:53 AM

Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 5651 Joined: 8September 06 Positive Feedback: 73.91% Feedback Score: 108 
Ah yes, the cry of the crank: "Prove me wrong".
BTW, did you actually read any of the articles you cite? There have been no gravitational black holes created. Just analogs, which mimic some aspects of a black hole. This post has been edited by AlexG on Apr 25 2012, 12:58 AM  Its the way nature is!
If you dont like it, go somewhere else.... To another universe, where the rules are simpler Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy Prof Richard Fyenman (1979) ..... God does not roll dice with the Universe"  A. Einstein "God not only plays dice with the Universe, He rolls them where you can't see"  N. Bohr 
Send PM · Send email ·

brucep 
Posted: Apr 25 2012, 07:07 AM


Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 3834 Joined: 3October 09 Positive Feedback: 88.37% Feedback Score: 146 
It's a hypothesis not a theory. A very stupid hypothesis to boot. 

Send PM ·

BenRayfield 
Posted: Apr 26 2012, 09:51 PM


Newbie Group: Power Member Posts: 24 Joined: 3March 12 Positive Feedback: 0% Feedback Score: 0 
The exact amount of gravity expected was observed, which is approximately 0 since gravity is such a small force. Gravity applies to all particles. This is the amount of gravity expected.
Isn't that what you're saying to me? Prove the model you already think is correct wrong or it will continue to be thought the most accurate even though it describes many things as random and unknowable, like Heisenberg Uncertainty? My theory isn't actually that far from the existing model. If certain things turn out to be smooth, it may best be modeled as a fractal lengthcontraction space, which is like a fractal minkowski space except without time. This post has been edited by BenRayfield on Apr 26 2012, 09:53 PM 

Send PM · Send email ·

AlexG 
Posted: Apr 27 2012, 04:57 AM


Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 5651 Joined: 8September 06 Positive Feedback: 73.91% Feedback Score: 108 
The model we think is accurate produces verifiable predictions, as well as technologically useful data. That's why we think it's accurate. All you're doing is hand waving.  Its the way nature is!
If you dont like it, go somewhere else.... To another universe, where the rules are simpler Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy Prof Richard Fyenman (1979) ..... God does not roll dice with the Universe"  A. Einstein "God not only plays dice with the Universe, He rolls them where you can't see"  N. Bohr 

Send PM · Send email ·

brucep 
Posted: Apr 27 2012, 08:24 AM


Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 3834 Joined: 3October 09 Positive Feedback: 88.37% Feedback Score: 146 
I'm trying to figure out how something can fall into the black hole if maximum density reigns at the event horizon. Maximum density? He must mean it's denser than the space between his ears. 

Send PM ·

Ed Wood 
Posted: Apr 27 2012, 02:42 PM

Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 877 Joined: 12September 06 Positive Feedback: 25% Feedback Score: 14 
All inertial frames see waves as quanta
If by that you mean Light/EM radiation and time is quantized by Mass I don't have a problem with that. There are problems with the rest of it. A non gravitational black hole has no gravity so I think you need to come up with another example of a lab created gravitational black hole. 
BenRayfield 
Posted: May 2 2012, 11:31 PM


Newbie Group: Power Member Posts: 24 Joined: 3March 12 Positive Feedback: 0% Feedback Score: 0 
Nothing can ever fall into a black hole. It is a fact that every black hole must evaporate into hawking radiation and/or explode before the end of time (also known as heat death), and it is also a fact that the end of time is quickly experienced by anything falling into a black hole in the limit of approaching the event horizon, therefore anything falling into a black hole will see it evaporate and/or explode just before it would have fallen in. Nothing ever moves or affects things faster than light, including entanglement, because that is instead slower than light through shorter paths in the infinite dimensions and all patterns defined by "all selfconsistent possibilities". See Max Tegmark's "Mathematical Universe Hypothesis" for a similar definition of "all selfconsistent possibilities". Timeless Multiverse Relativity theory is therefore excused from explaining any contradictions resulting from faster than light movement, anything past event horizons, and related discontinuities. Those things are nonsequitur because all claimed faster than light observations have been measured against theories which contain more than 0 contradictions, especially the theory that time is a property of the universe at the deepest level instead of only a local approximation.
Timeless Multiverse Relativity theory defines mass as amplitude of any part of the universal wave (which is all selfconsistent possibilities together), and since we are all part of that wave, its amplitude is relative to itself therefore is experienced as 1.0 (quanta) at every point of its surface. I do not know if we are agreeing or not, since the phrase "is quantized" is ambiguous without first agreeing on a definition of time and wavefunctioncollapse. To everyone, I agree Timeless Multiverse Relativity theory is incomplete, and I will find more specific evidence and equations before continuing this thread. It may take a long time, but I think I've vaguely defined a good research path to explore. This post has been edited by BenRayfield on May 3 2012, 12:28 AM 

Send PM · Send email ·

brucep 
Posted: May 3 2012, 06:23 AM


Advanced Member Group: Power Member Posts: 3834 Joined: 3October 09 Positive Feedback: 88.37% Feedback Score: 146 
Your pronunciations are bullshit. The maximum density is between your ears. Everything you just said is nonsense. Just like every other comic book gravitational physicists you forgot to learn GR. Because you don't know 'the rest of the story' you make a fool of yourself. 

Send PM ·

BenRayfield 
Posted: May 3 2012, 09:44 AM

Newbie Group: Power Member Posts: 24 Joined: 3March 12 Positive Feedback: 0% Feedback Score: 0 
brucep, science is not a democracy, so find a specific flaw in what I said or stop spamming your vote against my ideas.

Send PM · Send email ·

Pages: (2) [1] 2 
Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll 