The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: TOE fun  (Read 3404 times)

Aquarius

  • Guest
TOE fun
« on: 01/08/2015 19:29:20 »
 :)
« Last Edit: 07/08/2015 18:01:37 by Aquarius »


 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 155 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #1 on: 02/08/2015 00:39:49 »
Occam's razor seems to be a bit blunt.
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2773
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #2 on: 02/08/2015 12:45:12 »
Quote from: Aquarius
Let's start again, I've only been developing this theory for a few days now, ...
It's unfortunate that people often misuse the term theory in physics/science so often. There's theory in its use among layman and that refers to contemplative thought whereas in physics/science it means a great deal more. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#In_physics

for more on this.
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1921
  • Thanked: 125 times
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #3 on: 02/08/2015 16:37:56 »
The dig at Quantum mechanics, was provoked by someone less elequent than yourself. I wont expand any further. ...... I think ive blasphemed enough now for amusement.
I wouldn't worry too much. Most of the physicists I've worked with spend a lot of time questioning accepted theory, particularly at the moving edge of knowledge, I don't think they would consider it blasphemous. However, the questioning does have to be clear and logical  ;)

If you every find yourself sailing UK south coast, PM me. We are somewhere along there most yrs.
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1921
  • Thanked: 125 times
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #4 on: 04/08/2015 09:50:35 »
.
Based on this relativity is wrong.
I must have missed the bit where you show that the speed of light is not constant. Could you go over that please?
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1921
  • Thanked: 125 times
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #5 on: 04/08/2015 15:05:05 »
...... do you think there is anyone on this website would care to review it, other than with someones razor, or maybe run with idea and glue some maths on it :-\ [?]. Up until now ive just been having fun with the idea, but it seems to be so simple it has to be correct. If you read the section on light you will see how theories about photons going through all possible trajectories to go through 2 slits is nonsense. :)
I'm sure there will be folks willing to review and help, sometimes with razor :)
A couple of suggestions.
It needs a lot of cleaning up so it doesn't read like a brainstorming session - perhaps post as a PDF?
With ideas dotted around it's easy to misread what you are saying eg my comment on light speed.
If you think gravity is from infrared you need to explain why hot objects are not (or are!) heavier or more attractive.
Also, gravity is not magnetic, so I personally would go for the idea of gravity dipoles, which have been proposed by someone at CERN.
I wouldn't get too hung up on maths terminology eg all possible paths. Least action + least time is just another way of deriving Newton's Laws and showing how light goes in a straight line.

If you can provide structured ideas, grouped under different concepts, with step by step logic I'm sure there will be people who will look. The ideas do need to be solid, not just pseudo waffle like too many posts in this section.

PS If you feel yourself falling off the dock again, take more water with it :)
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #6 on: 04/08/2015 23:31:48 »


''massless dipoles could also be described as the ether.''

no they could not. and what exactly is a massless dipole? are you refering to photons?
« Last Edit: 04/08/2015 23:51:27 by Thebox »
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #7 on: 05/08/2015 01:11:07 »
Lol... You have my full approval thumbs up... :). Kind of reminds me of a site I used to visit, something about scientists and the earth being flat.  Not sure where you are going with this but please do carry on.  :))  I'll be back.
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #8 on: 05/08/2015 15:44:13 »
(Chuckle) Well, in the matter of free energy you'll find me at the beggining of the queue...but firstly, what is this massles dipole?  I am of course staving off the temptation to settle the matter with a quick Google search... because... I'm almost certain that your explanation will be much better.
« Last Edit: 05/08/2015 15:47:01 by timey »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 155 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #9 on: 05/08/2015 16:32:29 »
Quote
I think this removes the wave particle dualatiy problem.

There is no problem. We have two classical models, neither of which predicts every aspect of the behavior of nature, so we invent quantum mechanics which does the job a lot better.

The "problem", as with so many that appear in these forums, is in the minds of those who insist that classical mechanics must explain and predict everything, when it obviously can't and doesn't. The solution is lies in the realm of psychiatry, not physics. 
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #10 on: 05/08/2015 22:55:55 »
(Alan, have you ever heard of the flat earth society?  I used to gain quite some amusement in reading that site for a while, even thought of joining/posting until it dawned on me that they were in fact being serious. :) ...completely ruined it for me)

Aquarius, dear man, did you think Alan was saying 'you' were mad, I thought he was referring to 'me' Lol!... Maybe we are both being paranoid?

About your ideas, personally I haven't quite decided, however we stand at a cross roads...my toe is in the water, it could go either way... but firstly may I inquire as to you making your wife a cup of coffee in the morning? I want to know what her secret is!  I realise that it is in fact a gross assumption on my part that it was morning when you made her this coffee, you are in a different time zone I note, but you did say that she had just woken up.  There does exist the distinct possibility that she may have woken up in the night and you made her coffee.  I don't drink coffee at night, so if this is the case then I don't need to know your wife's secret after all.  Perhaps my question should be "What time did you make your wife the coffee?", but if I just said that you might think me a little weird!  Gosh... how complicated a simple question can get...it's just that I wake up in the morning you see?

Let me rest on this overnight, I find it best to give matters serious thought from the moment I fall asleep until the moment I wake up.  That way I remember nothing about my considerations - which, let's face it, in most situations is probably for the best.  Can you imagine the sheer length of my posts if I added in all my unconscious thoughts as well, crikes, I'd never get a moments sleep but for all the writing matter...and I do realise there is something not quite right about how that last bit actually corresponds to itself, but to go sleepless...well this really would be a shame - as I would not then have the need to know this secret your wife is potentially in possession of - in the waking up to a cup of coffee in the morning. :)
« Last Edit: 06/08/2015 01:56:40 by timey »
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #11 on: 06/08/2015 12:24:23 »
(Scratches head...!) Oh... (Looks around, side to side, up, down, rolls eyes) ... After dropping hints into the sea of the internet the size of double decker buses, whereas the ripples are now knocking out all medium sized posts in New York...have you posted me a cup of coffee this morning?  Well I'm just not seeing it...but I might have to let it slide today, I'm far too tired.

I wrote the stuff below last night, but now I'm I just not sure...

""...of course it may be, and I think it worth mentioning that tonight I have completely forgotten to go to sleep before thinking about matters...or at least I hope I have, I'm sure dreams are supposed to be better than this...anyway, it might be that you and I may be on the same wavelength.

In fact I was thinking we could make a mini theory out of this principle just for good practice... but of course this mini theory is only a theoretical mini theory until we are fully agreed on the principle.  I'm sure you can concur that as you, I, and this principle of being on the same wave length are the only functions of this proposed theory... that we 'can' be in agreement upon the principle would then be the unifying factor.

Hypothetically, if we can forward this mini theory out of the theoretical region, we may end up with a working hypothesis, but of course you do realise that this working hypothesis would have to be subject to rigorous experiment and testing.  It's just one of the drawbacks unfortunately, can't be avoided.

In the interests of symmetry we must also examine the possibility that we are not on the same wavelength at-all... This is a far less involved affair, one might even say simpler, however Occam's razor has been pronounced blunt by an expert, but as this medium does not transpose your physicality I care not if you haven't had a shave, not that beards are a problem to look at, but the food that gets stuck in them is a bit gross... Where was I, oh yes... Not on the same wavelength, perhaps we're not, in which case the theory, in its theoretical stages or otherwise is disproved by the inability to unify the factors, and ends up on the scrap heap of theories.

Right, I'm off now, or else I'll be in danger of forgetting to wake up before having to attend matters.  I've experimented in this field before and it doesn't bode well... :) ""

P.S. Don't worry about GMT it's not as mean as its name suggests! ...although it can be little short, I agree...
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #12 on: 06/08/2015 16:14:15 »
Oh...Oh well, it would seem I'm barking up the wrong tree here, especially with regards to the coffee (is my air of disappointment pallable?)...

In all seriousness, I wish you all the best with your Theory of Everything.  In any case you are already doing far better than me; you've got management speaking  to you!  I've been sent to Coventry myself; but that's Ok because I know my way to Birmingham really well from there...where I do have some very good friends.

Good Luck!
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1921
  • Thanked: 125 times
    • View Profile
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #13 on: 07/08/2015 09:21:24 »
qThe bit in quantum theory i dont agree with is the description of the slit experiment describing light travelling all over the known universe before it goes through the slits.
I really wouldn't get hung up on this. If you look at the maths it is like planning a route between 2 cities, you could take an infinite number of paths, but if you do the calculations for least time (or energy, or distance) then one path becomes the most probable. For light it's a straight line!
 

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Thanked: 9 times
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: TOE fun
« Reply #14 on: 08/08/2015 19:01:30 »
Hey there Aquarius,  my sillyness aside... I have not been able to open either of your PDF's (it my phones fault, I'm sure) so I cannot comment and in any case I would not be of any use to you at-all with regards to the maths... :). All the best.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: TOE fun
« Reply #14 on: 08/08/2015 19:01:30 »

 

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