The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Is Fundamental Theory Of Existence correct? FTOE?  (Read 2190 times)

Offline variationz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • Fundamental Theory Of Existence.
XY=1
If 1=0 God exists otherwise God can't exist. For all X, Y takes a different value, such that XY=1. If we draw a graph for all values of X and Y we get Rectangular Hyperbola and we can clearly observe that both X and Y can never be ZERO, therefore GOD(S) can't exist.If 1 can come out of 0 it means creation ( by GOD ) and if 1 can become 0 then it means destruction ( by GOD ). XY=1 supplies as means to understand that 1 is not equal to 0 and it means absence of GOD. The only GOD is life. We are GODS. Our parents are GODS.
XY=1 is a means to understand why X and Y can't be zero. Weather it is a unit area of a rectangle or rectangular hyperbola... it doesn't matter until you see the connection. All we have to do is obtain the possible values of X and Y such that XY=1....and X and Y can never be equal to zero. If X or Y equals to zero then we get 1=0 which is??? Still want me to connect the dots? This is the big picture...the big picture is neither X nor Y can ever be equal to zero. That answers all the questions... X never becomes 0 and the same goes with Y. This means that the so called creation and destruction are simply impossible. In my theory there are eleven postulates and only one [[[ velocity of light is relative ]]] postulate is not connected to XY=1. All the other TEN POSTULATES are interconnected. The only thing you have to understand is the possibilities of XY=1 and what else it can mean.
1. Zero can not exist as denominator.
2. Anything can not be created out of nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere.
3. Anything can not be destroyed into nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere.
4. Existence of anything can not be infinite.
5. There is no beginning and an end to the existence of the World.
6. There are finite absolute laws.
7. Velocity of light is relative.
8. There are three dimensions and three dimensions only.
9. Time Travel is impossible.
10. Tan 90 can not exist.
11. God(s) can not exist.
.....CONNECTING THE DOTS.....
FIRST POSTULATE:
1. Zero can not exist as denominator.
If X can't be zero...
If Y can't be zero...
1/0 can't equal anything. Hence proved.
SECOND POSTULATE:
2. Anything can not be created out of nothingness.
If 1 can't become zero...
If 0 can't become one...
Creation? ( change related creation? or total creation? )
Destruction? ( change related destruction? or total destruction? )
If creation and destruction ( not related to change of form ) are possible then there is no reason why it can't happen NOW???!!!
All rules will fail if CREATION and DESTRUCTION are possible.
1=0 becomes the only rule...all other rules will fail.
The only rule with
1=0 ( If accepted )
is anything equals anything.
Proton=Electron=Neutron=Quark=Meson...etc;
Anything can't equal anything else.
ONE can't be equal to ZERO.
All other postulates are hence proved.
Fundamental theory of existence.

God(s) can not exist.Space can not be infinite and it is timeless.There is no beginning and an end to the existence of the World.Numbers are infinite but number of apples (existence) can not be infinite.....

Fundamental Theory Of Existence.
1. Zero can not exist as denominator.
2. Anything can not be created out of nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere.
3. Anything can not be destroyed into nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere.
4. Existence of anything can not be infinite.
5. There is no beginning and an end to the existence of the World.
6. There are finite absolute laws.
7. Velocity of light is relative.
8. There are three dimensions and three dimensions only.
9. Time Travel is impossible.
10. Tan 90 can not exist.
11. God(s) can not exist.



 

Offline variationz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • Fundamental Theory Of Existence.
Is Fundamental Theory Of Existence correct? FTOE?
« Reply #1 on: 10/09/2010 13:41:27 »
Fundamental Theory Of Existence.
Let us consider x, y and z as any three numbers. If we take an equation such that x / y = z then x = y * z. 4 / 0 is said to be infinity. If 4 / 0 is equal to infinity, 4 / 0 = infinity then 4 = 0 * infinity, that is 4 = 0 but 4 is not equal to 0 therefore 4 / 0 is not equal to infinity. What is infinity? Infinity means not finite. If infinity means not finite then infinity can not be a number. Therefore infinity is not a number. When we divide a finite number with another finite number we get a finite answer but not infinity. Therefore any finite number divided by any finite number is equal to some finite number. For example 4 divided by 4 is equal to 1. The numerator is 4 which is a finite number. The denominator is 4 which is again a finite number. Now 4 / 4 is equal to 1 and once again 1 is a finite number. Therefore the result of dividing a finite number with another finite number is also a finite number. 4 / 0 is sometimes said to be undefined or not defined. If it is so then let us define it. We already know that 4 / 0 should give us a finite number. 0 / 4 means we are dividing the numerator 0 with the denominator 4. Zero means nothing. Dividing 0 with 4 means dividing nothing into 4 parts, it means we are not dividing anything. Therefore 0 in the numerator means we have nothing to divide. What does 4 in the denominator mean? 4 in the denominator means we are dividing the numerator into 4 parts that is we are converting the numerator into 4 parts. Now that we know what denominator means we will discuss 4 / 0. 0 in the denominator means dividing the numerator that is 4 into zero parts. Mind you, 0 in the denominator does not mean we are not dividing. Zero in the denominator actually means we are converting the numerator into zero parts. If we can divide the numerator into zero parts then each part is equal to zero. But sum of zeroes does not give us 4. Therefore 4 can not be divided by 0. In fact numerator can not be divided by 0. Therefore 0 can not exist as denominator. It is true that the numerator can not be divided into zero parts and it is also true that sum of zeroes does not give anything but zero. If we take Y = 1 / X ( Y = 1 / X is Rectangular Hyperbola ) then we get different values for both X and Y that are other than zero. The values of X and Y are never equal to zero and that means that the curves never intersect the X - axis and Y - axis. Therefore
1. Zero can not exist as denominator.
The fact that the numerator can not be divided into zero parts means anything that exists can not be destroyed into nothingness. And the fact that sum of zeroes gives us zero alone means anything that does not exist can not be given existence out of nothingness. Therefore
2. Anything can not be created out of nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere.
3. Anything can not be destroyed into nothingness, only change of form is possible and change is everywhere. Once again we need to know what infinite means. What does infinite mean? Infinite means not finite and not finite means unlimited. By now we know that creation and destruction are impossible. If creation is impossible then there is no other way new things can add up to the World that already exists. If new things can not add up to the World then there is no way anything that exists in this World can be infinite. Space can not be infinite. Therefore
4. Existence of anything can not be infinite.
Numbers are infinite but number of apples ( existence ) can not be infinite. Now, we know that creation and destruction are impossible and we also know that the existence of anything can not be infinite. We are part of the world we live in. In our world existence of anything can not be infinite. That is Space, Mass, Energy, Density, Gravity, Force,... etc; can not be infinite. Also, in our World creation and destruction are impossible. Creation is impossible means no new things can add up to the World that already exists and it also means what already exists can not come out of creation. Creation is impossible, creation is completely ruled out. We also know that destruction of the World is impossible. Space is timeless. Therefore
5. There is no beginning and an end to the existence of the World.
According to the fourth postulate space can not be infinite and according to the fifth postulate space is timeless.
We know what an equation means. An equation is a law of equity. If creation and destruction are possible then all laws have to fail. In a World where creation and destruction are possible laws can not exist, only Chaos exists. We know what infinity means. Infinity means not finite and it means infinity is something that is unlimited, something that is ever increasing. Positive infinity is ever increasing and negative infinity is ever decreasing. It is said that, infinity + 2 is equal to infinity, then 2 = infinity - infinity which implies 2 = 0 which is wrong, also 2 times infinity is equal to infinity and that implies 2 = 1 and 2 = 0 which is once again wrong. What is wrong with the above equations? Infinity is the answer. Infinity means unlimited and it can not be used in equations. If creation is possible, equations will fail. Therefore
6. There are finite absolute laws.
E = M C2 has another side to it. E stands for the energy of the electromagnetic radiation, M is the intrinsic mass of the electromagnetic radiation and C is the velocity of the electromagnetic radiation. Any ordinary body can be moved and therefore its velocity is relative at constant gravity. Electromagnetic radiation travels on its own, it can not be moved like any ordinary body by moving the source of the electromagnetic radiation. Therefore velocity of electromagnetic radiation is observed to be constant at constant gravity. When there is considerable change in gravity there is change in velocity of the electromagnetic radiation. Therefore velocity of electromagnetic radiation is relative to change in gravity.
We know that... Energy is equal to the product of mass and square of the velocity of light.
Velocity of light is observed to be constant to different observers from different frames of reference. Why? Is velocity of light constant? Einstein said in his Theory Of Relativity that velocity of light is constant, he also said that gravity bends space so, light travelling in a straight line actually appears to be bent but, its not true, he made mistakes and here is the truth... Let us take Michelson–Morley experiment---- in this experiment it was proved that velocity of light is observed to be same in different directions and hence they proved Ether doesn't exist ( Scientists proposed that Ether might exist and velocity of light is relative to Ether... ) and they got Nobel prize for their discovery. Why is velocity of light constant in different directions?
I will explain why velocity of light is observed to be constant even though it is relative to " Change in Gravity ".
When we move source of light on a moving car or on a much faster train we don't move light... light is generated at the source and it moves from point of origin to other places in space... that is; it propagates from point of origin to other places...
We don't move light... we can't move light therefore velocity of light is observed to be constant to different observers from different frames of reference.
Why is it constant in the Michelson–Morley experiment? If gravity has its hold on light's velocity - then it should be different - where there is change in gravity... yes its different.
In the Michelson–Morley experiment if we take the dimensions of the apparatus it is not big enough..what do I mean?
In this Michelson–Morley experiment there is no considerable change in gravity from one point to other point where velocity is measured... therefore velocity of light is observed to be constant...
Velocity of light on Earth is 3 into 10 power 8 kilometers per second
and
on moon velocity of light will be greater than on The Earth and it will be even greater in Space...
Velocity of light is greater in Space than on Moon and is still greater than that on the Earth.
Einstein said gravity bends space... How true is this statement? It's not at all true. Why?
Space is something that gets occupied by rest of the World.
Our World/Universe consists of Space and Everything else in Space. Gravity can not bend space.
Light has intrinsic mass ( inherent mass ) or relativistic mass
E = m into square of c
E stands for energy released and m stands for mass annihilated and c stands for velocity of light
it is also true
that
" E " stands for " Energy of Light ".
" M " stands for " Light's intrinsic/relativistic mass ".
and
" C " stands for " Velocity of Light ".
Gravity can't bend space. Space has boundaries.
Distance travelled is equal to product of Velocity and Time.
Distance travelled is relative
also
Velocity of anything is relative
and therefore
time is also relative
There is no such thing as absolute when it comes to time. Time is a local phenomenon it is not Global...
Time is never absolute it is always relative.
Time is relative, always and also
velocity of light is relative.
Gravity can't bend space.
7. Velocity of light is relative.
Everything is well defined in three dimensions. Space too is three dimensional. String Theory claims more than three dimensions. Time is an imaginary dimension. Existence of anything short of three dimensions is impossible since anything that exists can not be destroyed into nothingness. If more than three dimensions can exist, they have to exist everywhere and always. Since anything can not be created out of nothingness more than three dimensions can not be given existence out of nothingness. Therefore String Theory can not be true.
8. There are three dimensions and three dimensions only.
Therefore anything short of three dimensions and more than three dimensions is impossible.
9. Time Travel is impossible.
There are no infinite parallel Worlds with infinite parallel changes and we can not Time Travel. Time Travel is meaningless.
10. Tan 90 can not exist.
If two angles are 90 degrees then it is not a triangle. If any angle is equal to zero then it is not a triangle.Please visit the below website.
The sum of all the angles of a triangle is 180 degrees. No two angles can be 90 degrees. Also no single angle can be zero. Tan 90 can not exist. If Sin 0 exists it means two sides are overlapping (without any angle between them) and it means that it is a straight line. We live in a three dimensional World where everything is three dimensional and three dimensions only. We neglect the third dimension for our convenience. Sometimes we neglect two dimensions and continue studying as if everything is occurring as a single dimension.In a right angle triangle one angle is 90 degrees and the sum of the other two angles is 90 degrees. The sum of all angles in a triangle is 180 degrees. Therefore in a right angle triangle ( One angle is already 90 degrees ) the other ( two ) angle(s) can not be 0 and or 90. For a straight line Sine 0 is 0, we can observe that in the Sine graph. For a straight line Sine 0 is 0 ( Does not exist ), and Cos 0 is 1 ( Cos 0 exists and is equal to unity ), and Tan 0 is 0 ( Tan 0 does not exist ), and Tan 90 can not exist. Therefore Tan 90 can not exist for a right angled triangle. Tan 45 ( Tan theta = opp/adj and for Tan 45 opp=adj - Tan 45 is clearly equal to one ) is 1 and
tan(A+B)=(tanA+tanB) / (1-tanAtanB).Tan 90 = (Tan 45 + Tan 45 ) / (1-Tan 45.Tan 45 ).Tan 90 = ( 1+1) / ( 1-1.1).Tan 90 = 2 / 0.
Also Tan 90 = Sin 90 / Cos 90 = 1 / 0.
Since zero can not exist as denominator Tan 90 can not exist.For a straight line Tan 0 is 0 ( Does not exist ), and Tan 90 can not exist.
11. God(s) can not exist.
God(s) can not create and God(s) can not destroy and God(s) can not change laws.
God(s) can not create laws and also can not destroy laws...
Therefore God(s) can not exist.
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Is Fundamental Theory Of Existence correct? FTOE?
« Reply #2 on: 10/09/2010 16:04:26 »
This all looks remarkably like your post from:
Have I calculated the value of infinity?

XY=1  ...

No one responded to it then and, as it's incomprehensible, I doubt anyone will now.
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Is Fundamental Theory Of Existence correct? FTOE?
« Reply #3 on: 10/09/2010 17:09:39 »
This all looks remarkably like your post from:
Have I calculated the value of infinity?

XY=1  ...

No one responded to it then and, as it's incomprehensible, I doubt anyone will now.

Give it the ole pepper mill!
 anything divided by itself has ~won oh one
but is'nt "0"s nothing?
 Than is nothing divided by nothing is something?
oops rambling on yataaaa yataaa blabla una ga tucka
« Last Edit: 10/09/2010 17:17:56 by tommya300 »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Is Fundamental Theory Of Existence correct? FTOE?
« Reply #3 on: 10/09/2010 17:09:39 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length