0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I can only say I SEE NOW FLAWS IN YOUR THEORY! Chapoo [] I think you have a posible winner here! Very nutale and positive or positifly balanced sorry for the spelling errors do you have a theory about darkmatter to and why we have been failing to detect it's shape Or size? Or maybee why we can' t see it? May i prepose it changes faster then light or matter so we have to messeur in the midle or something like that? With a theory like yours you make the universe blose!
That is just what I mean I Love transparent things! [] it controling or dominating all matter so it must be obvious clear and transparent For our brains! It everywhere all around us and between and in us so thats obvious is it not? But maybee you mean like glass then it schould have a shade and reflection mass and thinks of that kind don't you think? I Mean do you expect it to be like matter? And obeying the rules matter has to because of timespacematter? It Seem it has its one Rules and behaviour and it sets the rules for matter and even adds and adjust rules overtime? [] This is not a absolute opinion just small talk and my way of loving perfect imperfection making things move!Anyway I love the one sentense aswers! Do you know you have choosen out of thousants posible thoughts and you only choose one sentence thats control! I WONDER do you think timespace matter was created with the big bang or that it was already there? SO the bigbang happend inside timespacematter /blackmatter.It seem to my we are looking the wrong way treu the window we can only see it if we look treu the otherside of the window so our universe is inside out [:0] or put different we are looking at from our perspective but we need to look under the hood! Inside the engine that makes the rules. I mean timespacematter is not aflicted by itself like we are obvious and transparent is it not?
......., I am giving up soon on science.
Science is not bothered though.
Science does not accept there being a passive dark infinite space with zero time point space, each point representing the size of an atom that can be occupied by an atom that accumulates time occupying that space.
Introduction.I accidentally fell into science with little prior knowledge and poor literate ability, but quickly became ..............s and unable to put the ideas into a context that anyone else could understand.I feel I have now achieved a better standard of literacy and I am able to express my ideas with clear intent.
....light is a state and we see by EM radiation being a communications protocol by low voltage differential signalling of matter , which is formed by matters resistance force to the opposing force of light thus giving propagation and pressure magnitude to spectral content, ..
Move the object you are observing to a different place a different dimension of space.You will observe that the now unoccupied space from where you displaced the object that time now has no value,
Transparent like air and not like glass or water.
Quote from: TheboxI hope this answers you, I am giving up soon on science.Don't give up. All you need to do is study harder. It takes an enormous amount of work/study to become a scientist and for a physicist that includes a ton of advanced mathematics. If you have a love of physics then I suggest that you really get into it. That means learning advanced math and studying real college level calculus based physics texts.You will never be taken seriously to change something in physics if you don't have a good understanding of what it is that you propose to change. And talking down to us won't help either. Some of us have been physicists for decades. What ever gave you the idea that you're the only one who has challenged ideas in physics when in my experience that's part of learning the subject in the first place. We don't merely learn my memorizing but by challenging what is presented to us. We accept it temporarily when we are unable to break it. And that's true for all physicists.
I hope this answers you, I am giving up soon on science.
Quote from: Thebox on 15/03/2015 22:28:22Transparent like air and not like glass or water.Air is transparent in almost exactly the same way that glass or water is. Each of these substances absorb light at some frequencies better than at others. This is called their absorption spectrum. The spectrum for air can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_mass_%28astronomy%29#/media/File:Atmospheric_electromagnetic_transmittance_or_opacity.jpgAir and glass and water also interact with light even when not absorbing it. Light slows down slightly as it passes through matter, giving rise to refraction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refraction)Air definitely refracts light. This is most obvious when viewing air that is near or mixing with air of a different temperature. The refractive index of air (and water) is dependent on its temperature. This is why we see "waves" above a hot grill or behind a jet engine or coming off a hot road, or when it's –30°C outside and you open the window of your heated apartment. It is also responsible for mirages.Cool kitchen experiment!: Fill (half-way up) one transparent glass with cold water and one transparent glass with hot water (heated with a kettle or in the microwave to just below boiling is best). Both water samples are transparent, but they have drastically different refractive indices. Slowly pour the cold water into the hot water and observe closely--you will see these "waves!"
Quote from: Thebox on 15/03/2015 22:28:22......., I am giving up soon on science.Don't do that, you've come a long way and it's a hard journey. Anyway, once bitten ........Quote from: Thebox on 15/03/2015 22:28:22Science is not bothered though.People doing science are bothered. They are continually questioning and experimenting to find the best explanation, there is significant accolade to anyone who proves an alternative way of looking at the universe.People here are bothered, otherwise they wouldn't have engaged in discussion with you.Quote from: Thebox on 15/03/2015 22:28:22Science does not accept there being a passive dark infinite space with zero time point space, each point representing the size of an atom that can be occupied by an atom that accumulates time occupying that space.Why should it? Just stating it does not make it so, you have to show proof. Proof means identifying things that are different if your hypothesis is true and then experiments that show those very differences exist.You are somewhat of an anomaly. Some parts of your posts are very lucid, clear and well written. If you started with poor literacy you have done well. For example:Quote from: Thebox on 15/03/2015 12:32:14Introduction.I accidentally fell into science with little prior knowledge and poor literate ability, but quickly became ..............s and unable to put the ideas into a context that anyone else could understand.I feel I have now achieved a better standard of literacy and I am able to express my ideas with clear intent.Whereas at other times your posts seem incomprehensible and unclear. EgQuote from: Thebox on 15/03/2015 12:32:14....light is a state and we see by EM radiation being a communications protocol by low voltage differential signalling of matter , which is formed by matters resistance force to the opposing force of light thus giving propagation and pressure magnitude to spectral content, ..I'm not asking you to explain what that means, just to think whether that collection of words really conveys your ideas to someone unfamiliar with your thoughts. I find it hard to extract your meaning and ideas from that example.You also need to think whether what is obvious to you is obvious to others, and why. EgQuote from: Thebox on 15/03/2015 12:32:14Move the object you are observing to a different place a different dimension of space.You will observe that the now unoccupied space from where you displaced the object that time now has no value, Ask yourself "how is this observed?". It is not observed by others, especially me. What experiment can be done to show this is true?No, don't give up, use that passion to study more and learn more about science, but don't allow that passion to lead you down too many blind alleys.I get the impression that you work in or have a special interest in computing or data communications. We need people who can apply science to practical application, perhaps that is your direction. But whatever you decide don't stop learning or questioning, but do learn to ask the right questions.I wish you well, good fortune go with you.
Re-written - ''...light is a state and we see by EM radiation being a communications protocol by low voltage differential signalling of matter , which is formed by matters resistance force to the opposing force of light thus giving propagation and pressure magnitude to spectral content, ..''I do not think we actually ''see''. I think everything you see is a mirage inside your brain created by your brain , I think light is actually dark, I do not think that a wave is light without the brain the same as a sound is not a sound unless it is heard.
I really think we ''see'' in the very same way a night vision device works and we simply evolved to see in the dark.
Quote from: Thebox on 16/03/2015 11:39:29Re-written - ''...light is a state and we see by EM radiation being a communications protocol by low voltage differential signalling of matter , which is formed by matters resistance force to the opposing force of light thus giving propagation and pressure magnitude to spectral content, ..''I do not think we actually ''see''. I think everything you see is a mirage inside your brain created by your brain , I think light is actually dark, I do not think that a wave is light without the brain the same as a sound is not a sound unless it is heard.That is an excellent piece of rewriting. I now understand your viewpoint.My viewpoint is different. I agree that what I see is my brains interpretation of light and that interpretation can be wrong. However, to me a mirage is something that has no concrete substance, whereas I believe that what I see is a representation of something real - even if that something is a mirage!.Think also how my viewpoint on sound and light differs from yours. To me a sound is defined as a range of frequency vibrations in air and other media, those vibrations exist whether I experience them or not. Similarly with light.The questions you are asking are good ones, they challenge our perceptions. These questions have been asked by philosophers in the past, and some still challenge our thinking. others are confusions of definition and meaning.Quote from: Thebox on 16/03/2015 11:39:29I really think we ''see'' in the very same way a night vision device works and we simply evolved to see in the dark.This I like, very perceptive.There are many crackpots who visit this forum who are incapable of thinking. If I thought you were like these I would not be taking the time to write this.I think you have the capacity, but as you say, you have not had an education that has given you the same understanding of words or meanings. Some have the words and meanings but either have not been taught to think or are too lazy to do so; you have a head start over these as you are willing to try thinking and challenge your mind.I have a copy of Honey and Mumford, and although we may have a preferred style, we are capable of using all the styles and it is good to practice them. I have some other books by Peter Honey "Face to Face" and "Solving People Problems", I think you would enjoy them. Have you read the books by Edward de Bono? He suggests we try out various 'thinking hats'. I have been fortunate to meet both Peter Honey and Edward de Bono and they would recommend that you try as many different thinking tools as you can. I think you should also revisit formal logic. In some of your posts I think you are misunderstanding the use of Armstrong's Axioms.Can I recommend http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/ if you haven't already found it. I only found it this morning thanks to PmbPhy. Look at the section in part 1 on time, then read the rest.I suspect we will see you back here. If you have specific questions and are willing to listen to the answers you will be welcome. Some will expect you to believe everything they say, others will be less egotistical!
My opinion is that sound is frequency of vibration in/off the air but unless our receivers (ears) detect the waves and the brain converts it into a noise (sound), it is simply a wave without volume.I do not believe a volume of sound is present unless detected and converted.
Quote from: Thebox on 16/03/2015 15:29:29My opinion is that sound is frequency of vibration in/off the air but unless our receivers (ears) detect the waves and the brain converts it into a noise (sound), it is simply a wave without volume.I do not believe a volume of sound is present unless detected and converted.OK, we'll agree to differ on that one. I am used to using instruments to measure sounds I can't hear. Also volume for me has a very specific technical relationship with the waveform, you are using a different definition/meaning. Try looking at some Psychoacoustics, I would recommend some books, but I'm sure you will find plenty on the net. You would be interested in the aural illusions, like optical illusions, they give clues to how our brains interpret the (very real []) sounds.See you around, I hope.
A question to you, if gaseous forms such as air or Helium is made of atoms and in all the space around me right now there is billions and billions of Protons in and of the atoms, this makes Atoms transparent also?
Quote from: Thebox on 16/03/2015 16:43:30A question to you, if gaseous forms such as air or Helium is made of atoms and in all the space around me right now there is billions and billions of Protons in and of the atoms, this makes Atoms transparent also?In the air and in water there are millions of bacteria. I can see them through a microscope, but not usually in the air or water because they are very spread out. Sometimes if they are really dense you can see them as a bloom or mist in the water.Have you ever looked across a room of what appears to be clear air and seen the light of a sunbeam catch the dust motes floating in the air, but not be able to see those in other parts of the room.Even in solid matter there is a huge amount of space between atoms. Atoms are not transparent because things, including light, bounce off them or get absorbed. Although you might think that the air is transparent because of the empty space between atoms, in fact it is because the atoms do not have available electrons, with energy levels above them, which match the range of the visible photon's quantum levels. (sorry PmbPhy, trying to keep it simple)However, let's take the example of water (where you are talking about molecules not single atoms). In fact water absorbs most of the EM spectrum except for a very narrow notch in the visible spectrum. That might seem an odd coincidence, but if you think of creatures evolving in water it makes sense that the eye would develop around the frequencies that pass through water. And anyway, if you believe in a God, it wouldnt make much sense to use water in the eye if if you put the eyes sensitive zone where the water blocks those frequencies!So, for the most part water is not transparent!