The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Proof  (Read 1490 times)

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #25 on: 11/10/2016 01:01:40 »
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void? [/Quote]

Because energy is of space not mass.
« Last Edit: 11/10/2016 01:05:31 by GoC »
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #26 on: 11/10/2016 01:08:00 »
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void?

Because energy is of space not mass.
[/quote]
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #27 on: 11/10/2016 18:51:41 »
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void?

Because energy is of space not mass.


and why would you think that energy does not occupy a spacial void?
 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #28 on: 11/10/2016 20:08:21 »
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void?

Because energy is of space not mass.


and why would you think that energy does not occupy a spacial void?

Gravity(X)
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #29 on: 11/10/2016 21:11:40 »
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void?

Because energy is of space not mass.


and why would you think that energy does not occupy a spacial void?

Gravity(X)

gravity is a product of mass, mass occupies space , I see no reason why space itself can not be a void , absolute emptiness.

 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #30 on: 12/10/2016 12:23:49 »
   The effect of gravity continues through space. Physically  there is a mechanical reason similar to sound needing air to propagate. Spectral waves, magnetism, gravity and the movements of the electrons are caused by mass affecting space energy. Fundamental Energy is of space not mass. Or electrons move by magic.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #31 on: 13/10/2016 16:17:13 »
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void?

Because energy is of space not mass.


and why would you think that energy does not occupy a spacial void?

Gravity(X)

gravity is a product of mass, mass occupies space , I see no reason why space itself can not be a void , absolute emptiness.

yes, product of masses, but not on the macro mass, "the gravity" is happening right at space, the friction of macro mass with space, releases energy from space, causing temperatures, electromagnetism and all sorts of reaction, but macro mass creates dilatation, there will be produced dark mass energy, gravity is a force, macro mass is the catalistor yes, but at the end is provenient from space energy, thus the presence of macro mass will inevitable result in dark mass energy, and this mass alone will affect itself trought space, for it cames from it...
 One coukld say that macro mass is possitive and dark mass energy is negative, the gravity we experience is the results over the macro mass, space around macro mass is also simple expanding away, everything, all the macro mass should be ejected into space on a fraction of a secund, as solar winds does, if energy is relased by macro mass is hold togueter (as a planet) is becouse the spinnign of particles, and the atomic bounds they produce, if wasn't for the electorn, the earth would simple instantly become light/energy and fade away into space...  So in resume energy for space, mass/electromagnetism for mater = Gravity
 Space dilatation is simple trying to fill the macro mass hole that earth represents on it's whole, it does not intend to compress it only moves towards the planet, the spping of the particles is what converts a passive attempt into a spiral flow of this very dark mass energy, against the hydrosphere, hydrosphere weight against the earth's crost, from that point own is all up to atomic bounds and electromagnetism...
 
« Last Edit: 29/11/2016 13:56:00 by Alex Siqueira »
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #32 on: 13/10/2016 16:57:11 »
   Logically we have to understand mechanics as a down up approach. You are using a top down approach. Energy was here before macro mass. Macro mass is frozen dark mass energy. Similar to black holes being condensed atoms with no energy (time) inside. What is time? The energy of spin c not a flow c. Mass occupies normal space at about a marble to a football field. A black hole is a football field of marbles where energy of space can no longer hold atoms apart. Black holes are formed by stars whose gravity surpasses attraction greater than the speed of light. Stars gain mass by producing electrons and forming atoms. Stars create mass and form higher elements as they age. Star entropy. So we have to create a operating system that causes relativity to work not just opinions with no basis in mechanics. Push pressure of energy is not mechanically uniform by direction. Mass pushes to the center of mass or pulled by the lack of energy density in the center is a matter of conjecture. It is the correct operating mechanical process causing relativity that will provide the answers we seek. We need an operating system that provides answers to all motion of relativity not just a specific issue of relativity. Bottoms up.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline ProjectSailor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #33 on: 28/10/2016 11:23:48 »
I like the way the box thinks, I think the same, but disagree on this point of free space.

The reason I do not think free space is a void is because I believe that space without substance would not be able to carry any force/energy. It is not unusual to consider that something that does carry force as being of substance and although describing something as the 'undetectable' is about as helpful as a chocolate kettle, it remains the best guess at what could be there..

That something we call space could be comprised of the smallest unit of existence, not holding mass or energy (hence undetectable) but concentrations thereof making up mass and allowing energy to be carried, is actually a fairly workable theory if utterly unprovable, but as we know the unprovable can also be used as the undeniable. God Theory.

IF the ether exists, it would be inconsequential to all theories and laws (no mass, no energy)
If the ether doesn't exist, it would be inconsequential to all theories and laws as well..

think like pixels on your screen, the picture exists because of them, but they do not impact the picture.

Therefore I do not see much point in either trying to prove it, or disprove it. The same as there is no point trying to tell those that believe in God that it doesn't exist.

 
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #34 on: 18/11/2016 13:01:33 »
Quote
That something we call space could be comprised of the smallest unit of existence, not holding mass or energy (hence undetectable)

You need a more complete understanding of energy. Your current understanding is electron based. What moves the electrons? In my opinion Quantum mechanics move the electrons and the fundamental reason for time we measure as electron cycle or photon distance. Which are confounded in every frame to measure the electron cycle and photon distance to be the same in every frame. You seem to understand the need for connection but not the need for understanding from where the fundamental motion comes. E=c without M. In Quantum mechanics c moves electrons. It is a simple logic jump or you believe in magic.

If Relativity is wrong than the box may be correct in his thinking. I totally believe in Relativity and its beauty.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #35 on: 27/11/2016 03:31:25 »

yes, product of masses, but not on the macro mass, "the gravity" is happening right at space, the friction of macro mass with space, releases energy from space,

If we were to remove for our imagination all the matter from space, I do not believe gravity would exist, space would be just free space, a spacial void.  However, there is no laws of the universe that says energy does not occupy free space. Energy is quite ambiguous so can we call this imagined energy that exists in free space dark energy?

An energy that is almost undetectable with a ''viscosity'' of zero and observed as neutral, however I believe the neutral is because it is constant and we evolved in this energy , not to notice the energy or able to detect the energy.
Any device set up  in a constant could  never notice the constant the device was invented in to begin with.

 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #36 on: 27/11/2016 03:33:02 »
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void?

Because energy is of space not mass.

But energy could occupy space, I ''see'' space to be a blank canvass and all that is of ''matter'' is of ''creation'' that occupies free space of a void.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #37 on: 27/11/2016 13:41:11 »
Quote
But energy could occupy space, I ''see'' space to be a blank canvass and all that is of ''matter'' is of ''creation'' that occupies free space of a void.

if energy occupies space than space is not a void. I view c as the gears of motion. Without c there is no motion. We live in a 3d point world. The proof is there is no such thing as a perfect circle, only points closer together.
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
  • Thanked: 53 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #38 on: 27/11/2016 14:11:29 »
If time really slowed down , then it would take longer to get somewhere and the velocity would also have to slow down of the moving Caesium atom.

This is a very important point and the fact that you are considering it demonstrates your intellect. Don't let anyone say otherwise. Think about this a little more.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #39 on: 28/11/2016 07:33:37 »
If time really slowed down , then it would take longer to get somewhere and the velocity would also have to slow down of the moving Caesium atom.

This is a very important point and the fact that you are considering it demonstrates your intellect. Don't let anyone say otherwise. Think about this a little more.
I could think about this in several ways , is there anything specific you want me to think about or direct me towards?

 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #40 on: 28/11/2016 21:53:25 »
Well, seems that Time was stated as derivation from motion, thus the conclusion of the Caesium atom is backwards... Time should have slowed down in function of the (now) velocity of the Caesium atoms, due dilatation of space(time), where the measurement is occurring...
 Isn't it?
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #41 on: 29/11/2016 05:33:30 »
Well, seems that Time was stated as derivation from motion, thus the conclusion of the Caesium atom is backwards... Time should have slowed down in function of the (now) velocity of the Caesium atoms, due dilatation of space(time), where the measurement is occurring...
 Isn't it?


No , the frequency of the Caesium atom is dependent to the atom and not dependent of space although ''things'' in space do affect the Caesium frequency.
However ''things'' occupy space, ''things'' with motion that can  be timed, timed not being the same as time.
The mechanics of timing ''things'' do not interfere with absolute time and space, time and space being a whole and  interwoven as a dimensional whole. 
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #42 on: 29/11/2016 15:13:33 »
Quote
No , the frequency of the Caesium atom is dependent to the atom and not dependent of space although ''things'' in space do affect the Caesium frequency.
However ''things'' occupy space, ''things'' with motion that can  be timed, timed not being the same as time.
The mechanics of timing ''things'' do not interfere with absolute time and space, time and space being a whole and  interwoven as a dimensional whole. 

It is interesting how we each have a different understanding of time. Alex is describing time as a reaction rate. You are describing time as a c ratio. I suspect a reaction rate is a deeper understanding of c as a constant. Mass affects c as energy of motion. c always remains constant but dilation expands c for less GR zero point energy. Red shift increase is an affect of expanded less dense energy giving electrons a longer path with higher dilation

So you can argue both sides of the same coin.
 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #43 on: 29/11/2016 22:35:30 »
I came to believe that spinning C is derivation of higgs field (as it is now), higgs field is setting constants on everything but energy, each particle being interconnected one with the other by their own fields, spinning at the same rate, just like perfect clocks, such particles do not experience time, although their interaction with different proportions(field) cause a delay on both as higgs is constantly seeking balance between sipping and centrifugal force...
To really understand time in our scale, one need to perfectly combine GR with QM, but the still missing piece is what is causing the C pattern?
 Einstein thought the universe was static cause everyone always considered milky way as being the universe, he could "see" the infinite continuous void of empty space beyond our galaxy horizontal plate. I mean he obviously knew that "space" was infinite, eternal as he said...
 I can't let go from this idea, that if he knew that universe is formed by hundreds of galaxies, he would once again reach the same conclusion but with the correct information, that universe is in fact an expanding event, a field that is "still" expanding (dark energy), but nonetheless a expanding field much like the first few moments of a nova... I wonder that his conclusion back there would be again that "space" is infinite and eternal, and universe is a still expansion momentum of an ordinary nova, perhaps among many others...
  For me this is relevant for my source of C, time as a whole entity, and also quantum (engine) lies much beyond our physical universe, and behaves much as a black hole/particle does...
 For me that, wherever it may be, is giving to a frozen space the C pattern converting its pure state of frozen energy into a kinetic pattern of this spinning C, and is doing that trough higgs field...
 The only truly linear motion on C "seems" to be energy cause is able to ignore higgs field... Clarifying it, everything is moving on a straight line, it's higgs field that is offering to mass a point of reference, changing linear to still sppin, both being the same...
 When one suggest that time is a whole existence of C, independent of the Caesium atom, I have to try to implement that universe is not finite nor all that is, but a bigger solar system witch all the planets and stars have went super nova, a singularity should have being there at a virtual center, but being so the field should not be expanding and much less with an increasing rate, seems to be the case that all the galaxies are just conserving momentum and that our singularity at center is less activated or even completely dispersed into heat trough out space...
 This would explain why distances are increasing, the speed of the event also increasing... I'm suggesting a scenario similar to the delay earth would felt before have noticed that our sun was gone.. Evens so factors like time and sipping C still constant... Black holes should be able to spin the electron, also mess up with space on the quantum level and produce time, but only as local, as sun is for solar system, and super massive black hole is for galaxy...
 The proportions are too chaotic to work homogeneously as those constants are, blue and red shift seems to be like interference on those constant patterns(field), as GoC said, "increasing the distance of the jump", expanding the field much beyond its capacity(C), if expanded enough it should loose the color light quality and become gin-clear(spectrum) as The box mentioned once.
 And eventually even milky way itself will reach the moment where it will feel that the center was gone, much speculation, but it's my understatement of sipping C and time, if time is an whole entity:
  Or it is a big dimension, or it's a product of expansion and quantum mechanics, or if time is in fact a "final product" motion, and proportional and constant as C, I become in conflict within myself, that the "engine" of C, thus time, lies much beyond our sight and understanding, maybe beyond universe itself...
  If not possible, if universe is all there is, undependable of it's size, time has to be a "final product" of the quantum mechanics when submitted to our universal expansion... The sipping particles does not bound to time, but inadvertently when you add expansion (motion/C) to the environment, inadvertently end up producing time on our scale,   any delay on quantum mechanics, would inevitable result in slower rate in our scale....
 If one is to thing about it, time is a primordial scale on itself, if time want but a product, a measurable one, there would be no need for scales, nor dimensions, everything would be frozen, nothing would ever have size or substance, time is there as a ruler, between scales, so universe do not mess up and accidental forces every planet or any given mass to behave as a black hole does...
 As much more one things about this, even being speculation, more plausible the jump of the particles are as important and fundamental as anything else.... My true question is why space is at C, without this visualization is very unlikely that humanity will ever figure it all out, we advance by observation, how do we observe beyond what we would never be able to observe?
 "A space that has no particles/matter, does not requires existence of time"
 Everything that is would be energy, without motion, without C...
 As long one does not have the answer, I agree with both versions too...
« Last Edit: 03/12/2016 14:32:12 by Alex Siqueira »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #44 on: 04/12/2016 02:50:36 »
I came to believe that spinning C is derivation of higgs field (as it is now), higgs field is setting constants on everything but energy, each particle being interconnected one with the other by their own fields, spinning at the same rate, just like perfect clocks, such particles do not experience time, although their interaction with different proportions(field) cause a delay on both as higgs is constantly seeking balance between sipping and centrifugal force...
To really understand time in our scale, one need to perfectly combine GR with QM, but the still missing piece is what is causing the C pattern?
 Einstein thought the universe was static cause everyone always considered milky way as being the universe, he could "see" the infinite continuous void of empty space beyond our galaxy horizontal plate. I mean he obviously knew that "space" was infinite, eternal as he said...
 I can't let go from this idea, that if he knew that universe is formed by hundreds of galaxies, he would once again reach the same conclusion but with the correct information, that universe is in fact an expanding event, a field that is "still" expanding (dark energy), but nonetheless a expanding field much like the first few moments of a nova... I wonder that his conclusion back there would be again that "space" is infinite and eternal, and universe is a still expansion momentum of an ordinary nova, perhaps among many others...
  For me this is relevant for my source of C, time as a whole entity, and also quantum (engine) lies much beyond our physical universe, and behaves much as a black hole/particle does...
 For me that, wherever it may be, is giving to a frozen space the C pattern converting its pure state of frozen energy into a kinetic pattern of this spinning C, and is doing that trough higgs field...
 The only truly linear motion on C "seems" to be energy cause is able to ignore higgs field... Clarifying it, everything is moving on a straight line, it's higgs field that is offering to mass a point of reference, changing linear to still sppin, both being the same...
 When one suggest that time is a whole existence of C, independent of the Caesium atom, I have to try to implement that universe is not finite nor all that is, but a bigger solar system witch all the planets and stars have went super nova, a singularity should have being there at a virtual center, but being so the field should not be expanding and much less with an increasing rate, seems to be the case that all the galaxies are just conserving momentum and that our singularity at center is less activated or even completely dispersed into heat trough out space...
 This would explain why distances are increasing, the speed of the event also increasing... I'm suggesting a scenario similar to the delay earth would felt before have noticed that our sun was gone.. Evens so factors like time and sipping C still constant... Black holes should be able to spin the electron, also mess up with space on the quantum level and produce time, but only as local, as sun is for solar system, and super massive black hole is for galaxy...
 The proportions are too chaotic to work homogeneously as those constants are, blue and red shift seems to be like interference on those constant patterns(field), as GoC said, "increasing the distance of the jump", expanding the field much beyond its capacity(C), if expanded enough it should loose the color light quality and become gin-clear(spectrum) as The box mentioned once.
 And eventually even milky way itself will reach the moment where it will feel that the center was gone, much speculation, but it's my understatement of sipping C and time, if time is an whole entity:
  Or it is a big dimension, or it's a product of expansion and quantum mechanics, or if time is in fact a "final product" motion, and proportional and constant as C, I become in conflict within myself, that the "engine" of C, thus time, lies much beyond our sight and understanding, maybe beyond universe itself...
  If not possible, if universe is all there is, undependable of it's size, time has to be a "final product" of the quantum mechanics when submitted to our universal expansion... The sipping particles does not bound to time, but inadvertently when you add expansion (motion/C) to the environment, inadvertently end up producing time on our scale,   any delay on quantum mechanics, would inevitable result in slower rate in our scale....
 If one is to thing about it, time is a primordial scale on itself, if time want but a product, a measurable one, there would be no need for scales, nor dimensions, everything would be frozen, nothing would ever have size or substance, time is there as a ruler, between scales, so universe do not mess up and accidental forces every planet or any given mass to behave as a black hole does...
 As much more one things about this, even being speculation, more plausible the jump of the particles are as important and fundamental as anything else.... My true question is why space is at C, without this visualization is very unlikely that humanity will ever figure it all out, we advance by observation, how do we observe beyond what we would never be able to observe?
 "A space that has no particles/matter, does not requires existence of time"
 Everything that is would be energy, without motion, without C...
 As long one does not have the answer, I agree with both versions too...

I do like your input, I however really need you to ''see'' the interpretation error about ''expanding'' space.
I too believe that is space is forever and infinite without boundaries. I do not  believe that space itself is expanding, I believe the red-shift evidence shows us according to present doppler use, that  bodies are moving away from us into more space.   Lets face it,  a distance star shines light in all directions, so the furthest away radius of the last observed star, is almost certainly shining the other way , a radius away from the star away from us into ''deep'' un-explored , un-observed space.  The ''blackness'' we observe between distance galaxies is actually daylight, but there is nothing large enough or reflecting enough radians of light to be observed by our conventional present technology.
I believe this Higgs field you  mention may occupy the void as an entity maybe.
I am not sure what you mean by what is causing the c pattern, but I am sure if you have c  patterns, the patters are of observer affect, in short you are stopping the light from permeating through space creating pattern or spin .  ''Linear torque twist.''

Space does not have slits.
« Last Edit: 04/12/2016 02:52:43 by Thebox »
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #45 on: 05/12/2016 15:08:31 »
Much appreciated, I do like it, The ''blackness'' we observe between distance galaxies is actually daylight, but there is nothing large enough or reflecting enough radians of light to be observed by our conventional present technology. "

  About C patter, it only cross my mind when I decide to consider space as an infinite field, where the "momentum universe" (big bang/nova) is still "expanding"... My concept of expansion if surelly present when thinking about blackholes as centrifugal force, spin as one would say... But I do consider that all this field we call universe is a momentum of a nova expansion...
  If space and time are existing in coorelation, I do accept that the reagion of any nova when the star explodes is temporarily submited to a expansion, and on that few secunds, the interior experience a local existence of time, different from the one on the exterior... AQs I do wonder we are expericing our from universe...
  I see space as a void, altough when I do accept universe as a limited C existence that is still expanding over nothing, than I do not need that pattern, it must be somehow related with sppining particles and blackholes on control...

 But if I do accept universe as being a still expanding super nova, an ordinary momentum over a "already existing" field of "energy", I tend to seek for a more deeper resolution...
  If universe is nothing but a still expanding momentum of an ordinary nova, over a space that was already there, light does not make sense...
  For so, I'm considering both factors, sppin and expansion, as being of different origins...  C would be the expansion itself, it belongs to a still borning universe, altough for me the spin, the whole "engine" of quantum mechanics, was already there much earlier than universe, I relate with empty space all the patterns of quantum mechanics... In a sort version i'm wondering that quantum mechanics dictates and operate particles and energy, on and from the void, and a good topic for that is both gravitron and higgs boson...

 See I do believe that C is for expansion(local/universe), as sppining "C" is for (space/energy), one existing and coodepending on each other, but nonentless one being a constant, and other being a momentum...
   If one is to reverse our so called big bang, I do believe that void would be all there was, frozen energy, a higgs field different from our own on the present, a frozen entity of energy as a whole existence, with no scales and without time... one could consider that as a frozen particle, that is vast as infinity...

 Somethign was happen or started to happen on the center, maybe from the interaction between two dimentions.  Yes this is merely speculation, but in terms of beyond the existence of the universe, basically one had a perfect, predictable entity, if there was a pattern presented it should have being  opossit charge and balance...
 I do make an Idea of what happened, there's no way to see or to know for us.
 The point is: When I consider space as an whole entity eternal and infite, two possibilities come to mind.
1- "space" has a structure with a virtual center that is constanty cicling the entity, twisting and stretching it, spliting it into fractions (quanta), determining all the constants...
 i do picture something, like a rupture, or an eye of a hurricane, with a very eliptical shape, but that more than sppin is also sort of rolling space in as if it was a hope, stretching it, raging it into smal pieces, on the quantum level... Imagine something like the momentum when a black hole is feeding on a gass cloud, now imagine that:
  A sort of singularity that grew so wide and so large, that is started to work as an ring that started to propagate itself as it feeds on the fabric itself...
  A easy way is to watch a spherical rock hitting a lakes surface, the wave is propagating trough the fabric, well on this scenario, the wave is the ring, ans is propagting itself troght the lake... Messing with it from inside out, stetching and sppining all water in there atributing to it a ciclic expansion and twisting proprieties...

 Imagien that we (universe) is alreadyexisting and born from inside out this already expanding ring.
 Such ring would be feeding from primordial energy, expanding itself, lefting behind only its patterns constantly submiting the interior to it, and also forming this void, tht for me on this scenario is nothing less than knetic energy from this very expansion...
  This red shift on thsi scenario seems trully to be as you mentioned, perhaps by very different reasons, but nentless I agree that the "gin-clear" out there is also red shift, more precisely what happen with photons beyond C, the colour beyond the red shift, that is also happening even where there is nothing to see... There is nothing to see for the distance is to great and C is constant...

 The secund cnfiguration would make universe become a simple faction of a eliptical hyper horizontal disk, of a super massive singularity, white hole or primordial black hole made of light, I'm not fan of this theory for it seems not to provide a correct expansion...
   I do believe that black holes are absolute, but there should be a point where not even the field can handle it, and with enought particle present, as on a begining, a black hole could theoreticaly grow into a spiral ring expanding, maybe even more than one, that is devouring space itself, and lefting this space that we do know on the interior...
  The faster expansion, seems to be the same way they use to calculate PI and diameter of stars, it seems to also explain a faster expansion, that is infact a bigger diameter, and not altering the cosntants or the speed of the expansion itself, only the diameter of it's edge...

I do not accept on this scenario, universe to be rare and unique, it is simple a expanding momentum of a nova, surounded by a super intercaled void, till we "pyshicaly" reach another universe or star and so on and on...
  I agree with the tinny size and bang, but I do believe that what caused universe to be born from that point of super density, was infact the "space expansion itself" it crossed over it at C, perhaps is still occuring, and crashed all those super massive objects, that we now see as galaxies...
  Much speculation, but my big bang, starts with lots of ordinaries stars, that where ripped apart by an sudent expansion on the blackground, latter on absorving the "now" C partterns resulting on the mechanics we do experience today...

  Is speculation, but for me "C" lies beyond the universe, it's a propriety of space itself, or it is a product of a expansive structure at the edges of "space" that is ripping energy and forming this void with all its patterns...
  Time as a whole entity would also be resultant of this spiral structure...
  As it it more a conversion than a destruction of something, just like a black hole it should be converting primordial energy into this ever growing void, as a ordinary black hole would be doing with a galaxy...
  So C and all its properties would be of space and on it, matter is something that was already there, or pieces that somehow survived the expansion without be consumed...

 In resume this is only necessary when I do consider space as eternal, it needs a structure, again, if universe is allthat is, there is nothing to worry about, for C would be again, the universal expansion over nothing, and quantum mechanics was always based on probabilities since day one...

  Somehow I do not believe that, but is too soon for take it as a conclusion, for the moment I share the same space at C that everybody does...
  The only aspect that does not match with this are the constants, universe "seems" to be to chaotic to control such perfect patterns...
  I'm working but where higgs enter on this:  Higgs would be the primordial energy tring to come back to its resting form, always trying to conservate energy, constantly trying to rest, not sure becouse this act itself could be gravity, the original entity trying to rest on the "after" expansion.
 As ona large black hole that is eery time less destructive as it grows, perhaps even if expanded enought, alowing particles to reapear....


 For me on a sort seculation, dark energy and dark matter origins, as space expands, the interior is becoming back to its original state, that should be the general source of gravity and expontaneous formation of particles...
  I'm no scientst, so I still have a long way to go on those thoughts...
 I'm trying to understand why a inactive photon was never considered to be a gravitron, a photon that is part of this "gin -clear", as on if photons was serving as for light and gravity...
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #46 on: 05/12/2016 16:13:34 »

        Alex you have a good mind and curiosity. They are the traits of a good scientist.

Why do you personally believe the universe is expanding and not steady state?
 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #47 on: 05/12/2016 23:04:58 »
Thanks Goc, but as always for my official opinion, i'd stick with your and relativity, for we were able to measure and observe...
 
  The reasons why I do believe space is still expanding, is the thing that is expanding, cycling...
  See, we do consider for a galaxy a colection of solar system, gas and any osrt of matter that is sppining around a center(BH)...
  But I wonder that this perception is similar for the miss interpretation of Einstein and others, as the milky way as being the entirely universe. Reason why he claimed space to be infinite...
 I also do consider what is a galaxy not by the field it is existing within(space), for me any galaxy is simple the matter and mass, a structure that exists between space...
 So it goes for universe, univer would also be all the matter/mass we can observe, but space is not restricted to universe on this scenario, space(void) would be already there when universe was born, as the same principle that a galaxy is born over the already existing same space...
   So I believe that the thing expanding in our "universe" is space, not trully an literaly expansion, but more a constant proportional "adaptation" of an ever growing void, that should have a structure at the edges, not necessarily at the edge of universe, can be much beyond universe itself, more likely impossible to be visualised...
   I consider this (space as a void) the secund stage, form, of the primordial entity. Now I do not sure how or why a singularity would be born from a static frozen entity of energy, but interaction with another dimension...

 Now I do believe that wherever happened to trigger the rupture once it was done, it started to behave much as a black hole does, and different from our insignificant black holes feeding on left overs...
 This original one, would be surounded by energy, and the grown would be almost abusurd to consider.
 Now I'm not sure what an ordinary black hole would become if it was surrounded by energy instead of void, But I do wonder, that space is flat now, but wasn't always, one could say that I'm considering that we do exist inside a universal hole, that our universe is an ordinary momentum along with perhaps many others, but without the necessity of verses or extra dimensions.
 Basicaly one would have our universe intercalled by super void, and eventually another portion that we could call "andromeda" and next another universe that we would call perhaps "sombrero" and so on and on...

 I thing that this singularity would not be able to grown spherical for it was feeding on a now flat universe, for so it the structure itself would exchange the spherical grown for a more eliptical one...
  I wonder that our magnetic fields and spinning particles are simple assimilating this patterns and appling it to mechanics, from particles upt to black holes, all but copies...

 Now being practical:
We do observe an aleatory galaxy and we do observe and assume that it is moving away from us.
 I believe that is not that simple, some would be in fact accelerating away or towards some other one, but as for the expansion, I believe that is more as "relocation"...
  Like the singularity space growing up on diameter as it continues to feed on the primordial entity, the diameter keeps growing, and what would seems to us a "faster" expansion, would perhaps be only a exponential growth in diameter...
 As the space as a void grows in diameter the interior is also relocated, contantly relocated, and along with space, anything that is existing within it, in our observations, everything that is(matter)...
 This "speculation" makes me question not the age of the universe anymore, as I used to do. Universe since the begin should have being submited to "time" as we do know now, otherwise light and our measurements would not make sense, the clock experiment that lead us to those 13-14 billion years (that we already observed) wouldnt make sense, for me always sounded logical that if uiverse was all that is, and that space "belongs" to universe, that time and light should have being independant one of the other since day one, I mean that the clock assumption does not make sense to me if universe is all there is, time could not have being born ready as it is, nor light, but than again...
 Energy, C, and time over many different experiments and technology have prove to be intricate and constant, we could calculate the decay of atoms, the age of rocks, and much more, and I simple cannot accept that a bunch of aleatory unpredictable, inscontant and "not enternal" black holes could be on control of that perfection... And again they also do, those objects also can interact with energy, C and time, but as one goes away from those objects in any dirrection constants come back perfectly, so why is that?

 I can only think about a ever lasting expanding ring like structure that is feeding on the energy of a pre-space/void, and the voild is the result, space as a result, knetic energy... It would not have curves, nor dirrections, nor density, but it does have patterns, it twists, it expands, is is procuded aparently from nothing...
  I tend to think that two opposit constants are acting here on the total scale, one is C, C being result of the spiral sppin of this ring like structure that is ever growing at the edges of infitity(space).
 And the oposit force would be like the "mother" of this structure, it came from it, so is to expect that it's gorwing is submited to some sort of control, what determinates it's gorwth, delimitates C...
  I once read something about another "mistake" of Einstein where he sugested a so chaotic oposit force to gravity that the explanation itself only made things more weird...
  I do believe that C is always and constantly countered for its own source, controled by gravity...
 I do not know how to say but Gravity should have being born at the same time that C started to happen, gravity being the constant attempt of the "original still existing entity" to come back to its resting/original state, and would be proportional anywhere, but also local, gravity than would not be constant...
 I guess that as near one gets to the edges, bigger things can be, because gravity should be weaker there than at more at near a virtual center...
  Imagine the situation of a quasar, here it's own grownth when consuming energy, forces it to become eliptical in order to not surpass C, I picture this ever growing singularity as being sujected to the same now "constant" situation, very reason of why the eliptical form...

  So in resume, when someone observe a galaxy moving away from another, I assume it may well be moving away indeed, but also being constantly relocated as the diameter of space (void) grows...
  One thing I'm sure but only within this speculation, so it's meaningless without observation, I do prefer that way...  If space has similar structure, that is growing by feeding on energy, lefting this knetic void, that allowed universe to exist, by observing any field on any scale, I do presume that no matter how big "universe" is, it has matter, and as any other thing out there, universe got to be at the center of space...
  Now universe can be very large, but I'm not sure that it is still growing beyond this virtual plate, there got to be an end back in time, I just consider that if humanity ever come to glimpse on that, we would find that after creation (big bang) there would be depending on the dirrection we are observing, or more and more intercalled super voids of empty space, or once again the same oservtions on backwars, if we by coincidence be observing at the center... As the last thing we may see is still forming galaxies, a barrier of light , maybe a imensurable black hole where galaxies are orbiting, like great attractor, and than it will make sense, that universe is no different than a galaxy, hyper galaxy...

 I'm used to write down a lot, so I apologize for that, but seems the only viable way to explain why I do consider "Expansion" as being "Relocation"...
 I do not believe Universe can expand, for the same principle a rock can't expand, universe for me is but the visible matter, space belongs to universe as much as our solar system is producing "new" space, it's not... Space was there, if there was a big bang like event is was from space itself becoming a ever growing void, universe is but a event, occurring inside this everlasting space expansion...
  I thought about this for a long time, but still many information to cross, I'm ever imagined that matter and much more planets could stand a super nova expansion, but thanks to internet, I was able to learn that a few bodies can indeed withstand supernovas and still continue to orbit their mains star, I never considered it to be possible...
 If you ask me, I'm sticking with relativity, it does make sense...

 If I was to guess, "universe" was an earlier hyper massive star, that could withstand it's "imensurable size" due it's existence nearby the post-C expansion of space, weaker gravity, it was a giagantic star, as space kept growing on diameter, exponentially, eventually gravity increased and the universal star when nova, eons latter within the new existence of gravity, the leftovers started to gathered togueter and form galaxies, solar sistems, and so on and on...
 I do wonder that is that that we are observing, anything but a momentum of a universal star that once upon a time went nova due an ever growing void...

 A bigger the eye gets, closer to the orginal entity this dimmension returns, stating to loose movement, allowing the re-formation of particles, matter would than be the result of a marriage between this two oposits, but not for ever, eventually dark matter, that should be not observed by its effects, dark matter should be the effects, an aproximation of a "crushing" resting state as the virtual more centered regions of this void start to rest...
I know that mass should not be from space, I do accept this, but I'm also always questioning, should not from space in witch state, the resting energy, or the knetic void?
  For my oficial opinion: Expanding universe
  For my subjection: Realocating on space time
 As if space as it grows in diameter, it is constantly readapting the sizes to math the constants, in function of C, part of this would be set things apart, from the particles to galaxies...

 To visualise the whole idea, I'm assuming that black holes are sperical "only" becuse the "already void. That the true form of any singularity is infact a "spiral ring", the true form of a black hole being quasar, and this ever growing rupture being precisily that, a expanding quasar like event...
 A quasar event that is on this scenario, at the edges, surrowunded by frozen  energy/mass, and empty at the center, different from our "inversed" singularities... A ever growing quasar like eliptical structure, that is massive at the ring itself and empty at the center. As like the ring, the structure itself as "Whole" being the center of it, the center is the edge. I'm considering a different gravity at the borderds that makes the ever growing structure to not requere mass at center. A different more "real" form of singularity...
  Like a "constant quasar" that is constantly devouring energy/mass from the exterior, from outside in, one where the void lies on the inside...
  I wondering if we where to serve a quasar with pure energy instead of a void, it would reveal to become a expansive horizon that would reveal a void at the center(new space)... From a certain point, this ever feeding quasar event, would make its center the whole expansive ring, unable to fall back towards the center, and when big enough, the very object that once formed it, would eventually dissipate its mass into heat and radiation... Than all matter and energy that make us and stars, that make universe itself, would be born from the left overs of this virtual center, that now exists no more. It may even have lasted only a few moments, before dissipated, lefting only the ever expanding ring, that would theoretical still be consuming energy, and growing in diameter since there should be a limit "C" that does not allows it to grow on size, only in diameter...

 If one ask me why mater?
  I carring the tought that mater is the "death of space/void". Particles(energy/quanta) are the prelute of an ever continuos cycle of resting, as much more the void keeps growing in diameter, more and more particles are to apear, they only reason why they do not collapse is the ever sppining C and expanding C, those constants should grant to the void a perpetual existence, but only up to a certain point, for C is still constant. as big the void gets, greater the delay(time). One is to expand forver at C, but time not, time is backwards. Time will remain as constant as C, but C structure does not need to grow in size, or can't, but it can virtually grow forever in diameter, as for the opossit time can't, time is not at C. What I wonder is that as bigger the diameter of the ever growing void, bigger the delay towards the center(comunication), this could be the source of dark matter, dark matter being "mass", and will keep growing on quantity, increasing gravity and time setting the scales, making everything every time smaler but in more quantity. Self producing particles borning everywhere on and from the void on past as it keeps expanding... So I use to consider particles as proof of a already dying space...
  If you ask me why the existence of quanta? It's an aproximation of the original state, but thanks to C and relocation it is fractured in pieces... I look to the existence of a planet and I think what space would be like in the very distant future: Dense, massive, as bigger that density grows, more static at the center, returning to its original state, till eventually it may well re-start the whole process over and over again. But there's a difference, what of the original expanding ring? Well I presume it would remain there, and that universes like now, would still be happening at the right place...
 Something like a expansion, followed by another from inside out, and so on and on

 Mass starts to occurs when the C pattern is disrupted/delayed in time, for me energy is the source of mass, but mass is at the same time, the original state of energy, of space, before the void...
« Last Edit: Today at 00:21:37 by Alex Siqueira »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3158
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #48 on: Today at 04:32:04 »
Much appreciated, I do like it, The ''blackness'' we observe between distance galaxies is actually daylight, but there is nothing large enough or reflecting enough radians of light to be observed by our conventional present technology. "

  About C patter, it only cross my mind when I decide to consider space as an infinite field, where the "momentum universe" (big bang/nova) is still "expanding"... My concept of expansion if surelly present when thinking about blackholes as centrifugal force, spin as one would say... But I do consider that all this field we call universe is a momentum of a nova expansion...
  If space and time are existing in coorelation, I do accept that the reagion of any nova when the star explodes is temporarily submited to a expansion, and on that few secunds, the interior experience a local existence of time, different from the one on the exterior... AQs I do wonder we are expericing our from universe...
  I see space as a void, altough when I do accept universe as a limited C existence that is still expanding over nothing, than I do not need that pattern, it must be somehow related with sppining particles and blackholes on control...

 But if I do accept universe as being a still expanding super nova, an ordinary momentum over a "already existing" field of "energy", I tend to seek for a more deeper resolution...
  If universe is nothing but a still expanding momentum of an ordinary nova, over a space that was already there, light does not make sense...
  For so, I'm considering both factors, sppin and expansion, as being of different origins...  C would be the expansion itself, it belongs to a still borning universe, altough for me the spin, the whole "engine" of quantum mechanics, was already there much earlier than universe, I relate with empty space all the patterns of quantum mechanics... In a sort version i'm wondering that quantum mechanics dictates and operate particles and energy, on and from the void, and a good topic for that is both gravitron and higgs boson...

 See I do believe that C is for expansion(local/universe), as sppining "C" is for (space/energy), one existing and coodepending on each other, but nonentless one being a constant, and other being a momentum...
   If one is to reverse our so called big bang, I do believe that void would be all there was, frozen energy, a higgs field different from our own on the present, a frozen entity of energy as a whole existence, with no scales and without time... one could consider that as a frozen particle, that is vast as infinity...

 Somethign was happen or started to happen on the center, maybe from the interaction between two dimentions.  Yes this is merely speculation, but in terms of beyond the existence of the universe, basically one had a perfect, predictable entity, if there was a pattern presented it should have being  opossit charge and balance...
 I do make an Idea of what happened, there's no way to see or to know for us.
 The point is: When I consider space as an whole entity eternal and infite, two possibilities come to mind.
1- "space" has a structure with a virtual center that is constanty cicling the entity, twisting and stretching it, spliting it into fractions (quanta), determining all the constants...
 i do picture something, like a rupture, or an eye of a hurricane, with a very eliptical shape, but that more than sppin is also sort of rolling space in as if it was a hope, stretching it, raging it into smal pieces, on the quantum level... Imagine something like the momentum when a black hole is feeding on a gass cloud, now imagine that:
  A sort of singularity that grew so wide and so large, that is started to work as an ring that started to propagate itself as it feeds on the fabric itself...
  A easy way is to watch a spherical rock hitting a lakes surface, the wave is propagating trough the fabric, well on this scenario, the wave is the ring, ans is propagting itself troght the lake... Messing with it from inside out, stetching and sppining all water in there atributing to it a ciclic expansion and twisting proprieties...

 Imagien that we (universe) is alreadyexisting and born from inside out this already expanding ring.
 Such ring would be feeding from primordial energy, expanding itself, lefting behind only its patterns constantly submiting the interior to it, and also forming this void, tht for me on this scenario is nothing less than knetic energy from this very expansion...
  This red shift on thsi scenario seems trully to be as you mentioned, perhaps by very different reasons, but nentless I agree that the "gin-clear" out there is also red shift, more precisely what happen with photons beyond C, the colour beyond the red shift, that is also happening even where there is nothing to see... There is nothing to see for the distance is to great and C is constant...

 The secund cnfiguration would make universe become a simple faction of a eliptical hyper horizontal disk, of a super massive singularity, white hole or primordial black hole made of light, I'm not fan of this theory for it seems not to provide a correct expansion...
   I do believe that black holes are absolute, but there should be a point where not even the field can handle it, and with enought particle present, as on a begining, a black hole could theoreticaly grow into a spiral ring expanding, maybe even more than one, that is devouring space itself, and lefting this space that we do know on the interior...
  The faster expansion, seems to be the same way they use to calculate PI and diameter of stars, it seems to also explain a faster expansion, that is infact a bigger diameter, and not altering the cosntants or the speed of the expansion itself, only the diameter of it's edge...

I do not accept on this scenario, universe to be rare and unique, it is simple a expanding momentum of a nova, surounded by a super intercaled void, till we "pyshicaly" reach another universe or star and so on and on...
  I agree with the tinny size and bang, but I do believe that what caused universe to be born from that point of super density, was infact the "space expansion itself" it crossed over it at C, perhaps is still occuring, and crashed all those super massive objects, that we now see as galaxies...
  Much speculation, but my big bang, starts with lots of ordinaries stars, that where ripped apart by an sudent expansion on the blackground, latter on absorving the "now" C partterns resulting on the mechanics we do experience today...

  Is speculation, but for me "C" lies beyond the universe, it's a propriety of space itself, or it is a product of a expansive structure at the edges of "space" that is ripping energy and forming this void with all its patterns...
  Time as a whole entity would also be resultant of this spiral structure...
  As it it more a conversion than a destruction of something, just like a black hole it should be converting primordial energy into this ever growing void, as a ordinary black hole would be doing with a galaxy...
  So C and all its properties would be of space and on it, matter is something that was already there, or pieces that somehow survived the expansion without be consumed...

 In resume this is only necessary when I do consider space as eternal, it needs a structure, again, if universe is allthat is, there is nothing to worry about, for C would be again, the universal expansion over nothing, and quantum mechanics was always based on probabilities since day one...

  Somehow I do not believe that, but is too soon for take it as a conclusion, for the moment I share the same space at C that everybody does...
  The only aspect that does not match with this are the constants, universe "seems" to be to chaotic to control such perfect patterns...
  I'm working but where higgs enter on this:  Higgs would be the primordial energy tring to come back to its resting form, always trying to conservate energy, constantly trying to rest, not sure becouse this act itself could be gravity, the original entity trying to rest on the "after" expansion.
 As ona large black hole that is eery time less destructive as it grows, perhaps even if expanded enought, alowing particles to reapear....


 For me on a sort seculation, dark energy and dark matter origins, as space expands, the interior is becoming back to its original state, that should be the general source of gravity and expontaneous formation of particles...
  I'm no scientst, so I still have a long way to go on those thoughts...
 I'm trying to understand why a inactive photon was never considered to be a gravitron, a photon that is part of this "gin -clear", as on if photons was serving as for light and gravity...
wow Alex your posts are extensive and you have a  good ability to think.

Let me see if you can understand this .



We all have heard of photons right, we imagine in thought these little tiny mass less particles travelling from the sun to the earth.
photons that are information packets.


Now I want you if you can, to imagine that there is no photons but only a photon. Imagine that and matter, the smallest of particles , gives of a spherical light field.

I want you to imagine that the entire spherical field is a single photon . I want you to imagine zooming out so the spherical field you observe relatively contracts to a single point , so all you see is a dot like a star.

You are an outer observer looking in, you can see the now dot but the dot can not see you because you are beyond the limit of lights radius.

Imagine these dots you now visualise to be single photons, inside of each and every photon is a visual universe that is connected via the light internally.

Let me know if you understood please.
 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Proof
« Reply #49 on: Today at 09:13:41 »
Yes, I do see that, but also saving the consideration that those "seeds" were before...
 It were there happy with their unique force, a soup of energy as a whole entity, perhaps a frozen one...
 One where quanta was not, a single field, with a perfect pattern. I like to think of photons as it, but it could also be a unique bosson, as a dimenssion...
   Eventually some other dimmension interacted with it, or by any reasons it started to develop "cancer".
 A twisted singularity that started at a virtual center, maybe more than one, devouring one the other, but I do believe to have being only one, it started to grow in diameter exponentially from the minute it where born.
  Accelerating towards everything there was(energy) as a wave, feeding and growing on diameter on it...
  Perhaps resambles a big bang, but for me big bang was ordinary nova, that produced a "bigger" galaxy that we call universe. On a reverse scale universe is bigger in diameter for the period on the expansion it was born, as for galaxies, solar systems, atoms are smaler for the same reason...
  I do consider the big bang as a nova for the universe borned from it, but nonentless particles borning from the void as the ever lasting expansion continues, with those particles "re-apearing" universel star, was able to form, but submited to a weaker gravity than now, for the void was smaler, as it kept expanding gravity has increased on our region(different from now) and from that point own all that happens was what we already know, nova and black hole(once and somewhere) but I do wonder that "space as a void" was  already growing in diameter and realocating the interior.
 The very act of realocation and growing, what allowed matter (energy) to reapear, thus universe..

  One have a whole entety of energy(frozen/spherical)
 Now, One have a singularity that feed on it, from inside out, lelting behind a inner void of knetic energy "space/C" as it consumes and grows in diameter... C remain constant and time stretches towards both dirrection, faster at the edges and slower at the center, allowing the existence of different scales other than particles, alowing matter to exist...

 Matter and void, would be a marriage, inconstant for they are not from the same thing, energy is a constant state (primordial), and void/space but a momentum (result)
 I wonder that as the diameter keeps growing, the interior will be constantly relocating the (void) and as the diameter grows the center (where universe should lies now) it's on itself a consequence of a slow "return" to the original resting state, and atempt to conserve... Though they are still married, so one would have fractions of the entity, like copies(atempts)
   
 So I assume universe has indeed born from a explosion(that also expanded), but only expanded matter, as any other super nova out there, the miss understanding I believe to be that C was already happening on the blackground, and that univer iself, only born because space adquired a big enought radius that allowed particles to "re-apear", matter is than result of a marriage.....

I'm short on time, latter I'll correct it, but basically universe as a "probability" for it's own existence due it "now place"/ "relocation" on the ever growing void.. altoguh different from our already "inversed" singularityes surrowunded by already void. This ring/singularity can and should be growing much as a quasar, but one that theoreticaly does not requeres a center of mass, one that the center is the whole "weight" of the ring itself, with void at the center.. I believe that this condition is repeating itself from inside out dense objects as inner cores, they seem to explode nova depending on their size by the same factor "relocation"... An atempt to become one again, what does not let it happen is becouse matter is a marriage that is now forever submited to C...

  I do understand what you asked to visualize, I'm just implementing over it... Cause photons are already sppining energy. I tend to think that what more resambles the primordial state is frozen mass. Bosons seems more logic then sppining particles, like individual fractions of a whole quanta, the rest of the particles (stages), sons of this marriage, would any other particles, inevitable they would assimitate its father caracteristics(Twisting) around their mothers personality(static)... Not precisily on those terms, but I take for "mother" the primordial existence of the dimmension as whole energy that remains opossit to the father on the edges of the ever growing void, acting as a delimitation for the event(time) controling C, C controling higgs, the simple existence of the bosson, an alternative reason for sppining particles, around a virtual center...
  I imagine that primordial existence, thinking about a inner core from outside in as being similar to the primordial space, it only does not expand again, cause the void is already there, even so is known that the do expand to...
 Big bang describles a new bron even, I do not focus ont hat, I consider a inverse scenario for space itself, it was already infinite as energy, than the void started to clean up, consuming it as it expands, not in size, bt in diameter, we would be on the middle, happens only that this middle this, universal plate, or, this horizont where universe exists along with others, is very very large...
 So what's out there? Beyond the universe event? Void and eventually with "time" and "relocation" self expontaneous particles, back up to another "bigbangs"...

 As for gravity, seems to be related with higgs bosson, it is the source, but it is transmited trough this "photonic space/void"  in a deeper speculation photon is but a carrier, that forms and refrms on the void itself... This gin-clear that The Box mention, this blackground can indeed be filed with inactivated photons/gravitrons...
 This last speculation is related with the one above for even higgs being the source as a point of reference for sppining particles, there would require something else to carry the information/waves, and do it at C I can only thing of photons themselves being the carrier of all sort of information, from light up to gravity... But not even close to take it as a conclusion... I do not expect to be correct, but the only way to thing differnt is to strapolate over the details and reach a partial conclusion, than start to check it step by step, possible, not possible and why, if so, how?

 I'm sugestingthat the very re-apereance of particles/enever. (now sppining at C), is on itself, proof of an already dying space, as also condition for an universe itself to exist...
« Last Edit: Today at 14:35:41 by Alex Siqueira »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Proof
« Reply #49 on: Today at 09:13:41 »

 

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