[guest39538]

To be clear by substance I mean things that we can feel such as objects.  Now we all know the atomic model of an electron and proton and we all know that they have opposite polarities.

Now what if I was to say that one could not exist without the other?

Yes you may be shocked but this could be a physical fact by what we know so far.

Now the easiest way to explain this is with an analogy/a thought experiment.

I want you to imagine a handful of energy in your hand that was a single pole, I then want you to imagine trying to squeeze this energy together in your hand.  Now because the polarity throughout the energy is likewise to itself, it will repulse itself and the harder you squeeze the denser the energy will become.
Now when you open your hand the energy will just permeate and dissipate to nothing. It cannot maintain stability on its own.
So it needs a co-existent of an opposite polarity to exist and likewise the opposite polarity can not exist without the co-exist of an opposite.
Therefore explaining creation.

[Kryptid]

Free electrons are produced easily and routinely, so no, they don't need protons in order to exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode_ray

[guest39538]

Free electrons are produced easily and routinely, so no, they don't need protons in order to exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode_ray

I am talking before that stage my friend. Photo-electrical affect and Cathodes are processes within the field.  I am talking about from nothing .   
Start in your mind with a void of space,  then imagine a positive polarity energy trying to manifest.  It can' t happen the laws of physics will not allow it. It will permeate by its own mechanism of likewise to itself  to diminish into nothing.

p.s Only when you stop visualising objects as objects will you understand.  I visualise all objects as energy.   No energy has solidity unless there is two opposite polarities  at work to retain solidity.

A mono-polarised  energy will have a natural inflation .   

added- Just imagine a 0 point energy ''sprite'' that has a very little ''life'' span. It appears then ''inflates'' at c to disappear, i.e a flash.

(0³)∞*c=0

So in reverse energy must be

E=³

added- oh you are not going to understand that 0³=1 unless I put it.  0³ is equal to 1 box's box  and is the smallest 3 dimensional measurement possible.

[Bored chemist]

I want you to imagine a handful of energy in your hand that was a single pole,

Then you will need to explain what you think that means.

[guest39538]

I want you to imagine a handful of energy in your hand that was a single pole,

Then you will need to explain what you think that means.

It means what it says it means, imagine an amount of energy in the palm of your  hand, if the energy was a single polarity instead of having a duality, it would just disperse.
By the way the energy in the palm of your hand is invisible.  It is a dark energy.

[Bored chemist]

imagine an amount of energy in the palm of your  hand

How?
It's like trying to imagine  a handful of Thursday morning.

if the energy was a single polarity

Energy does not have a  polarity.

By the way the energy in the palm of your hand is invisible.  It is a dark energy.

Technobabble.

[guest39538]

How?

Well if it helps I will materialise the energy into a rubber ball.  Squeeze the ball it compresses, let go of the ball it decompresses.  However it decompresses infinitely or as far as it can go. 

Energy does not have a  polarity.

Yes it does.

[Bored chemist]

Well if it helps I will materialise the energy into a rubber ball. 

It doesn't help because energy does not behave like a rubber ball.
For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

Yes it does.

That's an extraordinary assertion and requires extraordinary proof.
You need to provide that proof or nobody will take you seriously.

[guest39538]

That's an extraordinary assertion and requires extraordinary proof.
You need to provide that proof or nobody will take you seriously.

E=q³c

everything is energy

p.s anyway working on learning some tensors at the moment which seems rather complex and I just don't get it.

[guest39538]

For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

That is because your hand has a greater Eviscosity than the Eviscosity of the energy of the earths n-field.

[Bored chemist]

For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

That is because your hand has a greater Eviscosity than the Eviscosity of the energy of the earths n-field.

Word salad.

[guest39538]

For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

That is because your hand has a greater Eviscosity than the Eviscosity of the energy of the earths n-field.

Word salad.

Could you possibly mean you just do not understand it?  Are you too modest too ask what anything of it means?

I guess being humble is not a part of your nature.

Eviscosity = energy density

ok?

[Bored chemist]

Still word salad.
And it will remain so, regardless of my state of modesty, until you actually explain what you mean.

[guest39538]

Still word salad.
And it will remain so, regardless of my state of modesty, until you actually explain what you mean.

Pffff tough crowd...

viscosity
vɪˈskɒsɪti/Submit
noun
the state of being thick,

[The Spoon]

For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

That is because your hand has a greater Eviscosity than the Eviscosity of the energy of the earths n-field.

Word salad.

Could you possibly mean you just do not understand it?  Are you too modest too ask what anything of it means?

I guess being humble is not a part of your nature.

Eviscosity = energy density

ok?

It is probably because 'Eviscosity' is another of your made up words

[guest39538]

For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

That is because your hand has a greater Eviscosity than the Eviscosity of the energy of the earths n-field.

Word salad.

Could you possibly mean you just do not understand it?  Are you too modest too ask what anything of it means?

I guess being humble is not a part of your nature.

Eviscosity = energy density

ok?

It is probably because 'Eviscosity' is another of your made up words

Well actually if you looked it up, it would stand for extensional viscosity although I am using it a sense of energy viscosity.

For example :  Blue light has a greater Eviscosity than red light. Because =λ³

Red light is less divided by space-time than blue light.

[The Spoon]

For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

That is because your hand has a greater Eviscosity than the Eviscosity of the energy of the earths n-field.

Word salad.

Could you possibly mean you just do not understand it?  Are you too modest too ask what anything of it means?

I guess being humble is not a part of your nature.

Eviscosity = energy density

ok?

It is probably because 'Eviscosity' is another of your made up words

Well actually if you looked it up, it would stand for extensional viscosity although I am using it a sense of energy viscosity.

For example :  Blue light has a greater Eviscosity than red light. Because =λ³

Red light is less divided by space-time than blue light.

Funny that. I did look it up. Extensional viscosity is there, not 'eviscosity'. Extensional viscosity refers  to a viscosity coeeficient when the applied stress is extensional stress and is used in characterising polymer solutions. You are basically taking a term, making a word up as a portmentau and then applying it to something completely different. i.e. making things up again.

Your equation that you give which you claim explains it - can you tell us what each of the symbols represent? i.e. explain x, y z, h, f seperately.

[guest39538]

For example a rubber ball is compressible and can be held in the hand.
Energy is not, and can not.

That is because your hand has a greater Eviscosity than the Eviscosity of the energy of the earths n-field.

Word salad.

Could you possibly mean you just do not understand it?  Are you too modest too ask what anything of it means?

I guess being humble is not a part of your nature.

Eviscosity = energy density

ok?

It is probably because 'Eviscosity' is another of your made up words

Well actually if you looked it up, it would stand for extensional viscosity although I am using it a sense of energy viscosity.

For example :  Blue light has a greater Eviscosity than red light. Because =λ³

Red light is less divided by space-time than blue light.

Funny that. I did look it up. Extensional viscosity is there, not 'eviscosity'. Extensional viscosity refers  to a viscosity coeeficient when the applied stress is extensional stress and is used in characterising polymer solutions. You are basically taking a term, making a word up as a portmentau and then applying it to something completely different. i.e. making things up again.

Your equation that you give which you claim explains it - can you tell us what each of the symbols represent? i.e. explain x, y z, h, f seperately.

xyz are dimensions and they can also be used for vectors, hf is high frequency but I am sure you already know this .

E= c

[The Spoon]

xyz are dimensions and they can also be used for vectors, hf is high frequency but I am sure you already know this .

E= c

I already know this do I? How? If you do not tell us what symbols in a particular equation mean, they are just random scribblings.

But back to the equation you have given. You are saying that high frequency divided by dimensions or vectors multiplied by the speed of light equals something you made up called eviscosity?

[guest39538]

xyz are dimensions and they can also be used for vectors, hf is high frequency but I am sure you already know this .

E= c

I already know this do I? How? If you do not tell us what symbols in a particular equation mean, they are just random scribblings.

But back to the equation you have given. You are saying that high frequency divided by dimensions or vectors multiplied by the speed of light equals something you made up called eviscosity?

I am trying it may not be perfect, but  yes more or less. 

Let me try to explain and maybe you can help perfect the maths or notion. 

Let us take a dimension of space, we will use 10 mm³  just for the ease of it.   Imagine there was one joule of energy retained in this space but permeated in this space. The eviscosity can change in two ways.  A volume contraction of the space or an increase in hf at the speed of c.
Hence E = hf divided by the volume of space at the speed of light
  I have tried to draw it


evis.jpg (28.71 kB . 898x572 - viewed 1875 times)

<V=>Evis

The blue box and the red box contain the same amount of energy.