The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: the universe as a ten dimensional binary system  (Read 82072 times)

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« on: 10/06/2009 20:37:27 »
I have a non-classical magnetic field that proposes that the universe may be a 10 dimensional binary system.  I am an amateur so must ask at the outset that any reader of this thread make allowances for my terminology.  In some instances I have had to invent terms, and in others I have unfortunately used known classical terms incorrectly.  The model is described in the attached blog.  It's awfully difficult to read.  I'm hoping that through discussion it may not be necessary to refer to it at all.   

And, for Sophiecentaur, and any other hypercritical readers, I would stress that it is not presented as it should be.  I am an amateur.  It is simply the best I could do.  You may criticise it - of course - but I'd thank you not to critise it on the grounds of my lack of conventional training. I have reason to believe that there are some contributers who may be interested.

The proposal is based on a single observation related to inductive laws.  These laws state that changing electric fields induce magnetic fields and changing magnetic fields induce electric fields.  But no-one has proved the existence of an electric field in a magnet on magnet interaction.  That got me started. 

http://rosemaryainslie.blogspot.com/

I have proposed that the magnetic fields comprises particles.  I've called them tachyons,magnetic dipoles with the velocity of 2c.  That's the first question.  Is it classically considered possible that any particle can exceed the speed of light?


 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #1 on: 10/06/2009 20:52:50 »
No. And if your proposal was correct then wouldn't magnetic fields propagate at 2c? Cause they don't.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #2 on: 10/06/2009 20:59:02 »
Madidus_Scientia  So glad you're the first contributer.  How do you know they don't propogate at greater than light speed?
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #3 on: 10/06/2009 21:03:27 »
Because it's been measured to be c, not 2c.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #4 on: 10/06/2009 21:25:54 »
be interested.

The proposal is based on a single observation related to inductive laws.  These laws state that changing electric fields induce magnetic fields and changing magnetic fields induce electric fields.  But no-one has proved the existence of an electric field in a magnet on magnet interaction.  That got me started. 

http://rosemaryainslie.blogspot.com/

I have proposed that the magnetic fields comprises particles.  I've called them tachyons,magnetic dipoles with the velocity of 2c.  That's the first question.  Is it classically considered possible that any particle can exceed the speed of light?


The term classically indicates that which has been accepted as part of classical physics. Classical physics has always been limited to the speed of light.

The better question would be that:
  Is it possible that any particle can exceed the speed of light?

 Since I believe in a multi-lightspeed universe, particles from speed of near zero C to infinite C are indeed possible. Thus total universe contains photons which range from zero light speed to light speed infinity.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #5 on: 10/06/2009 21:30:17 »
Because it's been measured to be c, not 2c.

Our instruments are based upon interactions with electrons. Electrons are made from light speed C matter. They do not have the ability to measure light speed 2C readily.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #6 on: 10/06/2009 21:35:13 »
Thanks JerryGG38 - from all kinds of levels. [:X]

I agree, but I'm trying to get to any argument that categorically allows for greater than light speed?  I first thought that I had it in E=mc^2.  Because - a photon has NO MASS then E times anything at all would still be zero.  So.  My argument was this, if the photon itself has no energy then self-evidently something else is moving the photon.

Then I learned that actually that equation was modified so that its energy was then in its velocity.  But if that's true, then by the same token we can attribute velocity to anything and at any value.  The hard part would be to try and prove the existence of that 'faster than light' thing?
« Last Edit: 11/06/2009 12:13:18 by witsend »
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #7 on: 10/06/2009 21:42:36 »
You know Jerry - I actually think that your dot-wave theory could so be like my own.  I also need those dots.  Did you read the model?  It's way too obtuse. But there are definite similarities.  My own dots fill a toroid in a series of really thin strings. But they always join.  Very structured fields.

Jerry I'm exhausted.  If you post tonight I'll check it tomorrow.  I see Sophiecentaur is still posting on that thread. 
« Last Edit: 10/06/2009 22:08:05 by witsend »
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #8 on: 10/06/2009 22:12:34 »
You know Jerry - I actually think that your dot-wave theory could so be like my own.  I also need those dots.  Did you read the model?  It's way too obtuse. But there are definite similarities.  My own dots fill a toroid in a series of really thin strings. But they always join.  Very structured fields.

I just read some of your work. It is interesting the way you piece together the magnetic field. To me the magnetic fields are definitely particle waves. The big difference is that my dot-waves do not have to be bipolar (north/south) devices. However they could form that way. An ordinary magnet has a north and a south. An electric field can have a positive or a negative. We have never built a device that is a singlular north pole.
   However a moving positive dot wave is a singluar magnetic pole. A moving negative dot-wave is a opposite singular magnetic pole. Maxwells equations allow for a singular magnetic pole but no one has ever seen one.
   Although you move up in light speed for your magnetic devices, there is no need for that. They would work just as well at light speed C. My dot-waves move at light speed C. However dot-waves from the light speed 2C universe move at twice our light speed.

   Why do you feel you need to go to light speed 2C for your magnetic system to work?
  As far as interactions are concerned, the universe is filled with dot-waves. When groups of dot-waves interact with groups of dot-waves all over the universe, there is no absolute requirement that the interaction is limited to light speed C. It is possible for the simultaneous explosion of the big bang all over the universe moving upward toward light speed infinity.
  An event here can travel 10 billion light years in a split second. If we are limited to Einstein that is not possible. However for a multi-lightspeed universe we are only limited by light speed infinity.
  Thus Einstein is wrong. For example a high speed u-meson going east at 0.99C and a high speed u-meson going west at 0.99C are traveling apart at
1.98C. According to Einstein they can only travel apart at C. Therefore we have to turn our minds inside out.
  the problem is that we think at infinite light speed and are limited by our electrons moving at light speed C at most. Einstein was excellent in his work but they are less than perfect.
  I guess I should post Dot-Wave Doppler Space Time as an alternative to Einsteins relativity.
  In any event why do you need your little magnets to move at 2C?
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #9 on: 10/06/2009 22:17:40 »
Golly JerryGG38.  Your ideas blow me away.  I couldn't resist reading it through.  But I'm finished. I need to walk the dogs and get to bed.  I'll answer you tomorrow.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #10 on: 10/06/2009 22:24:26 »
Thanks JerryGG38 - from all kinds of levels. [:X]

I agree, but I'm trying to get to any argument that categorically allows for greater than light speed?  I first thought that I had it in E=mc^.  Because - a photon has NO MASS then E times anything at all would still be zero.  So.  My argument was this, if the photon itself has no energy then self-evidently something else is moving the photon.

Then I learned that actually that equation was modified so that its energy was then in its velocity.  But if that's true, then by the same token we can attribute velocity to anything and at any value.  The hard part would be to try and prove the existence of that 'faster than light' thing?

I do not agree with classical physics that a photon has no mass. To me the photon is a spinning plane surface which has an electrical driving force perpendicular to the plane of motion. The force drives the photon to light speed because the mass in the direction of motion is zero. However the mass in the perpendicular direction (the spinning plane) is like a gyroscope. Therefore the photon has mass but the mass is spread over a large distance. A photon travels 186,000 miles per second and the little mass in one second occupiles this distance. However this mass will cause light to bend around the stars.
   Of course that is not Einsteinian. However the net result is that there is Einsteins excellent equations for curved space time and alternate equations based upon the bending of a line of mass as it passes a star. Instead of a point mass it is a line of mass.
   Einsteins methods are good because the gravitational field adjusts for light speed as the photons near the earth. Thus I do not agree that the speed of the photons are constant. The gravitational field moves and self-corrects the measurements.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #11 on: 10/06/2009 22:26:54 »
Golly JerryGG38.  Your ideas blow me away.  I couldn't resist reading it through.  But I'm finished. I need to walk the dogs and get to bed.  I'll answer you tomorrow.

Have a good nights sleep. I am glad to discuss your ideas which are possible and interesting. I am also glad to forget that circuit.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #12 on: 11/06/2009 07:22:01 »
JerryGG38 - I really need to understand that superluminal speed is valid.  I love your point that two particles moving in opposite directions in the same field, would cover the distance at twice light speed. And your argument to proving our inabilities to measure beyond light speed is invincible - and concise and PERFECT.  That's exactly what I meant.  Would not have known how to explain it outside three or four pages of writing.  Vern would have winced.  We're doing good.

I take it that neither you nor Vern object to the concept.  My own justification came from a really distinguished professor.  He explained that E=mc^2 was modified to E^2=m^2c^4+p^2c^2 where p = momentum.  Here's my argument.  If E=mc^2 and if, as classical physics tells us, the mass of the photon is zero - then the photon's energy would also be zero because 0 as a product of anything at all is still 0.  So.  If true then the photon has no innate energy to move at any speed at all.  I needed this.  I'll explain later. 

But surely then, even using the second equation, if the measure of a particle's energy can also simply be a measure of its momentum - then by the same token anything can exceed light speed provided that it has negative mass?  I know nothing of Lorenz equations Vern.  I'm trying to find an ACTUAL scientific argument that allows for faster than light speed.  Is this valid? Or even in terms of this equation is the velocity of a particle is still constrained to light speeed?

It's not critical.  It's good that the preclusion to light speed is apparently NOT WRITTEN IN STONE.  I was always given to understand that it was.  That, also as I understood it, was the overriding flaw in my model.  But it would be so nice to find something that refuted the constraint.

Anyway - glad to get answers to this.  I'll press on.

Vern asked me why I need more than 4 dimensions.  It's critical and it goes back to my analysis of the magnetic field.  It occurred to me that a magnetic field may be a primary force.  Certainly magnets interact with magnets without inducing an electric field.  That there may be an electric field hidden within that interation is unarguable.  But it is yet to be proven.

You see my proposal is that a magnetic field always manifests as a 'smooth' (I think that's the term) field.  In other words it appears to orbit and to retain it's justification within the structure of a magnetic flux field.  So, if it comprises particles - zipons - as I've proposed, then those particles must also be moving at some speed that light cannot detect - so superluminal.  And they must be able, at its least, to defy Pauli's exclusion principle precisely because they do structure themselves into fields.  Definitely not leptons.  So if it has a neutral charge, and if each of these little dipoles simply attach to each other and orbit and if their overriding condition is to move towards a condition of zero negative charge - then why can't we find the particle? The only thing that would prevent it's detection would be light speed.  As jerryGG38 pointed out.  We cannot measure beyond light speed.

Now, if something is exceeding the velocity of our measuring instruments then, by my definition, it's operating in another dimension.  That's all.  I call it a boundary constraint.  And this is the analogy.  You have a machine that throws rocks.  It operates in a vacuum so no extraneous forces, no variables.  All it does is throws stones.  And the smaller stones are thrown further than the big stones because it always throws with a constant force.  But when the stones are too big - it can't lift the stone.  And when it's too small - it can't detect the stone.  That's it's boundary constraint.  Too big or too small i'ts out of reach. And I have suggested that magnetic fields cannot 'reach' particles with greater or less mass than its own. So it effectively operates within a different dimension.

 
 

lyner

  • Guest
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #13 on: 11/06/2009 07:55:41 »
witsend
Quote
I know nothing of Lorenz equations Vern.

If you don't know about them then how can you possibly discuss the relativistic effects of high velocities? Science is not about arm waving.
Who 'gave you to understand'  the limits of velocity? If they didn't include Lorenz then their qualifications may be in doubt. They would possibly have left out a lot of stuff which is relevant to what you are claiming.

 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #14 on: 11/06/2009 08:10:14 »
Sophiecentaur. I outlined the 'conditions' of this proposed discussion at the opening post.  I specifically asked that you do not criticise the content on the basis of my lack of qualifications.  At this point I am developing the argument with the dialectic.  It is a valid tool.  And I am well qualified in its use.

If you do not like my contributions can you not simply ignore them?  But, if you continually dominate this thread with constant reminders as to my lack of scientific qualfication - as you did in the previous - then this thread is doomed.

If BenV or any moderators object to my contribution then please advise me.  I am specifically asking.  Am I allowed to post here - notwithstanding my lack of conventional scientific training?  If not - then I will stop posting.  If I am, then may I ask why you keep reading my threads?  They cannot possibly be of any interest to you because, as you say, I am 'arm waving'. Just look elsewhere for heaven's sake.  And let me try and get some answers to these questions.   
 
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #15 on: 11/06/2009 09:41:47 »
jerryGG38 - I need to answer your post.

I'm intrigued with magnetic monopoles.  If you're proposing 2 opposites, would they not move together? Or are there more than 2.  I only used 2 because that seems to correspond to the two known charges of particles.  The neutral charge - to my thinking - would be a conjunction of these two opposites.  I think what you're describing is a condition that is even more fundamental than my own. 
 
I buy into multiple singularities.  I also buy into limitless velocity.  But that's only an idea.  It needs justification.  Do you justify these in equations or, like Vern said, equations simply describe the model?

Your meson analogy is brilliant.  It could go some way to proving superluminal communication.  But I'm not sure.  The point is that in a particle pair, the one adjusts its spin in response to another, even when the one is artificially adjusted. Vern disputes that this is proven.  I'm still looking for the proof of this.  But it's published. Somwhere.  I'll check.

I understood your Dot-Wave Doppler Space Time was published.  So impressed.  Does this specifically refer to superluminal speed?

My little magnets don't need to move at 2C.  They just DO.  I sort of found that when I did my composites.  But I'll get to in, hopefully, through the thread.
 
EDIT - by the way - please check the earlier post where I reference my definition of dimensions.  I need feedback.
« Last Edit: 11/06/2009 12:21:47 by witsend »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #16 on: 11/06/2009 12:47:24 »
Quote from: witsend
Your meson analogy is brilliant.  It could go some way to proving superluminal communication.  But I'm not sure.  The point is that in a particle pair, the one adjusts its spin in response to another, even when the one is artificially adjusted. Vern disputes that this is proven.  I'm still looking for the proof of this.  But it's published. Somewhere.  I'll check.
I'm not sure I understand what it is that I dispute here. :) If it is superluminal communication, then yes; that has not been observed; it has been attempted a lot but never achieved.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #17 on: 11/06/2009 12:58:46 »
Hi Vern. I only mentioned it because jerryGG38 proposed a condition that exceeds light speed.  I thought it was neat.  So glad you're there.  Did you understand my description of boundary constraints? 

EDIT Regarding superluminal communication - I'm sure you're right.  But I've got it somewhere that not only proven but published.  I'll check.  May very well be wrong.
« Last Edit: 11/06/2009 13:03:17 by witsend »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #18 on: 11/06/2009 13:10:43 »
I'll search your text and see if I can find reference to boundary constraints. It is not something I remember seeing. You will find published articles that assert observations of faster than light and suggestions that communication might be possible. But so far, no successful experiments demonstrate this.

 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #19 on: 11/06/2009 13:16:07 »
Quote from: witsend
Now, if something is exceeding the velocity of our measuring instruments then, by my definition, it's operating in another dimension.
Maybe this is it. It makes sense; you can't measure it so it may be in another dimension. So, why not five dimensions? What is the significance of the additional five. String theorists seem to need ten or more dimensions, but this comes from their application of maths.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #20 on: 11/06/2009 14:29:39 »
Witsend responded as W: My remarks are JGG. (Sorry I donít know how to break apart long discussions without erasing them. Therefore I copy unto word and then response this way. Witsend in italics.

W:  Vern asked me why I need more than 4 dimensions. It's critical and it goes back to my analysis of the magnetic field. It occurred to me that a magnetic field may be a primary force. Certainly magnets interact with magnets without inducing an electric field. That there may be an electric field hidden within that interaction is unarguable. But it is yet to be proven.

JG: I agree that a magnetic field is a primary force. To me the dot-wave when stationary at a point is part of an electric field. As the dot-wave moves it is a magnetic field. Therefore the dot-wave is both an electric and magnetic field.  The dot-wave lives outside the Plank radius most of the time. However when it returns to the Plank radius, its properties depend upon which dimension it exists in.

W:  I take it that neither you nor Vern object to the concept. My own justification came from a really distinguished professor. He explained that E=mc^2 was modified to E^2=m^2c^4+p^2c^2 where p = momentum. Here's my argument. If E=mc^2 and if, as classical physics tells us, the mass of the photon is zero - then

JG: I am trying to work out this equation. Letís see:

  1) E = MC^2

 2)  P = MC

  E= PC

  E^2 = M^2C^4

Or

E^2 = P^2C^2

Now in the physics books, Einstein & Company combined both equations.

In all my work, I only use the first equation or the second. Was Einstein correct? I cannot justify that it is perfectly correct. The experimental data falls somewhere between one equation and the other. Therefore I cannot say that it is absolutely true or only partially true.

What do you think Vern??

W:  . Here's my argument. If E=mc^2 and if, as classical physics tells us, the mass of the photon is zero - then the photon's energy would also be zero because 0 as a product of anything at all is still 0. So. If true then the photon has no innate energy to move at any speed at all. I needed this. I'll explain later.

JG: This is an error on your part. Classical theory says a photon has no mass. I do not agree since I maintain that it has a small mass perpendicular to its motion. This mass is stretched out. Classical theory specifies that the photon has momentum.
   I maintain that a photon, which slows below light speed, increases its mass. Thus the photon mass is:

   3) Mp = (1-(V/C)^2  Mo

  Equation 3 is somewhat of a justification of Einsteinís equation. As the photon slows it spends less and less time in the forward direction and more and more times in the orbital planar state. Therefore the mass of the photon perpendicular to the direction of motion increases.

  The energy of the photon then become partially due to the mass increase and partially do to its motion at near light speed. Again this would justify Einsteinís Equation.

  (Right now I am rethinking my objection to Einsteinís equation. I always thought it was less than perfect but as I discuss this with you I will have to study it more. My Equation 3 was written down implicitly over the years but perhaps I can connect it to Einsteinís.)

W:  You see my proposal is that a magnetic field always manifests as a 'smooth' (I think that's the term) field. In other words it appears to orbit and to retain it's justification within the structure of a magnetic flux field. So, if it comprises particles - zipons - as I've proposed, then those particles must also be moving at some speed that light cannot detect - so superluminal. And they must be able, at its least, to defy Pauli's

  You are assuming that only particles moving faster than light speed are not detectable. You can detect my high-energy dot-waves because they appear at AM radio frequency wavelengths. You can detect concentrations of dot waves that are light. You cannot readily detect dot-waves that make up the gravitational waves since the energy level is too low to be part of the hydrogen atom levels.

  Therefore you cannot detect individual magnetic particles because their energy levels are too low to detect. You cannot detect the individual electric field particles because their energy levels are too low.

  Concentrated magnetic and electrical dot-waves can be detected because their energy levels are sufficient to interact with the electrons.

  We pick up the electric and magnetic fields because we are dealing with heavy concentrations of the dot-waves. We cannot pick up an individual dot wave subparticle.

  Therefore we do not need over light speed particles to make out light speed C universe work.


W:  defy Pauli's exclusion principle precisely because they do structure themselves into fields. Definitely not leptons. So if it has a neutral charge, and if each of these little dipoles simply attach to each other and orbit and if their overriding condition is to move towards a condition of zero negative charge - then why can't we find the particle? The only thing that would prevent it's detection would be light speed. As jerryGG38 pointed out. We cannot measure beyond light speed.

Any particles or subpartices beyond out light speed is very difficult to detect. However the problem we have here is energy levels. We cannot detect very small energy levels. That is why I cannot readily prove the existence of masses which are billions of billions of times less than the electrons or charges which are billions of billions times less than the charge of the electron. However the world is made from such things.

W:  Now, if something is exceeding the velocity of our measuring instruments then, by my definition, it's operating in another dimension. That's all. I call it a boundary constraint. And this is the analogy. You have a machine that throws rocks. It operates in a vacuum so no extraneous forces, no variables. All it does is throws stones. And the smaller stones are thrown further than the big stones because it always throws with a constant force. But when the stones are too big - it can't lift the stone. And when it's too small - it can't detect the stone. That's it's boundary constraint. Too big or too small itís out of reach. And I have suggested that magnetic fields cannot 'reach' particles with greater or less mass than its own. So it effectively operates within a different dimension.

I agree that the light speed dimension is a different dimension. If a space ship of light speed 1024C passed through your body, it would feel strange. It should not destroy you or harm the Earth. Thus we can coexist with different intelligent beings which can observe us and pass through us.

Bad enough we have bugs all over our bodies and within us that coexist with now. Now we have to worry that some other intelligence could enter our bodies and take over our minds. The higher light speed entities having greater ability to interact with our dimension while to us they are merely ghosts. We can put our hands through them but they can control us.

In any event I agree that the magnetic field operates in a different dimension than our mechanical world.


 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #21 on: 11/06/2009 14:38:13 »
Sophiecentaur. I outlined the 'conditions' of this proposed discussion at the opening post.  I specifically asked that you do not criticise the content on the basis of my lack of qualifications.  At this point I am developing the argument with the dialectic.  It is a valid tool.  And I am well qualified in its use.

If you do not like my contributions can you not simply ignore them?  But, if you continually dominate this thread with constant reminders as to my lack of scientific qualfication - as you did in the previous - then this thread is doomed.

If BenV or any moderators object to my contribution then please advise me.  I am specifically asking.  Am I allowed to post here - notwithstanding my lack of conventional scientific training?  If not - then I will stop posting.  If I am, then may I ask why you keep reading my threads?  They cannot possibly be of any interest to you because, as you say, I am 'arm waving'. Just look elsewhere for heaven's sake.  And let me try and get some answers to these questions.  
 

  What is good about your posts is that it provides alternate ideas in arease where there is much unknown. We are all struggling to find the answers. The greatest minds have not solved the most basis structure of the universe. Einstein and Lorentz produced great works but they are not perfect. Each has flaws.
  Therefore the way you look at the universe may produce truths which others cannot see. One limitation of educated people is that they often discount and crush alternate ideas due to their training.
  My own way of doing things is to assume that everything we have been taught is suspect. Our knowledge is tainted. We are taught less than perfect things.
  Therefore do not take any poison. Your new ideas will cause all of us to think about your ideas and alternatives.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #22 on: 11/06/2009 14:59:33 »
Vern and jerryGG38 - many thanks indeed, that you're both looking at this - so TOLERANTLY.  Much appreciated. I just want to get that off.  I have NEVER discussed this model of mine and I cannot tell you how frustrating it's been.  I feel very privileged, to have the two of you look and to do it from this forum.  I just want to get that on record.

Regarding Sophiecentaur's criticisms - he's right.  As a rule a trained mind is simply bored with an untrained.  Of necessity I plod.

Thanks guys.  I just so want you to know how I appreciate this.  My replies wont be too quick because I've got to plough through them.  That agricultural simile is possibly getting overworked.

 :D
« Last Edit: 11/06/2009 15:01:24 by witsend »
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #23 on: 11/06/2009 15:13:09 »
Witsend responded as W: My remarks are JGG. (Sorry I donít know how to break apart long discussions without erasing them. Therefore I copy unto word and then response this way. Witsend in italics.


W: quote author=witsend link=topic=23552.msg257394#msg257394 date=1244709707]
jerryGG38 - I need to answer your post.

I'm intrigued with magnetic monopoles.  If you're proposing 2 opposites, would they not move together? Or are there more than 2.  I only used 2 because that seems to correspond to the two known charges of particles.  The neutral charge - to my thinking - would be a conjunction of these two opposites.  I think what you're describing is a condition that is even more fundamental than my own.

JG: My plus dot lives in the positive universe . My minus dots live in the negative universe. These are two different electrical universes. We live in the bipolar universe. All universes are separated by the Plank time of  5.579E-44 seconds. The minus universe is below our time and the positive universe is above our time by this tiny amount. The amount is so small that the universe we live in looks like a simple three dimensional universe.

   However the total light speed universe is a different story. That truly are different dimensions. In general the lower light speed universes are closer to the common center. We are 13 billion years from the common center. The higher light speed universes are further from the common center. Thus the 2C universe is 26 billion years from the common center.

   Many universes self destruct at big bang. All lower universes expand rapidly at big bang from a shell. Thus our universe of light speed C at big bang was a shell. At big bang our radius was 1.098E-8 meters from the common center and our thickness was 2.27E-9 meters.

  Thus the entire universe was less that one millionths of a meter at big bang. As we go up to the extreme light speeds, there is no necessity that they take part in the big bang. Thus some higher light speed universes are perpetual while we eventually will explode over and over again.
 
W: I buy into multiple singularities.  I also buy into limitless velocity.  But that's only an idea.  It needs justification.  Do you justify these in equations or, like Vern said, equations simply describe the model?

JG: I just produce rules for each universe. Thus the dot charge and dot mass for a light speed 2 universe is half our dot mass and dotcharge. The higher we go in light speed the less mass we achieve. At light speeds near infinity, the mass is basically zero. Therefore we have energy only universes as we go toward light speed infinity.

W: Your meson analogy is brilliant.  It could go some way to proving superluminal communication.  But I'm not sure.  The point is that in a particle pair, the one adjusts its spin in response to another, even when the one is artificially adjusted. Vern disputes that this is proven.  I'm still looking for the proof of this.  But it's published. Somwhere.  I'll check.

JG: I am not sure of that. I have limited physics knowledge. So adjustments of spin is not something I have studied or been taught 45 years ago. Just two physics course and some readings of late. I find some data on the Internet but the advantage I have is that I believe the universe is purely electrical and thus as an EE I see the universe that way. I have no mass in my latest variation of the dot-wave theory. Mass is merely a gyroscopic action of electrical waves.
I like Verns photon pictures. It is my theory that if you add three photons pointing at the plank radius, they will not move when the vector sum of their momentums equals zero. Therefore 3 photons can produce mass.

W: I understood your Dot-Wave Doppler Space Time was published.  So impressed.  Does this specifically refer to superluminal speed?

JG: Not so impressive. I am the publisher. I do all the work and have McNaughton & Gunn print it. Quality books does the library of congress data. They sell some. Others are sold on the Internet. I did 4 books. One I had printed in India. The others here.

   It is not a money making venture. I gave most books away to libraries and charities. I tried regular publishers but they are only interested in big money. If you would like a copy of ďDoppler Space TimeĒ email me your address and I will send you one. No charge. I only have about 50 left.

   The only way I make money is being a handyman.

W: My little magnets don't need to move at 2C.  They just DO.  I sort of found that when I did my composites.  But I'll get to in, hopefully, through the thread.

JG: That is always a possibility.  Look at the photon. It travels at C in the forward direction. However at what speed does it travel in the perpendicular direction? We could argue that the dots actually move faster than C because they are moving forward at C and at some other speed in the perpendicular direciton.

  High energy photons would take less time spinning around. Therefore they would travel slightly faster in the forward direction.
   Is C the forward light speed only? Perhaps the perpendicular speed is variable?? We do not fully know these answers.
 
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #24 on: 11/06/2009 15:53:44 »
So, why not five dimensions? What is the significance of the additional five. String theorists seem to need ten or more dimensions, but this comes from their application of maths. Vern

Apparently string theory math is postively exotic.  But always remember, they've cracked the code.  They just haven't found the particle.

I actually need 10.  It's because the magnetic fields have three dimensions of space (share ours) but operate in a different time dimension.  We've sort of defined that?  I think so.

But to explain the 10 I also need to explain the composites.  I'll try and be brief. And I'll post the composites in the next post as this one will otherwise get too big.

The magnetic fields are super orderly.  Head to toe in really long strings that stretch around a really big toroid - the universe.  They always join up in circles.  They always orbit.  And the outer strings are, of necessity, longer than the inner strings.  But the correspondence is not only the length of the toroid, but also its width.  So shoulder to shoulder sideways, and head to toe lengthways.

Very small. Wherever they're positioned they will experience 'like charge' at some position.  This induces a movement.  They nudge forwards, thereby inducing a complimentary movement of all the zipons in that string.  Defined as a zipon moment is the time it takes one zipon to displace its position in a field of zipons.  It causes a 'ripple' effect lengthwise, and sidewise. In effect these are simply orbiting magnetic flux fields.  And all they're doing is trying to find a 'rest' condition.  But it's impossible because of their juxtaposition in the field.

Their movement, notwithstanding, is still very orderly.  In other words the whole field has a justification.  It spins in the same direction.  The only thing is this.  Because it's a string that's formed a circle - then one half of its justification opposes the other.  That's an important point to remember.  I'll get back to it.
« Last Edit: 11/06/2009 16:19:19 by witsend »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #24 on: 11/06/2009 15:53:44 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums