# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: the universe as a ten dimensional binary system  (Read 81828 times)

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #125 on: 13/06/2009 15:09:25 »
Quote from: jerrygg38
Verns statement does not specify what dimensions the fields occupy. It could be three , four, five , ten etc.
It only works in the familiar 3 + 1 dimensions.

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #126 on: 13/06/2009 15:11:13 »
Vern - Jerrygg38 - Let's somehow get to the same page.  JerryGG38 says that he has no need of mass in an electric field.  You say that it is a required property in any electromagnetic interaction.  Am I missing something.  These two concepts seem diametrically opposite.  I have no problem with mass.  I have a problem in any universe at all without it.

What's actually being said here?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #127 on: 13/06/2009 15:14:31 »
Quote from: witsend
I agree.  I totally and wholeheartedly agree - BUT with one proviso - that the magnetic part of that electromagnetic interaction is not in our dimension.  Except for this difference I ENTIRELY agree.
I guess there could be other dimensions; I can make computer simulations of them, but I can't imagine that they could exist in real life.

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #128 on: 13/06/2009 15:17:18 »
Quote from: witsend
These two concepts seem diametrically opposite.  I have no problem with mass.  I have a problem in any universe at all without it.
Mass exists; we are just considering its composition. The contention is that it consists of nothing other than electric and magnetic change trapped in local patterns.

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 781
• Thanked: 27 times
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #129 on: 13/06/2009 15:19:31 »
Yes. Since I have eliminated the necessity for the independent property of mass, all we have left is pure electrical theory.EDIT - sorry JerryGG38

What do you mean?  I cannot understand how you can eliminate mass.  It's tangibly evident - everywhere?

If you look at my Sister transformation theory you will see that in my theory I propose that
MCC = QC = energy
Therefore a moving charge at light speed has the property of energy
Therefore
M = Q/C = coulombs seconds per meter

This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.
Over the years I have had three different transformation solutions. I started with this one, then went to another sister solution, then I tried the mass equals charge solution. Finally I returned to my original equation of 1988.
You think mass exists? Why? You pick some heavy object up and it is hard to do. You push against a wall and think it is a hard object. Why?
If you take a three dimensional high speed gyroscope (3 axis) and try to lift it, you will find you cannot. It may weigh ten pounds but you cannot pick it up.
Mass is merely the electromagnetic field spinning on 3 axis. It is not an independent property of nature.

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 781
• Thanked: 27 times
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #130 on: 13/06/2009 15:23:25 »
Quote from: witsend
I agree.  I totally and wholeheartedly agree - BUT with one proviso - that the magnetic part of that electromagnetic interaction is not in our dimension.  Except for this difference I ENTIRELY agree.
I guess there could be other dimensions; I can make computer simulations of them, but I can't imagine that they could exist in real life.

Think about a magnetic hysteresis loop. You know that exists in real life. Then think about a light speed hysteresis loop. Finally think about a space time hysteresis loop. In this way the universe is a hysteresis loop of plus time, minus time and zero time.
It is not complex. It is just that the universe we live in is a composite of three time dimensions which are extremely close to each other.

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #131 on: 13/06/2009 15:24:34 »
This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.JerryGG38

OK - we're on the same page.  I'm with you.  I entirely agree.  The only difference between you me and Vern is this.  Vern says all is sufficient in the electromagnetic description.  You say is all sufficient in the Electric description.  And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.

How interesting is that.

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #132 on: 13/06/2009 15:32:44 »
Quote from: jerrygg38
Think about a magnetic hysteresis loop. You know that exists in real life. Then think about a light speed hysteresis loop. Finally think about a space time hysteresis loop. In this way the universe is a hysteresis loop of plus time, minus time and zero time.
I can imagine it; I just can't think of why it is needed.

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 781
• Thanked: 27 times
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #133 on: 13/06/2009 15:36:49 »
This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.JerryGG38

OK - we're on the same page.  I'm with you.  I entirely agree.  The only difference between you me and Vern is this.  Vern says all is sufficient in the electromagnetic description.  You say is all sufficient in the Electric description.  And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.

How interesting is that.

The problem is a man named Maxwell. His excellent equations have formed the basis of much of electrical theory. You cannot separate the electric and magnetic fields. They are interconnected. One makes the other. To me the stationary dot-wave is the electric field while the moving dot-wave is the magnetic field. In general things move and stop, thus the electric field always turns into a magnetic field and visa versa.

If you try to build a universe where the two fields are not sister properties, then the foundation of electrical theory is in jepoardy.

On thing I saw you state previously is that two magnetic fields will not produce an electric field.
If you bring two bar magnets toward each other, Each bar magnet will induce electric currents in the next bar magnet. Therefore the moving magnetic fields will produce electric fields and visa veras. you cannot disconnect the electric and magnetic fields from each other.

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #134 on: 13/06/2009 15:38:38 »
Quote from: witsend
And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.
Some physicists suspect that the two fields might exist separate from each other and that a magnetic monopole might exist. So far this has not been observed. A changing magnetic creates an electric etc.

Edit: jerrygg38; our posts crossed We're on the same page.
« Last Edit: 13/06/2009 15:40:50 by Vern »

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 781
• Thanked: 27 times
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #135 on: 13/06/2009 15:43:03 »
Quote from: jerrygg38
Think about a magnetic hysteresis loop. You know that exists in real life. Then think about a light speed hysteresis loop. Finally think about a space time hysteresis loop. In this way the universe is a hysteresis loop of plus time, minus time and zero time.
I can imagine it; I just can't think of why it is needed.

From a mathematical viewpoint think about differential equations. It works based upon delta time. Thus the whole basis of our math is the present time verses the past time and verses future time. Therefore the whole basis of our universe is plus and minus differential time. Therefore in reality there is a memory of the past time.
A rock moves slowly in pure empty space. There is a memory of the rock a split second ago. There are forces between the rock in the here and now and a split second ago. So we always have a universe of today and a universe of a split second ago. Now we get Einsteinian.
The image of the rock's motion is ahead of the rock at the speed of light. Thus there is a fast forward component to the motion of the rock.
Now we have a t- universe, a t=0 universe and a t=+ universe.
If we did not have three time universes, then differential equations would be eliminated. Our universe would be eliminated as well.

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #136 on: 13/06/2009 15:49:14 »
Quote from: jerrygg38
Now we have a t- universe, a t=0 universe and a t=+ universe.
If we did not have three time universes, then differential equations would be eliminated. Our universe would be eliminated as well.
I just always thought of the + and - of time to be properties of the time dimension.

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #137 on: 13/06/2009 15:49:43 »
since we're discussing everything except my composites - let me say this.

There was a young lady of Bright,
Whose speed was much faster than light
She left one day in a relative way
And returned the previous night.

NOT sure of the relevance nor the composer for that matter.
« Last Edit: 13/06/2009 15:52:22 by witsend »

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #138 on: 13/06/2009 16:00:36 »
If you bring two bar magnets toward each other, Each bar magnet will induce electric currents in the next bar magnet. Therefore the moving magnetic fields will produce electric fields and visa veras. you cannot disconnect the electric and magnetic fields from each other. JerryGG38

I have spoken to the following academics on this question.  Professor Lyndsay, Professor Zingu, Professor Violie and Professor Claymans.  I have also written and/or spoken to 2 other professors and have written to a whole host of professors including phsyicists at Yale and Harvard.  Not one of them has claimed that there is an ELECTRIC FIELD in a magnet on magnet interaction.  All have said that it is assumed but unproven.  That was a decade ago.  I then looked for proof.  There's a guy who did some test to prove this and the proof was inconclusive.  But it IS published.  I cannot for the life of me find that paper. I agree that there may be an electric field (edit) in this magnet on magnet.  But there is NO PROOF of an electric field, to the best of my knowledge.
« Last Edit: 14/06/2009 11:13:06 by witsend »

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #139 on: 13/06/2009 16:17:37 »
And JerryGG38 - I'm not sure, but I think that the only thing that can shield one magnetic field is another magnetic field.  Can one shield an electric field with another electric field?  I actually don't know.  I've just thought of it.

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #140 on: 13/06/2009 16:31:58 »
I guess there could be other dimensions; I can make computer simulations of them, but I can't imagine that they could exist in real life. Vern

If we can get back to this point maybe we can move on.  It's understood that we cannot see a particle in the magnetic field.  It could be that - if it did comprise particles and they moved at a velocity that exceeds light speed, then we would not easily be able to find that particle.  Well.  What if it is entirely impossible to find this particle becasue, not only does it exceed light speed but it, itself, moves light.  Then, like the balloon being blown by the wind, we could mistakenly say that the balloon has energy.  In the same way we could assume that light has energy to move it.

Now - that scenario - those nested 'ifs' present the theoretical potential that a particle in a magnetic field may be extant and may be forever invisible.  IF so, then it would be operating in a different time dimension to our own.

Does that satisfy you guys?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #141 on: 13/06/2009 17:21:49 »
Quote from: witsend
Now - that scenario - those nested 'ifs' present the theoretical potential that a particle in a magnetic field may be extant and may be forever invisible.  IF so, then it would be operating in a different time dimension to our own.
I don't understand why that would need to be that way. But it is possible I guess.

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #142 on: 13/06/2009 17:37:00 »
Vern - I know the concepts are different.  More than likely wrong.  But there's a kind of logic.  I've decided not go through the composites.  It's obviously boring you both.  Should we rather discuss some other aspect.  Gravity?  Something?  Anything?  You choose.  Clearly I can't seem to explain the relevance of (EDIT) magnetic fields in this context?

EDIT Actually it wont work.  I've just tried it.  Without some concensus this arguement's going nowhere.  It'll just get back to Vern asking the signifcance and JerryGG38 arguing the correspondence to his model.  I'll maybe try this again tomorrow.
« Last Edit: 13/06/2009 18:06:16 by witsend »

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #143 on: 13/06/2009 17:51:36 »
Therefore the whole basis of our universe is plus and minus differential time. Therefore in reality there is a memory of the past time.jerryGG38

I've heard it argued that time is only backward flowing.  Based on the observation that we can see the past but not the future.

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 781
• Thanked: 27 times
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #144 on: 13/06/2009 18:57:43 »
This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.JerryGG38

OK - we're on the same page.  I'm with you.  I entirely agree.  The only difference between you me and Vern is this.  Vern says all is sufficient in the electromagnetic description.  You say is all sufficient in the Electric description.  And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.

How interesting is that.

I agree with Vern. AS an EE, sometime I may say the electric universe. To me the electromagnetic field is the same as the electric field. so both terms mean the same to me.
However since you want to separate the magnetic field from the electric field, I will have to watch what I say.
You want to make the magnetic field primary and the electric field secondary instead of both interconnected. Therefore to you the electric field is a product of the magnetic field. The magnetic field could exist without the electric field.
That is what I understand you to mean. However why stop there?

We could have a system where the motion of some other force such as a spin (radians per second) is the primary force. The force produces the magnetic field. The interaction of the primary force with the magnetic field produces the electric field. Therefore both fields are the product of a more fundamental field.
It is always a possibility that something we canno envision is the main driving force of the universe. Yet it is very difficult to go beyond what we have encountered. We know the magnetic field and the electric field. We know Maxwells equations. We know from experiments that electrical theory adequately defines most interactions in the universe.
One solution for my Sister equations is that coulombs = radians per second. What does that mean? I think it might be correct but it says that the entire universe is the result of a spin of a wave.
An alternative to the plus and minus universe is a magnetic/ electric universe. This splits the universe into 3 dimensions of neutral, 3 dimensions of magnetic plus, 3 dimensions of magnetic minus, 3 dimensions of electric plus, and 3 dimensions of electric minus. Therefore 15 dimensions all separated by the tiny plank distance.

I have no problem with a sandwich of 15 dimensions as long as the separation is basically zero time and zero distance. However that is just to understand what is happening. We still must adhere to Maxwells equations.

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 781
• Thanked: 27 times
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #145 on: 13/06/2009 19:13:10 »
Quote from: witsend
Now - that scenario - those nested 'ifs' present the theoretical potential that a particle in a magnetic field may be extant and may be forever invisible.  IF so, then it would be operating in a different time dimension to our own.
I don't understand why that would need to be that way. But it is possible I guess.

As I just posted, it is possible that the electric and magnetic fields are the product of some higher force which we cannot see or measure. However we reach a limit to our ability to understand. And even if we can sligtly undestand such things, it surely is basically impossible for us to discuss it with others.
Vern, Witsend is attempting to go beyond the gound of our being and find the ultimate driving force of the universe. I try this as well. However in the end the greatest minds of man throughout the ages have produced concepts which are difficult to destroy. I can split the electric and magnetic field into different dimensions. That is okay with me. I cannot split the interactions between the fields because we have not seen such occurrences.
The only thing that is lacking in modern theory is that the gravitational field is a bipolar electromagnetic field. The Earth spinning around the sun produces gravitational eddy currents in the sun and the produces the same in us.  Thus the bipolar field acts the same as the unipolar electromagnetic field.

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 781
• Thanked: 27 times
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #146 on: 13/06/2009 19:17:47 »
Therefore the whole basis of our universe is plus and minus differential time. Therefore in reality there is a memory of the past time.jerryGG38

I've heard it argued that time is only backward flowing.  Based on the observation that we can see the past but not the future.
That is why I have a fast forward law.
"The image of an object appears before the object at the speed of light"
This law enables the Doppler mass. The Doppler mass is larger in the front of an object than behind it.
This is all part of the gravitational field.  The moving gravitional field of an object occurs before the object appears.
Physics has not accounted for the Doppler mass. Yet years ago in the Sperry Library were several studies of the Doppler Mass. The data appears to validate the Doppler mass but the change is so small that it is hard to prove completely. It is part of my space time equations.

#### witsend

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 418
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #147 on: 13/06/2009 19:29:22 »
JerryGG38 - are we comparing our different models and trying to prove the one right the other wrong?  Or are we actually trying to understand each other?

It takes way too much time and is way too boring to try and compete.  I couldn't anyway.  I don't know your language.  Did you even read my posts?  If you didn't and only glanced at them - I can understand.  It's words.  Not math.  I think sophiecentaur's right.  I don't belong on this forum.

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #148 on: 13/06/2009 19:51:42 »
Quote from: witsend
JerryGG38 - are we comparing our different models and trying to prove the one right the other wrong?  Or are we actually trying to understand each other?
My goal is simply to understand; I probably won't suspect that the concept represents reality. I may point out things that are similar to my own views or to other concepts that I know about.

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #149 on: 13/06/2009 19:53:02 »
Quote from: jerrygg38
This law enables the Doppler mass. The Doppler mass is larger in the front of an object than behind it.
This is all part of the gravitational field.  The moving gravitional field of an object occurs before the object appears.
I haven't heard of Doppler mass. I'll do some research.

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### the universe as a ten dimensional binary system
« Reply #149 on: 13/06/2009 19:53:02 »