Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Pincho on 28/02/2013 02:25:10

Title: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 28/02/2013 02:25:10
The zero particle is a scalar particle that fills space time. It's called the zero particle because its opposing forces cancel out all forms of physics that we could establish a connection with. It's the same to say 1 + -1 = 0, and the zero is the particle made from opposing forces.

The zero particle builds all other particles, and it does this when it loses its scalar ability. It loses its scalar ability when it gets bonded with other zero particles. It can't scale down, because to scale down collides with an inner particle. It can't scale up because zero particles are infinite, and take up all of space. Zero particles are the spacetime grain structure.

The opposing forces of the zero particle, are mass, and negative mass. They are most easily defined as convex, and concave. Convex is mass, and concave is negative mass. You can imagine the two halves of a sphere divided in the middle. So imagine a tennis ball cut in half. Now you have the convex, and the concave, and the physics that the half tennis ball can perform are similar to the physics that the zero particle can perform.

1/ The concave half can hold more particles. So for example the tennis ball can hold water on one side, but not the other. This is the flow side, and is the equivalent of a pull force. So a pull is a flow into a concave particle.

2/ The other side deflects particles. This is the equivalent of the bump force. Convex bumps, the tennis ball bounces on the convex side.

4/ You can fold it inside out to reverse the physics. Bump becomes a hole, and no longer bumps. This change from bump to flow we see as magnetism. The spin force around the iron bar scales down the particles until they flip inside out.

The scalar physics are created by spin. So convex is the outer spin wall, and concave is the inner spin wall, and the more particles that spin, the larger the scalar particle. But the fact that they are infinite has restricted the upper limit.

Now the concave, and convex design relates to the size of the particles moving towards each other. For example, a lens in convex for water which is a large particle, but is concave for photons which move through the lens, but interact inside the particles concave areas.

The Universe begins with these infinite scalar particles. They scale until they touch, and then they scale down. And this becomes a rhythm, and a vibration through space time. The energy from this vibration spreads through an empty universe. It forces the particles to obey particle stacking rules. So a fractal begins to form. The fractal obeys Newton's Kissing Problem for 12 particles around 1 particle...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kissing_number_problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kissing_number_problem)

The transmission of this energy eventually crashes together on the central particle of Newton's Kissing Problem. This particle then folds inside out, and becomes a hole to move into by bump forces from the vibration. The particles which move into this hole are then in the line of flow from 12 directions, and so they must scale down, and flip inside out... this is what we call a black hole. It is the energy of a hole, that has a flow force, and collapses the particles moving into the flow force. The particles scale down, flip inside out, and escape. It's a fractal, so it creates the spiral Galaxy shape.

This repeats forever. And the Galaxies start to appear from cross energy flow forces. The Galaxies are not lined up by time, but more by pressure. So red shift is a scalar shift, and not a time shift. The further you look out into the Universe has no relationship to the age of the Galaxy that you see. If one Galaxy is surrounded by more pressure than another Galaxy it will look older than the Galaxy under less pressure. A red dwarf is under less pressure than a white sun as well. Gravity is a flow force of these zero particles that pass through your body, and into atoms of the Earth.

The Earth has more holes than your body, so the flow is more like a flow into a plug hole. The bending of spacetime is a scalar bend of zero particles into the Earth. The twist of spacetime around the Earth is just a fluid twist the same as you see when water spins around a hole.

The grain structure of the Zero particles eliminates the need for Dark Matter, and eliminates the strangeness of Quantum Physics. Particle, wave duality is just a particle travelling through scalar particles. Action At A Distance is just the push force which is gravity, and now its local, and not at a distance. The fractals that are created by this particle stacking system relate to all of nature. So any shape, like human, or fish is part of this scalar fractal of infinite particles. Trees are a sort of inverted version of the fractal along with lightening bolts. You can spend years just going through all of the physics of life, and all based on Newton's Kissing Problem.

Because this fractal is a simple matter of allowing scalar particles to trap one another, and scale down, and fold inside out, it is easy to simulate the entire Universe in a fractal algorithm. If you have a powerful enough computer you have the proof of the theory, by watching a Universe self build.

I have started the computer program. My computer is not very good. I can only handle 60000 particles. That's useless. I am writing the program open ended however. So if you have a super computer you can run as many particles as the computer can handle.

I believe that the fractal can create life in a computer, but the computer must be able to assign each particle with its own calculations individually, so totally multi-tasking. My program is based on 'The Game Of Life'...

http://www.bitstorm.org/gameoflife/ (http://www.bitstorm.org/gameoflife/)

Using this self building method, but using the rules of the scalar particles. Not too many rules, and so the Universe has been simplified. But on a bog standard computer the fractal will be linear, and the energy flows will not be very natural. The future is Quantum Computers, and total multi processing.

It's best to think of the Universe as a simple set of rules that repeat, and then program this fractal to get the periodic table.

My work has started, and the tests are building up. My early test doesn't do much, but eventually the program will be a total 3D simulation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggRxyHjimxM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggRxyHjimxM)

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/03/2013 15:51:55
I would like to talk about time in my theory, as it is so different to the standard model version of time.

I have singularities situated like a fractal that are similar to Newton's Kissing Problem for 12 particles around 1. Each of these points is not an X/Y/Z location. It can be converted to X/Y/Z but is much more limited. If you try to move pixels on a computer screen you only have 8 directions that a little pixel man can move in. It's the same with space time. You can only move in 12 directions that match Newton's Kissing Problem, plus the central particle, which is the observer position. So consider yourself  a hole looking in 12 directions.

From that hole flows time. It is a scalar particle, and could be called a squirt for out, and a sink for in. Now we convert 'out' to forwards in time, and 'in' to backwards in time. The Bose / Einstein condensate showed that time can be reversed, and the Atoms moved 'In'. A snowflake also has a fractal that displays 'In' The in hole contains a sort of Russian Doll effect, and is a rebound trajectory that creates 'C'. So the rebound happens faster than 'C' in the hole to a scalar point, and back out again to result in 'C'.

So time doesn't even move forward, it moves in 12 directions, plus in, and out. And that is from a point. Now we move into the next point, and time is set up completely differently. You have to start all over again and you have only moved a possible Planck length.

So in this sense, time is almost completely impossible to calculate. You can average it out. But when it comes to complications like a Worm Hole, you are only swapping the time reference to 14 possible positions plus a 'C' scale. It's not really going to move you anywhere in time. You are always the central hole, and you always have to start from scratch after every change in location.

In a way, time is scale.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/03/2013 12:46:35
So you may ask, "Why do I have the need to change the physics of the Standard Model?"

My answer is because I have no pull forces in my theory, so every action must use energy propagation, and a bump. Even 'C' must be propagated, so you need faster than light propagation. The propagation of C is a scalar rebound action. It changes a convex curve into a concave curve, and back into a convex curve. The net result is that a photon is created from those forces. The forces are internal to the photon which scales out of those internal forces to produce 'C'. The rebound action is sometimes weak (without an observer), and strong (with an observer)

The Two slit experiment shows the difference between the weak rebound action, and the strong rebound action. The strong rebound action can travel in a straight line turning all of the convex curves into concave holes. The concave alignment forces particles to its centre. The weak unobserved force leaves behind some convex curves. These convex curves are similar to bubbles, and throw the photon to the sides of the curve. The bubbles group together to create a wave, and so a wave pattern is shown as a result.

Zero Particle theory turns Quantum Physics into every day physics. The reason that science has Quantum Physics is all down to a single word.. 'PULL'.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/03/2013 13:00:12
When Einstein was considering "What Is Action At A Distance?" he should have considered a push force Gravity. But instead he bent space time. The bending of space time does happen, but is an effect of gravity, and not the cause of Gravity. Einstein gets Cause, and Effect backwards at this point. The reason for this is his own, but it appears that he avoided changing some of Newton's ideas. He avoided changing the Force calculation which needs a replacement for mass.

Mass of an electron is determined by sending a particle near to the electron, and the curve can be worked out to be a mass. But science considers the curve to be a pull force. So science considers the result to be a mass result. The result is a flow result, and is the same as a flow around a whirlpool. A boat moves towards the flow, the particle moves towards the electron.

Now force is a flow, and mass is a flow into a hole, and all forces are push forces. You have been measuring a bucket full of water as mass, instead you need to take the water out of the bucket, and put a negative sign in front of the electron mass.

With a negative mass for the electron the force formula will work OK. A lot of formulas need reversing, but you lose the Big Bang in the end.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/03/2013 13:15:18
The replacement for the Big Bang changes some more physics. First you need to get rid of the pull forces that build the Universe. They all have to become flow forces into holes. The singularity needs a flow force towards it, and all of the particles need to create singularities.

To create the singularities you use the Zero Particle. The meeting of the vibration on a central point between the zero particles as they scale up, and down. They fold down a central particle into a singularity. The singularity takes over the physics, allowing energy to build up and produce new physics. These particles all become a fractal as 12 surround 1, and the fractal is a connecting pathway for energy to transfer by bump forces. The snowflake is a perfect 2D representation of the 2D fractal, and the 3D fractal only happens far away from Gravity. Gravity uses up the Y propagation particles so the dimension on Earth start to strip away partly to 6 from 12. Although we can struggle to use up probably all 12 of the Dimensions against the incoming forces.

So the dimensions are propagated through Newton's kissing problem. Energy must be propagated, so we have 12 dimensions from a single central point.

As you can see, all of the physics that I am working on are necessary to remove the 'PULL' forces from the Standard Model.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/03/2013 13:27:35
Instead of the Big Bang you only need to create the Galaxies at intersecting points of energy. Time is not a line through this Universe. Time is fractal. But Galaxies do help to create new Galaxies by directing the Energy along the fractals. So there is a connection that has linear time in it 'SOMETIMES'.

The central hole of a Galaxy has collapsed, and a whirlpool is created. The vibrations propagate through the whirlpool, and fold into more singularities. The new singularities create suns with an outside force, and an inside force. The sun is suspended like a bunch of ping pong balls on air. At this point I need the periodic table to start to develop. That will need to be calculated by my computer program. But sometimes it appears that we use the word Iron to replace some singularities. I know that I said that electrons are singularities, but they are small. Some larger singularities are needed that will create a mass like iron but without the iron due to the spin speeds of the electrons. So those dark spots on the sun are those super spin speeds, and when a planet is made we should consider that some of the iron is perhaps a black hole.

I'm pretty sure that we sometimes mistake black holes for Iron Cores. Although they may not be so black as to push in the photons when you replace pull with push.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/03/2013 16:12:29
The propagation of light is something that I have discussed, and I use a scalar particle changing convex into concave, and back to convex. The scalar effect is into a hole, and the propagation is by a Russian Doll type setup.

There was once a theory of the Luminiferous aether, and it was discarded due to a Michelson and Morley experiment that suggested a wind factor was missing from the physics. How does the Aether connect all things together? It can't follow both the sun and the Earth and all other products of the Universe. Is it moving, or is it stationary? How can it do both? Why is there no Aether wind?

Well I propagate all forces, not just light. The Earth is propagated, and the photon is propagated, and the electrons are the holes that propagate the physics along with Gravity flow, and scalar rebound forces. All things propagated together at the same time from a stationary scalar force. All linked together by a spin spin towards the electrons...

https://www.amherst.edu/aboutamherst/news/faculty/node/457128 (https://www.amherst.edu/aboutamherst/news/faculty/node/457128)

And the spin spin is a rotation through the zero particles.

What you have here is a stationary frame for all physics. All physics propagated at once due to the scalar rebound force. A physical animation frame. The frame is internal to the particles, the energy escapes as magnetism. Magnetism is a push force that creates a spin that screws particles towards itself. A screw is a push force that acts like an attractive force, eliminating pull force.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/03/2013 17:49:26
The single frame reference also contains the next stage of physics. If energy moves into a hole, and that hole was the area of least resistance, it is no longer the area of least resistance. The next hole along is now the area of least resistance. You can imagine an asteroid travelling past the Earth. It is travelling into the area of least resistance, and it drags the next frame along with it as a bow shock. We normally associate a bow shock with a high Mach speed, but even the slowest speeds store a bow shock internally to the particle. The bow shock is a scalar shock, and scales the zero particles down, and this scale down is the area of least resistance. Gravity has scaled down an area around the Earth, so the asteroid bow shock now adds to our own gravity shock. So the asteroid moves into the combined area of least resistance.

If you move towards the zero particles faster, and faster, they scale down ahead of the asteroid. A sun exhibits a huge bow shock, and it's a scalar shock wave. This is a storage of physics relating to the next frame of a time index.

When Einstein said that Gravity is the bending of Space Time he got cause and effect backwards. This bow shock is a scalar flow following on from a movement towards a hole. If you imagine moving through ice then you are an object melting a path, and the heat is ahead of you, and behind you is a cold flow that seals up the hole.

Apart from the bow shock there is the spin spin. As mentioned earlier, the spin spin is the rotation that takes place pointing towards a hole. This readies you for the second stage frame. Energy travels inside the spin spin as a shell. It inflates the shell, and the shell becomes the next particle along. Encased in a shell like this energy propagates like a hose pressure.

Something in the next frame creates entanglement, and action at a distance. Probably the spin spin.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/03/2013 19:56:27
The information that is stored in the physical frame has physical qualities that are about to happen. This is where relativity gets written into the environment. You stand on a train, you take on the bow shock, and now you are stationary to the train. You both share the same bow shock. The area of least resistance is in the same direction. The scalar effect is also matched, so time is stored as a motion through scaling.

Relativity is the storage of the frame, combined with the next frame.

Does time stop for a photon travelling at C?

No, the internal scalar rebound force is still happening, else energy would not be able to propagate the next frame.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/03/2013 02:42:25
Why do all of these strange physics exist, anyone could make them up?

Each time I use a new type of physics it is because at that stage in energy propagation the physics are required to get the energy from A to B if there was no such thing as a pull force. There is no explanation for a pull force that satisfies my mind, I find it impossible to have pull forces. Each time somebody says pull, you examine it closely, and it is a push force.

So let's take a look at a scalar force more closely. It took me years to figure out how to create movement from a standing start. The scaler force like balloons inflating next to each other push one another along. That's a standing movement, and it's not made of many physical parts. I limit part numbers, I don't want mechanics in my theory that look like they were manufactured. I don't have pull, and I don't have mechanics. I call mechanics simple things like waves, and strings. I don't use waves, or strings on their own. My waves are particle waves like a fluid, and strings have to be self building if they exist.

I avoid anything that sounds too good to be true. Making up new physics requires the natural procedure of a fractal algorithm. I am a programmer, and I work on computer games. Physics for computer games are sometimes simplified from the normal every day physics. I wanted physics that self build, without human intervention.

The physics that I use are self building physics. Each stage is an advancement from the last stage..

1/ The zero particle. It is the creation of separation. If the Universe had to start from the very first mathematical formula it would be 1 + -1 = 0. Which would be my fractal formula. You dig a hole, you get a hill, and a hole. In cause, and effect it is one of the few things that creates two effects from 1 cause that are equal. It is one of the few physical qualities that can be hidden. You put the dirt back in the hole, and you get a flat line. You can hide the hole, and the hill, and still have both physics sharing the same space. So just like virtual particles the zero particle can be the first building block.

2/ Time. Why is my time so different? Just like I needed a zero particle, I needed a standing start. Scalar Inflation from a hole was the only standing start I could come up with that wasn't very mechanical. But when I wondered about it, I figured that zero particles must be infinite, because zero doesn't really create anything. But once the zero particle is infinite it is forced to create everything. It runs out of energy free positions. The area of least resistance starts to spin around, because I use Newton's Kissing Problem. Newton's Kissing Problem has room for another particle hidden in its structure. The 13th ball that can never be fitted on the outside of a single ball. So what took me several years to come up with was a natural fractal of inflation, and movement from zero.

Each progression of physics is worked out from the last. The stages of my physics pass from zero to zero, with no net gain. The only reason that anything gets built is due to shortage of space in a infinite environment. The shapes that are created match nature. Newton's Kissing Problem matches the fractals of nature. The grain structure of the Universe that I use matches the fractal for Galaxies, and the fractal for humans, and the fractal for snowflakes, and the fractal for sea life. All of the fractals are forced from a particle stacking problem that happens naturally.

So I don't really invent any physics at all. My knowledge of computer games lets me know how to create a fractal that will self build the Universe. I am used to thinking of physics in this way. Unlike a game like Mario you can make a system that just happens. Getting each step correct as written on these pages is a carefully calculated procedure. I use the simplest form of physics for each stage. Only simplicity can be correct for a Universe with no knowledge of what it is about to create.



Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/03/2013 12:53:11
What does a particle flipping inside out mean?

I gave the example of half a tennis ball, and you can fold it inside out, and historically this has been called matter, and anti-matter. I don't use those terms, because I have the physics to explain those terms, and the annihilation is only virtual annihilation, the annihilation is 1 + -1 = 0. There is no annihilation.

Without the physics at first it is easy to use vectors to create the phenomenon. In a modelling package when you create a vector sphere with a positive number you can say that it has a scale of say 5. If you create a vector sphere of scale -5 it looks the same, but the physics have reversed. The structure is now mapped on the inside instead of the outside. It's comparable to folding the half tennis ball inside out.

Now we scale right down to quantum physics. We remove the vectors, and we are in a grain structure. To recreate the physics without vectors you use scalar particles.

What is scale?

Scale is relative. you can only judge scale by comparison. Compare an egg to a football, and a football to an apple, and an apple to an atom.

But the very first particles have no relative comparison at all. They aren't restricted to a scale. They are restricted to infinity. Infinity is a fractal due to the way that spaces are used up. And like Newton's Kissing Problem infinity has to obey the rules of a particle stacking system. When the atom arrives through the evolution of zero particles, the atom has become scalar restricted. We as humans only ever witness a scalar restricted environment. Trees grow using a scalar restricted growth method. A scalar particle grows because infinity has filled it with Russian dolls of itself.

Infinity uses infinite regression of scalar particles, but the physics of the infinite regression fold inside out like a negative scale vector sphere. This changes infinity into a scalar loop, and so you get a 12 point X Y Z field instead of permanent infinite regression. If you prod a soft ball with your finger the properties change from convex to concave. In the scalar particle version, the particles that are touched first scale down first. So the convex to concave change is more like a melting away of energy, but the energy is actually dividing into Newton's Kissing Problem. If you wonder why the LHC gets particles in groups of 6 then think about Newton's Kissing Problem hit from one side. The result is 6 particles that flatten, and 6 particles escape. Groups of 6 particles with 6 opposite particles. The energy then becomes less in the middle of a concave curvature. Water would gather in the curvature because it is the area of least resistance. The scalar particles fold a structure inside out, and now the reverse physics head in the opposite direction, and you have a bounce.

Here is the scale written out in numbers...

5,4,3,2,1,-1,-2,-3,-4,-5

As vector sphere, you see a ball shrink, and grow. The negative numbers are a growing hole. But gravity fills all the internal holes, and magnetism fills all of the external holes, so its a growing solid. Its a solid that shrinks, and grows because gravity or magnetism fills all holes. It either fills them internally, or externally, but to our point of view time never stops. The scalar rebound of time uses positive, and negative numbers to create a bounce back without having to stop at zero, because as a hole the hole is filled instantly. All that is changing is that the hole is first filled on the inside, and then the hole is filled on the outside of a curvature.

The matter anti-matter change is dependant on whether you are a hole or a filler. Energy can escape by switching from a filler to a hole, or back to a filler. The Gravity system is like a weather system. A chaotic algorithm of scalar change.

Gravity into a hole, scales to magnetism and escapes. Magnetism is pushed by holes, if it becomes trapped by holes it scales to Gravity. Magnetism is scaled down Gravity, A galaxy weather system. Dark Matter.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/03/2013 15:09:08
So to remind you...

Movement is a choice of 12 points, and a central hole where movement begins.. Newton's Kissing Problem as points. A central hole contains a scalar energy which is time. All of the dimensions are local, and X / Y / Z is an average extrapolation  of fixed points. Not all X / Y / Z locations are available at the quantum level, but smooth out to our scale. Time is inside that X / Y /Z analysis, it's at the centre of an atom in the Nucleus. Time is a scalar particle.

So for every frame of any movement all physics are stored as data for the current frame, and point to the next frame in the frame itself. You can visually see the next frame in the current frame. For example as a bow shock, a spin spin, or as part of the entanglement of particles, or scaler factors.

All extensions from the 1st frame into the 2nd frame are local to the points of Newton's Kissing Problem. There is no action at a distance, and all energy is propagated.

We can use a very simple example of a photo of a speed boat using atoms rather than scalar physics. The image of the boat includes some data. The rear wake of the boat, the bow wave, the motion blur, the wind in the hair, the height of the boat off the water.

In quantum physics the frame is required to determine the next frame for energy propagation. The clues have a physical reality to the next move in a game of Quantum Chess. A series of snowflake pictures are all a bit different, but can be turned into an animation of snowflake propagation. I've done this before. The smaller you get, the more the frame starts to become the next reality.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/03/2013 16:14:04
So what happens to time when you walk from point A to Point B?

If we just use atoms as our scale then all of the temperature changes are variations in the time flow. So we are never moving from A to B through time in a linear manner. If it gets too cold, time moves backwards, and we die. But we don't know how to examine real time like that, so we use something that we can call a time relationship. It's a bit like finding Pluto with a change in the orbit of another planet. Our time relationship is very weak.. we wear a watch. Imagine all of the cogs in a watch trying to represent scalar physics. One cog scales to another cog, to another cog. A tiny amount of scale from energy, and you are miles away from realistic time. Your watch has turned an atom into a Galaxy scale version of an atom. Now when you walk from A to B the changes in time don't happen according to reality, they happen at a much larger scale where a tiny change is ignored.

Moving 1 metre includes billions of time changes that no clock can identify. The speed of time is faster than C, so even if you had a watch that worked at C, it would still skip time. Time is faster than C to propagate C, and the central point of the atom is ignored by X / Y / Z. If you examine X/ Y / Z they are lines from a point. The point is time, and are skipped by X /Y /Z. Think of atoms.. who measures X / Y /Z from inside an atom? Who measures the central point of an atom?

The central point of an atom is 'In' and 'Out'. It's scalar. You are missing X/ Y / Z / IN / OUT.

Time can exist in the X / Y /Z if you include IN OUT as scalar points.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/03/2013 16:53:43
If a frame includes the following frame reference, with direction, speed, and time, then what is acceleration in that frame?

The acceleration is part of the bow shock distance from the particle. So an asteroid moves forwards, it has a bow shock against scalar particles. The scalar particles have a bow shock against the next row of scalar particles, and the next row of scalar particles have a bow shock against a further row of scalar particles...

Now you look at a sun with a huge plough of a bow shock.

Now time is the scalar particle in a hole with a Russian Doll effect. It is easier to think of time as a Geyser, or Hose Pipe for this example. The time Geyser with acceleration is forced back into the hole. So there is a physical relationship to time in acceleration.

The bow shock folds scalar particles into points. Atoms move into points. The greater the distance the points can be moved ahead of the previous point then the next frame includes information for acceleration.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/03/2013 18:43:18
I don't usually use Calculations but I suppose that I can present a calculation from a frame for acceleration. I take this off the internet...

Quote
a = F/m, where F is the net force applied to a mass, m.

For example, if an object's velocity changes from 10 meters per second to 20 meters per second in five seconds, its acceleration is (20-10)/5 = 2 meters per second per second, or 2 meters per second squared (m/s2).

Now I want to convert it into the frame physics of my previous examples.

a = F/m

needs to be changed to something like..

a = Bow shock point 1 - Bow Shock point 2 / Time scalar length from contraction (like a geyser in a hole contracted to recoil).

So the geyser of time is shrunk to fit between to bow shock points A and B, and its energy is like a spring that rebounds from a scale factor that reverses..

5, 4, 3 ,2 ,1, -1 ,-2 ,-3 ,-4 ,-5

If you squeeze time the recoil divides into the distance between two points ahead of time. C is the speed at which you split the data into segments (being as time is faster than C).

It's something like that. It requires a real mathematician to describe what I am trying to say. But the maths is definitely in there somewhere.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/03/2013 12:30:00
So fundamental energy is kinetic, and taken from time as a scalar bounce. A nice neat quantum bounce with no deceleration due to a flip from convex to concave filled by gravity then magnetism. It is the lack of deceleration that allows the bounce to repeat forever. The lack of zero in the system. 1 + -1 = 0 is reality. It takes two states to make a zero state, and if you can switch between the two states without stopping then you will never reach a zero state for energy.

1/ Newton's Kissing Problem.. the 13th ball.

After Newton discovered that you could get 12 balls around a same sized ball, he then puzzled over the gaps. He worked out that there was room for a 13th ball. The 13th ball could never be fitted. This is the chaos that leaves an area of least resistance forever in a scalar field that equals out to same sized particles.

2/ The time bounce.

Create a vector sphere scale 5, and a vector sphere scale -5. They look the same, the physics are inverted. Take a tennis ball, cut it in half, fold the other half inside out. Two halves, with physics that can flip, both the same size more or less. Time uses kinetic energy based on a system that doesn't need to reverse direction to actually reverse direction. It is a trampoline that always bounces, because its zero state doesn't exist. 1 switches to -1, and back to 1 because the geodesic quality of time never flattens out. And as a ball of gravity switching to a ball of magnetism all that is happening is a scalar change. The two ends of a bar magnet are examples of a scalar change bounce. The ends that push apart are pushing against scaled convex curves. The ends that 'APPEAR' to pull are scaled concave spin forces. The forces are polarised together, and only make changes to other particles with the matching poles, and scales.

If you were to use a black Box example of the propagation of all things, you need to include the bow shock of the Black Box in the example. The bow shock is made from the points as holes which are areas for kinetic energy to move into. If you stand in the black box your bow shock matches the black box bow shock. Your bow shock points are spaced relatively to the Black Box. You are both sending the same message. Your second frames match up, and kinetic energy is traversing its way along a fractal towards the bow shock holes.


Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/03/2013 12:43:39
Space isn't a vacuum or even close...

The fundamental zero particles fill space time head to tail. They then scale down minutely enough as to not make contact. Like a circuit board they are now hidden. The Earth however has no scalar ability, so it makes contact, it makes a circuit board. The electrons are holes in the zero particle field, and so a solid, or mass is actually more like a sponge....

The Earth is a sponge in a surrounding particle field of zero particles. The Earth as a mass uses less matter than space of the same size. The illusion is that we see a negative of reality.

A frictionless spacetime is actually a conveyor spacetime. The Earth as a sponge, or an asteroid, or anything that we call a mass is full of holes that fill with spacetime. If you move towards the zero particles with an atomic structure you are moving as a bubble towards a super liquid. The flow of the liquid through the structure conveys the structure with no net change, and therefore frictionless. The scalar particles which scale down to avoid making contact create a gap that Einstein called the bending of spacetime. It is actually the scaling of space time. The scalar particles then scale back up behind the atomic structure. A scalar bend.

We as humans are human bubbles in a super liquid.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/03/2013 13:44:41
So we have the atoms sliding over a scalar field. What about the photons?

Each zero particle is made from a convex curve, which touches things like atoms, and a concave curve which acts as a hole, and holes usually don't get touched by atoms. But photons can hit the convex side with such force that it becomes a concave side. In fact the propagation of the wave is due to collisions with zero particles which cannot scale out of the way fast enough.

So as the photon is hitting the convex side you need to change that side into a spin in your mind. Now imagine a bent waterfall.

1/ If the bend is towards you when you put your hand under it..... the water gushes out towards you.

2/ If the water is bent concave then the water takes your hand with it into the waterfall.

As the photon bends the convex it experiences slow down, but as it changes the convex to concave it experiences speed up. The incoming gush of water pops the concave back to convex again behind it. Then the photon leaves through concave.

(The photon may actually just be the flip, and the particle may be the gush. So in other words a photon may just be a virtual particle built there, and destroyed in the same location, but recreated by the next pop.)

In a lens this is much more fractal. The centre of a convex lens is the easier choice. In a prism the colours are separated by areas of least resistance.

Red shift is likely to be a scalar shift of the zero particles.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/03/2013 14:20:15
So far, the theory is based on a repeating fractal. The fractal exists, you can see it. You can see it in nature. You can see the relationship between a whirlpool, and a Galaxy spin. You can test pull forces, are they pull forces? Look closely at a chain, it is made up of all push forces. Pull open a door, and you look closely, you are pushing open the door.

If another theory comes along that is similar, will it find the relationship with the fractal? The relationship with Newtons Kissing Problem?

Lets try to break the relationship with the fractal..

The millipede...

It doesn't have 12 points per leg, or 6 points, it has two legs on either side of a body section. So how is it a Newton's Kissing Fractal?

Each body section is closed off at the ends. newton's kissing Problem for 1D is 2 balls either side of 1 ball. If there is a tiny bit more space you can add two legs per side so long as they are squashed in scale.

You could try salt, it's a cube...

Salt is probably the hardest to fit into the fractal. It has become a motionless version of the fractal. The electrons are trapped, time seems to be stuck.

The Octopus...

8 legs, no Kissing Problem Fractal has 8 in it. But water exhibits some changes to Newton's Kissing Problem. Water has a pressure from the sides. The side pressure is combined with the Y pressure of Gravity. So lets use X / Y pressure. The forces then cause a diagonal fracture in Newton's Kissing Problem. The diagonal fracture squeezes points together. So an Octopus is actually a 12 legged creature squeezed in the middle to become an 8 legged creature with an enlarged head where the pressure squeezes into. The squeeze  also pushes the Octopus testicles into its head.

So Fish are often squeezed in the middle to become flat, and our hands become flat fins.

All of these changes are stored in DNA, and so the physics don't actually need to apply anymore. A baby's feet are flat from gravity before it has walked, so the changes of Newton's Kissing Problem are sometimes evolved into a body with no forces acting on it at all.

If that isn't enough for you let's go up in scale to something really big. You will find a hexagonal fractal in Images like this one. Just overlay a hexagonal grid over it, and bend the grid concavely...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/universe/questions_and_ideas/dark_matter/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/universe/questions_and_ideas/dark_matter/)
A new theory is not going to be as complete as this theory. Although you can add to this theory.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/03/2013 18:41:40
Time, and Time again...

Time is central to all points, and is like a Scalar Geyser that propagates kinetic energy into physics. The snowflake is an example of Time In. The Sun is an example of Time Out. The difference between a hot sphere, and a cold hexagon is time.

The chaos of time is the 13th ball that can never be fitted into Newton's Kissing Problem.

More chaos is created by energy cells blocking other energy cells. Look at lightening, it forks when an energy cell is blocked. The same thing with a tree. Limited angles of 60 degree are still apparent at this scale, but are dwindling through the smoothing out of the fractal.

So if this is all a fractal what about free will?

I have a Theory right here that 7 Billion people didn't think of. Plus all of the people that ever lived. I don't follow cause, and effect, I don't use 'PULL' just because all of the causes said 'USE PULL'. I don't have to follow a leader. I appear to have Free Will, and I'm not just being random. I can play the piano, and my songs are original, I can paint, I write computer games, and I can invent new things.

I figured out the theory years ago, about 2003. Nobody bothered to follow up on it. Even if I try to implant a cause into others, nobody is taking the bait of the real TOE.

This is the real Theory Of Everything, and yet the free will to accept it seems to be a bit dormant for my liking. People seem to want to follow the Standard Model even if I prove that pull doesn't exist, and the standard model is based on pull. Newton Invented science as a mathematical proof. So from the very first use of science as mathematics there was a fault in it.. 'Pull'. Which created an error in the Force formula that uses mass. Which made Einstein use a pull force in the Big Bang.

But I ignored all of it.

Does Free Will exist?

It does in me.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/03/2013 19:28:06
So, did anyone put a concave hexagon grid over the NASA picture of Dark Matter?

This is what you would see...

Too good to be true?

Probably yes. I don't expect the fractal to be quite that obvious. There was another picture posted a few years later, and NASA said that the new picture definitely did not contain a fractal unlike the first. But when I inspected the new picture it had the same fractal, but you had to apply a bit more of a concave curve to the grid.

Here is a link, read it for yourself.. it has the same fractal...
http://www.space.com/17234-universe-fractal-large-scale-theory.html (http://www.space.com/17234-universe-fractal-large-scale-theory.html)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/03/2013 11:49:04
So, according to the evidence so far, a quantum set of 12 particles around 1 particle, maintains its shape all the way up to infinity. The particle stacking system uses Newton's Kissing problem, which averages out to a hexagon shape from any direction in 3D.

The structure of spacetime then looks a bit like this...

And Spin Spin is that shape rotating.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/03/2013 12:04:13
And when the particles touch the energy is passed along like a circuit board. And the message can be a photon. The fractal can be determined how each set of physics works. I said that a photon is a message passed by a sort of curved waterfall. An outward curve holds together until it is touched, and then it releases energy like a spray outwards. An inward curve blasts energy inwards. The fractal can be seen in some space anomalies...

(I edited this image to make the bubbles clearer to the human eye.)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/03/2013 14:39:07
So if that's the in flow what does the out flow look like...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23248-giant-milky-way-bubbles-blown-by-black-hole-merger.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23248-giant-milky-way-bubbles-blown-by-black-hole-merger.html)

The galaxy could be the out flow from the touching forces. It's something I am testing out at the moment, as seen in this test.... zoom in to the middle...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/03/2013 15:29:22
Here's a question? If the Universe is a fractal, what is the difference between Dark Matter, and Grey Matter?

Well if you look at the picture I posted earlier of Dark Energy placement in the Universe, and now look this article. there is not much difference...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130307124754.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130307124754.htm)


... and in my mind there is a planet called Earth

... and on this Earth I sit

... and I sit and I think of Dark Energy

... and in this Dark Energy there is a planet called Earth

... and on that Earth I sit, and think

... and in my mind there is a planet called Earth

Just a poetic interlude.  :)

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/03/2013 17:41:11
What is the constant C?

When you use a Newtons Cradle the balls have a similar size, and a set radius, and all propagate through a force, and the energy escapes. The speed drops because the energy escapes. That would be the Convex waterfall effect escaping.

The physics of C are similar to a Newton's Cradle, but the energy doesn't escape. A set distance is propagated through. Time acts as a piston in the middle. The piston value...

5,4,3,2,1,-1,-2,-3,-4,-5 adds up to zero. So zero is lost.

So in a normal Newtons Cradle energy is lost in the X/Y/Z

Inverted physics forces the energy into a hole, and back into the system again. The hole is where X / Y /Z all meet up at a single point... Time.

Time which has a bounce with no loss of speed. The propagator of all things.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 09/03/2013 02:34:38
Relativity stored in a fractal framework.

You stand on a train.

The train has a bow shock which is the scaling of space time.

Newton's Kissing problem is 12 balls around 1 ball.

The train scales down the centre ball of 12 to make points in space time, because the middle ball has nowhere to escape to.

The other scalar particles can escape if they are fast enough relative to the train speed. Otherwise bunching occurs.

Bunching traps more scalar particles, they cannot escape.

There are more points created by bunching, more scaling down, less resistance from forward motion due to a fragmented space time. Bunching is due to acceleration, once the speed becomes regular the bunching rolls through its own newly created holes in the bow shock areas.

Time as a geyser spring is under pressure. Time dilation occurs due to the restriction of forward flow from a hole. The loss of forward flow also takes pressure off the atoms. Contraction throughout the train is due to loss of internal time pressure. Time shrinks, time is a propagator of atoms.

The electrons as holes have a flow of incoming gravity from the train movement. This spins around the electrons, and expands the holes. Magnetism flows forwards as a push force. G force flows backwards as a push force. Magnetism is another aspect of the scaling of space time down.

Colour shifts are related to scale shifts. A wave is a scalar wave, so a red shift is a scale up, and a blue shift is a scale down. At the front of the train there is a scale down. At the back of the train there is a scale up.  A rainbow is therefore a scalar rainbow. The size to wave relationship is through individual particle pockets which are aligned to become waves. A rainbow looks like a curved packet of Rice Crispies at the quantum scale. The small crispies  shrunk to fall to the bottom of the big Crispies in the bag looks similar to photon pockets.

A person standing on this train experiences similar bow shock forces.
A person standing outside of the train has none of this Data.

So the frames are now frozen.

If the train is accelerating the zero particles change from convex to concave and forming the holes as an area of least resistance ahead of the train. Concave zero particles have an inward flow of time particles, and this flow acts as a bond (The waterfall is concave, you put your hand in it and your hand moves into the waterfall. It looks like a pull force, but is a quantum push force.) The zero particles can't escape under acceleration pressure. Time as a spring is under pressure. Magnetic bubbles are forming from electron spin speeds coming from increased G force. Zero particles are scaling down gravity into magnetism.

Train reaches a constant speed. The convex particles now bump away as less become concave. The convex geyser effect of time has regained momentum.

The thing is to think of the physics acting out Relativity as a Quantum flow. Two people do not share the entire flow of physics. The single frame is flowing towards the next frame.

Do not confuse time with Past, Present, and Future however. That's a big mistake. Time is always present time. The time dilation of a clock is a restriction of time energy. Time energy is a force limited to a small atomic sphere. It cannot escape it's own sphere, it's trapped. There is no arrow, there is a scalar sphere reducing to a snowflake, then into a point. If you test out the time physics on ageing then you get a result from limiting the energy loss of the test subject. That's not a time result in the sense of Past, Present or Future.

Time in most cases does not exist. It is just a force the happens inside a point where it propagates the X /Y /Z forces. A scaler vortex of Russian Dolls. A geyser where the water can fold inside out on itself... a super liquid, condom, geyser flow force.

It is quite complicated. And it is easy to make a mistake in this mixture of physics. So I may have missed something, or got something backwards. It's easy to get something backwards when a particle can take on the opposite physics by folding inside out...

Water scales up into ice, and ice scales down. The physics reverse. Water can be crushed into magnetism as well.

 




Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 09/03/2013 10:20:18
The image above of a photon stream, spin, and scalar change is not totally at the Quantum Scale. I mean that there are smaller physics happening that aren't in the picture, quite important details actually...

Spin Spin...
Newtons Kissing Problem has a hidden 13th ball that can never be fitted. Zero particles perform scalar changes which are like mini waterfalls. The exchange of energy between scalar particles creates scale equalization. So Newton's Kissing Problem in this case uses same sized particles, and the waterfall flow is Time which is smaller, and builds the same sized particles. The 13th ball that can never be fitted allows all particles to spin around the central particle. That spin is......... Spin Spin.

You have a hollow propagator, so it's spin directs the flow invisibly. So what we see has another invisible spin which points energy towards the area of least resistance. In the prism above the spin spin would point towards the largest mass area of the prism, because mass is holes, and holes are electrons. So the spin spin points towards the electrons first, and this is the passageway to the area of least resistance for gravity.

Now the spin spin is a very useful physical device. It directs flow, and it creates bonding. The bonding is created by the fact that the spin spin has open ends, but a more closed middle area. It looks like a Gyroscope inverted to be hollow made from Newton's Kissing Problem. The 6 balls surrounding the middle area are the Gyroscope wheel. The other balls 3 at the top, and 3 at the bottom create the Gyroscope arms. You see the bonding in snowflakes, and the locking can rotate very rarely...

http://i.livescience.com/images/i/000/009/281/i02/ig35_snowflakes_10_02.jpg (http://i.livescience.com/images/i/000/009/281/i02/ig35_snowflakes_10_02.jpg)

Above you see a snowflake which normally bonds in lines has a 90 degree rotation through the bonding. Similar things happen in other areas of nature, like trees, and DNA double helix.

One of the other important states of this bonding process is in creating the wave.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 09/03/2013 10:34:59
What is a wave?

A wave is particle bonding through a spin spin. It looks like a line of hollow Gyroscope end to end which propagate energy through touch bonding. Newton's Kissing Problem applies to all of the touch bonding locations. So the touch bonding is often limited to 60 degree angles, or various cases of Newton's Kissing Problem angles. Touch bonding is created by concave effects with concave flow walls which act 'similar' to a pull force. So all waves are created by particles.

The two slit experiment with an observer helps the bonding to take place. So you get spin spin towards the detector. Without an observer the contact of the zero particles is lesser without any bow shocks from the observer to create the concave holes required for bonding. The system can rock without better bonding, so it is like the gyroscopes slowing down on a table, and rocking in this lesser energy state.

The rocking motion creates the waves in the sea. The bonding is weak, it swings around like little bridges that open to let the boats through. Little fishing floats with magnets on the ends is a real model that you could build. If you centrally balance the floats, and use a weak magnet you can get the little waves to happen, and open up. If you can arrange a 60 degree rotation with a hoop, and make sure that you have opposite poles then you can get an even better model.

So that is how a particle converts into a wave, and a line.

Particle Wave Duality.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 09/03/2013 10:55:56
I first started this theory in about 2003. I look in the science news each day to see what new, undiscovered physics matches my theory. About 100 times I have found a new match. Today this is my match...

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/348865/description/News_in_Brief_Particle_caught_flip-flopping (http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/348865/description/News_in_Brief_Particle_caught_flip-flopping)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 09/03/2013 13:42:13
So Quantum Physics of the spin spin directs the energy flows, and it has limited turning ability because the energy has to propagate through Newton's Kissing Problem, and the propagation creates areas of least resistance at 60 degrees, and perhaps 30 degrees in places.

So why doesn't the Universe look more angular?

Well the rotations are tiny, but of course we do see a lot of angles like trees, and limbs, and snowflakes. However a circle is a large fractal of a hexagon anyway, so you can see that the angles become fainter, and fainter the larger you get. But here's a nice example...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn%27s_hexagon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn%27s_hexagon)

The Universe isn't smooth however. The fractal survives large scales.

Think about this fractal...

Newton's Kissing Problem with a time geyser in the middle, and a hole down through the two triangles at each end (There is a Kissing Problem around a sphere with two triangles in it). Well let's just apply this fractal to a human for a bit of fun...

A hole in the top.. the mouth.
A hole in the bottom... the bottom.
A geyser in the middle... The Urinary Tract
6 energy locations around a hexagon form... two arms, two legs, a head, and a tail.

Now I figure that comparing a human to a particle is too much for most of you. However not only are the shapes in about the right places, but the physics play similar roles...

A hole in the top propagates matter... the mouth.

A hole in the bottom releases the used matter... the bottom.

A hole in the middle releases a geyser as an energy flow... urination.

The 6 points act as propagators of information.. hands touch, feet touch, the head incorporates a complete new fractal of 6 new points from scratch. Two ears, two eyes, a tongue, and a nose. More information centres.

And the whole lot is propagated internally through a skin, which is about right.

So the fractal is in nature quite strongly.

Some Scientists probably dropped out way before this post, you need to be open minded to go with a particle fractal into a human form.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 09/03/2013 16:00:28
This is a fractal where zero is made from a combination of forces. 1 + -1 = 0.

0 doesn't exist.

1 + -1 = 0 does exist.

The human language once more creates an illusion...

"I pulled the weed out of the ground to create a hole!"

The real Quantum version is...

"I pushed a weed out of a whole!"

The hole exists even with the weed in it. 1 + -1 = 0

And the hole which we call 0 for hole

should be changed to the whole. zero is the whole.

1 + -1 = THE WHOLE

and my theory becomes...

The Whole Particle Theory

which itself becomes...

The Theory Of Everything
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/03/2013 13:55:26
Using the above example changes the start point of the Universe. The Whole universe is flat energy. You can pull everything out of the flat energy like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. So the Universe can start off infinite, and then you can move the energy around to make it change shape. In fact the Universe has to start off infinite, and you cannot add one more, because 0 doesn't exist on its own.

The Universe is sculptured from flat energy like building an igloo from the ice. You build the Igloo, and you have a same sized hole. The igloo becomes something observable in a flat plane. The hole become the lesser observable negative. So the Universe doesn't need the Big Bang now, as it already contains all of the material on location. The Universe now needs the little ripples that push up out of the flat energy. Newtons Kissing Problem creates all of the little ripples, because the flat energy states are granular, and stack up, but also scale down. So the flat energy state means that a granular structure is not passing along information, and is therefore scaling down not to touch a local particle.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/03/2013 14:23:00
This scalar structure can create outside bumps, and inner bumps. Using spherical particles you can create an outside bump through an outward flow force. The inner bump, the inner flow force.

There is a neat little trick to the inner flow force that helps energy to escape from an area of high resistance. The sphere can escape if they are away from particle walls. So to scale down moves them away from the inner walls of a sphere. If a particle scales down it must not bump into a particle inside itself, and if a particle scales up it must not bump into a particle outside itself. The final trick is to turn inside out, and put your outer wall inside your inner hole. The hole is able to create force by creating spin like a whirlpool uses a hole to create spin forces. Atoms however contain too many particles to scale up or down very much. Atoms are scalar restricted by inner particles. We see a world where scalar events rarely happen. But Gravity is not scalar restricted, and neither is magnetism...

When you use a bar magnet, and view the iron filings you can see shapes in those iron filings. The shapes represent the scaling pressures of gravity to magnetism. Gravity scales to magnetism to escape high resistance. The scale of magnetism determines if it touches any other particles in the scalar chain. Magnetism touches iron in the scalar chain of inner sphere sizes. So Iron experiences an inner bump force  of a particle that has scaled down to a negative scale. Magnetism is therefore a push force. All forces are push forces. Inner or outer, and it is important to remember that for Quantum Physics. Quantum Physics become spooky because of pull forces not existing. The trick of the mind. Treat physics as Quantum Physics, and the two things are the same.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/03/2013 16:47:48
Proving the Theory of a Fractal Universe...

This whole thing is a fractal that can be created in a computer. So somebody, some day will easily recreate life in a computer.

...and people often say to me prove it with Calculus...

... Mathematics is the scientific method, however mathematics has been wrong since day 1, and Newton was in no position to choose another form of proof, as he did not know of computer models.


Quote
I am changing the rules of science. I am changing the rules of the proof.

So from now on, I am changing the rules of the proof. Proof of the Universe as a fractal is to recreate the fractal in a computer. The person that uses the least rules, and the least logic gates has the new leading model. Any output by the model does not count as part of the logic so long as the computer never uses the output as further input. This means that you can put numbers on the screen as results as often as you want, and if this lengthens the program it does not count as more logic gates. All scientist are allowed to judge the new model to say that it is truly smaller than the previous model. All scientists are allowed to judge that the output matches the actual Universe that we live in. I think that a scoring system is probably best...

Best match for actual Universe score
Smallest number of logic gates score

This is the new proof. The proof is allowed to be rewritten by the majority. But the majority must not have an alternative motive to change the proof back to mathematics. Mathematics is not proof.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/03/2013 12:37:08
Why don't I trust maths?

With mathematics you can make a formula based on a falling object, and it's speed, and acceleration, and then you need to say what is happening. The words that you use like 'pull' can be reversed to 'push' just by changing the formula around to give the same end result. But the physics in the formula can be completely different with the same end result. I think of mathematics as the Mario World formula. You can make a measurement, and recreate the measurement Mario style. I don't want a creativity to be allowed in the formulas that describe the Universe. I want to give the formulas their own creativity.

The fractal formulas.
Take a look again at Conway's 'Game Of Life'..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life)

It is creating fractals and movement, and the fractals have rules to obey. You can take this to the next level. You can change the rules to copy the Universe rules that I have been talking about in this thread. The scalar rules, and energy propagation rules. You can change the grid to a particle stacking system shaped grid. You can add the Quantum Physics as rules.

The result (if you get everything right) will be The Universe. A complete copy, self building, with the same physics. It is easier than you think. The Universe has no intelligence in its creativity, so simple bump forces are all that you need. If you want to make it look realistic you need to take into account the human sensory system. So to add colours you need to identify those colours as whatever physics make sense in the program to become colours. You might find a wave, you might find a spin, or you might find a scalar change. You might find a scalar change that changes a spin, and becomes a wave. You could create an artificial eye in the program to just read the incoming fractals.

I am saying that the fractal includes fractal physics, and is self building. The proof of the system is that the output should match the Universe without human creativity as part of the process. So the computer model is better than mathematics. It is repeating the same creativity as fractal rules, and there is no point where human intervention takes place. Nobody shouts 'pull' and shoots a skeet.

The other important thing  is that there is no Freefall, and no Vacuum, and no Pull forces. Everything is propagated by the grid. If you think of the grid as a scalar energy field then the energy is constantly flowing through the system. Moving an object from A to B has to be complete with physics. That's another thing that Mathematics fails at. Mathematics allows you to use X/Y/Z as Action At A Distance. A fractal shouldn't be allowed to do that. If you move something, you have to propagate it, and therefore you have to always be in physical mode.

I know how to do it, I have been programming since 1980. I think of myself as an original programmer of the modern age. I think in programming language, and can run the programs in my head. I did a poll, and asked if programmers could run programs in their head before they write the programs, the majority was 'Yes'.

So I am writing on these pages the close approximation of the physics of the computer program that I can see in the fractal. They are all Cause, and Effect physics. One type of physics leads to the next. Water crashes against a rock, chips it away, creates sand, the sand stacks according to its shape, the smaller bits drop through the bigger bits through vibrations.. a fractal is forming. The zero particle is like that. But the zero particle creates all of the physics from beginning to end. So the zero particle created the water that started it all off, and the zero particle created the Earth, and the zero particle created the electron, and the zero particle created space, and time.

The zero particle is the grid, and the energy, and the fractal, and the location, and the path of Cause, and effect. It just bumps.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/03/2013 15:51:24
I've talked about about the Standard Model which to me has many Paradox "What's outside the Big Bang?" Which is a Paradox before you even bother talking about the Big Bang.

What about String Theory?

I think that string theory is most likely based on the fractal flows that Zero Particle Theory creates. So Zero Particle Theory is probably Quantum String Theory. In other words I don't use the strings, I build the paths that look like the strings. A string therefore is a necklace of Zero Particles. If the people using string theory were as strict as I am, they wouldn't allow the creation of mechanics to happen as a cause of the effects. The string theorists would have to sit down and create the strings before they have a theory at all.

And the chances are that the strings are Newtons kissing Problem. That's my analysis of String Theory. It requires the fractal that creates the strings. Then the Dimensions are simply paths through the fractal. Which takes away all of the strangeness of dimensions.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/03/2013 19:36:32
What is hot, and what is cold?

Now, once you have the general physics sorted out, they just repeat a lot. So working out what everything is at the quantum scale is just a matter of picking from a selection of those physics.

Hot, is for particles to touch on the inside of your particles so that they scale up a bit. The up-scale now shows why hot air rises. Again the hot air rising is the Rice Crispy effect, and it is the small particles moving through the gaps between the hot particles that moves them up. Hot also smooths out crinkles by the inflation and stretching of an area.

Therefore the opposite is cold. Cold is to touch particles on the outside so that the particles scale down. Particles have a flow towards their nucleus through a hexagonal snowflake structure. This structure is therefore not smooth but jagged. The old person has a flow like this, and the jaggedness creates the wrinkles in their skin.

Now we have the rice crispy effect rising into the air, and a rainbow is a scalar rainbow.

Do you see how I re-used all of the physics? It's a fractal, the physics repeat.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/03/2013 22:49:36
The Rising, and falling of scalar particles is part of the Granular Convection phenomenon...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granular_convection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granular_convection)

So Red shift could also be the same phenomenon in space. And that would be my first choice. I think that the Universe is using scalar particles in space, and that they create pressures around planets, and suns. The pressures scale down into the electrons, and come back out as magnetism. The magnetism is a negative scale which can be larger than a positive scale when it is inverted. -5 is larger than 4 because magnetism fills a larger negative hole. The negative particles then leave the planets, and suns as part of a bow shock, and just to escape the incoming Gravity. The negative particles then head out to create a red shift from the spin of the photons that fill them up. And spin, and scale are colours that create waves that match those colours. That's 3 ways to collect colours using different methods. The prism, and the rainbow then display that scaling by splitting apart the colours through scaler spins.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 13/03/2013 00:49:42
The larger picture of the Dark Energy in the Universe also has the fractal that I am discussing. Like I said earlier the most likely way to have hexagons all facing in one direction is that particle stacking rules are obeying Newton's Kissing Problem. And Newton's Kissing Problem averages out as a hexagon.

This image was stated not to have a fractal in it, but it has a hexagonal fractal in it if I bend the grid over the image...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 14/03/2013 02:47:16
Just in case you can't see the strange number of hits that the hexagonal grid gets, I have exaggerated the colours to make the distribution of matter clash against the grid. Now it sort of looks like the matter is growing on the grid like a climber plant. That's because the grid, and the matter match up so well.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 17/03/2013 13:40:17
Ok so maybe you see the fractal, maybe you don't. I see a 100% fractal, which is a bit strange to me. I imagine some sort of computer glitch, or telescope glitch.

However, before I came across that fractal I was already working on a spacetime fractal using Newton's Kissing Problem. I was working on Snowflakes, and how they match a lot of animals, and fruits. For example if you cut a tomato in half you see a very similar fractal to a snowflake. It's in a lot of fruits.

So I programmed the 2D version of Newton's kissing Problem, which would be 2D because Gravity uses the Y, which only leaves the Hexagon. I had also read about the Bose / Einstein Condensate, and how the atoms merged together. I figured that a merging of Newton's Kissing Problem would create the Snowflake fractal.

So imagine that a snowflake is cause by first the formation of Hexagons from Newton's Kissing Problem with Gravity in the Y.

Second the atoms start to move together using points created by Newton's Kissing Problem.

Third the Inverse Square Law changes the strength at which the atoms approach one another.

So I wrote the computer simulation, and I got a perfect snowflake. (I stop the program before an even better snowflake is created, but I saw enough not to finish the program)

Download, and press the space bar...

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxton/Snowflake.rar (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxton/Snowflake.rar)

And to see how matter propagates to be included with the Luminiferous Aether just hold down the space bar, and move the mouse around.

What you see is the bending of spacetime as a propagator of matter. To be combined with a propagator of light, and therefore to eliminate the failing in the Michelson and Morley experiment.

And the bending is the In/Out flow of time. In for backwards in time, and snowflakes. Out for spherical time, and Suns.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 17/03/2013 16:37:22
One of the great things about my theory is how simple it makes the Universe. It turns complexity into a repeating fractal. Take for example my snowflake code above. It just takes a bunch of points, and moves them towards each other. If however you have ever looked into the maths of snowflake code, the mathematicians do not think like an artist...

This link makes everything sound very complicated...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-do-snowflakes-form (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-do-snowflakes-form)

Behind all of complexity is a simple idea just hidden from view. All the guys above had to do was move points together, but they couldn't see it. The periodic table is the same. It's a set of repeating rules, and throughout the atom is a set of repeating 6 particles.

The theory does away with mathematics, and changes the approach to recreating what you see in a loop of repeating rules. A Fractal.

I see all of these complicated rules as mistakes. Calculus is no match for a Universe with no mind. A fractal is a good match for a Universe with no mind. It is getting the match between the way that you work things out, and the actual Universe right.

I think like the Universe. I have taught myself how to think like the Universe. I change pull into push, I change time into geyser, I change waves into particles, I change maths into a fractal, I change Galaxy into Universe, I change inflation into scale, I change Past, present, and future into just present...

You walk from A to B.. you leave in the present, you arrive in the present. Time is reset.

Speed is the amount of separation between points.

Acceleration is the changing distance between the separation between points, and the dilation of a Geyser between those points.

Mass is created by holes full of Gravity...

Gravity is scalar particles that I call Zero Particles.

Gravity scales down negatively to Magnetism with spin forces.

A negative scale can be bigger than a positive scale, because the holes of the negative scale fill up with other particles.

Spacetime is not a Vacuum it is a grain structure of scalar particles.

Red shift does not necessarily represent time. It represents scale up. Scale up just means that points lead to scale down, and all of spacetime is a fractal of points. The further away you look out from a point the more the particles scale up...

The holes scale down space time, because spacetime spins around the holes like a whirlpool, and a whirlpool has a funnel. The spacetime funnel is a scale down funnel, a bit different to a water funnel. The galaxy has a bar across it, that is a scalar funnel. Level with mass, but scaled down to travel through mass.

Thinking like the Universe is to make yourself think in Quantum Physics even when you are looking at large objects like a Galaxy. Change a Galaxy into Quantum Physics and you will know everything.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 18/03/2013 12:58:05
Why scalar funnels?

The idea of the scalar particles was to create movement from a push from a standing start like inflation. The idea was that scale has no real logic to it in an empty Universe, because scale is relative. The first particles having a scale would be a decision made before the particles existed. The way I imagine the Universe is that no decisions are made pre-existence. So no scale exists for particles. Particles end up with a scale because of infinite stacking rules. Atoms are scale locked because of the Russian Doll effect, they can't scale down, or up. And C is the scalar rebound of hitting negative scale which reverses to scale up when filled with other particles.

Scale allows energy to escape from being trapped in the middle of a whirlpool of scalar particles. We see whirlpool type structures in space.. Galaxies, and the other thing we see are rings.

Saturn has rings.

If you listen to the radio noise translated into sound for Saturn it sounds a lot like a toilet flushing. The rings look like a flattened rebound action. The two ends of Saturn exhibit whirlpool effects, and holes. So you can deduce two inward flowing funnels (like two toilets end to end) The collision in the middle turns out to be a scalar collision. The particles are scaled negatively into a flat disc. The disc escapes the pressure through negative scale coming out of Saturn's middle. So now you have these invisible negative particles. The negative particles act as the area of least resistance, and so act as holes. Bigger particles gather in the holes to form rings. Now you have the positive mass in the negative mass.

Every so often through the rings the funnel winds around to create streaks similar to the Galaxy Bars.

The Galaxy Bars are the funnel swinging around through a similar structure as Saturn's rings.

Outside Pressure on scalar particles scales them down.

Particles trapped in the middle escape when they reach a negative scale.

Negative scale fills with positive mass.

So Negative particles can appear bigger than positive particles.

Negative flow requires propagation from negative particles, and so act like a funnel, because the negative particles are pushing against the negative particles.

But because the funnel is also scaling down its particles it is escaping sideways. Unlike water which has very little scalar ability so escapes the pressure downwards, and across.

This becomes a series of scribbles like Newton's famous scribbles. The ideas are all related to each other. A set of repeating rules. But the bar across the Galaxy, and Saturn's rings can also be created by the positive particles captured in the negative rings. And so in this case it would be hard to establish if the bar is being created from the middle to the outside (negative to positive) or from the outside to the middle (positive to negative).

The moons around Saturn create bars as they move towards Saturn, and Gravity is positive, so that flow force is positive.

Here we have an example of how you can get two similar physics from two different causes. But at the end of the day, you have to create the rings, and to lock the rings in place you need an area of least resistance. The area of least resistance is in the middle of Saturn.

To me, using negative particles around Saturn has a high probability.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 20/03/2013 13:44:23
I was thinking about this image...

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=47070.0;attach=17582;image (http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=47070.0;attach=17582;image)

It includes a very clear fractal. When you try to map a flat image to a sphere it never fits. The best way to do that is to use a Geosphere poly primitive. Look at the one on the far right...

http://www.creativecrash.com/maya/downloads/scripts-plugins/modeling/poly-tools/c/geospheres--2 (http://www.creativecrash.com/maya/downloads/scripts-plugins/modeling/poly-tools/c/geospheres--2)

So the telescope is up there, and it most likely rotates on the spot. It maybe makes a panoramic image with a curve. Then somebody maps it, and the hexagons maybe appear.

So far that makes sense. But what if it is our human eyes which require the flattening out to be created for our own purposes? So that the hexagon is the reality, and we have eyes built to remove the hexagon fractal?

For example.. map some woods in the same way that the telescope was used to map the matter in the Universe...

http://ivorphotography.co.uk/2013/01/19/more-ice/iced-branches-olympus-e-5-iso-200-35mm-f63-160/ (http://ivorphotography.co.uk/2013/01/19/more-ice/iced-branches-olympus-e-5-iso-200-35mm-f63-160/)

Do we get the fractal back again?

Look at Neanderthal man...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/neanderthals-large-eyes-led-to-their-downfall-says-study-8532539.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/neanderthals-large-eyes-led-to-their-downfall-says-study-8532539.html)

Bigger eyes. So maybe we are removing a fractal from nature because our eyes aren't made to see it. Our lenses are the wrong curvature, and our mapping of reality is slightly out.

If we just play along with that idea like a toy, then we can suggest that bees, and birds, and butterflies see the fractal. Then we can suggest that these creatures can navigate using the fractal. The bee does a dance.. "6 hexagons, 8 hexagons, 20 hexagons" It does the dance to suggest how many hexagons to pass through to get to a destination.

So if the fractal is really there, then it is very large out there in space. It probably scales down in our Galaxy. Most people imagine particles to start off small, and get bigger. What if particles start off huge, and get smaller? Then the fractal gets smoother in our Galaxy. Trees become less fractal.

The image of the trees perhaps cannot be mapped with the same glitch as the image of the Universe.

But these are things to think about. If the glitch is reality, then the Universe is a fractal. If the glitch is a mapping anomaly then it should work on an arrangement of trees. But either way, as humans the anomaly could be the reality, because humans depend on false information. Colours, heat... etc. ... all false, so the fractal could be real even if we do find the glitch.

And whilst you are thinking about that.. take a quick look at my video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3fTYS99ZeE&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3fTYS99ZeE&feature=plcp)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 21/03/2013 14:25:10
Fractals, and scales...

Let's go with the Universe being a fractal. Let's treat it as a fact. I will therefore skip words like presume, perhaps, what if? I do live my life using my own physics, and I don't use the Standard Model, so since 2003 I am used to treating my theory as a fact.

So the simple sum.. 1 + -1 = 0 suggests that you can create a Universe from nothing, because nothing is a literary misunderstanding in the English language. Nothing is 'The Whole Of Two Parts' and the two parts come from Newton's 3rd Law 'Every Action Has An Equal, and Opposite Reaction'

When used together the Universe is created from two equal parts that look like space.

But to complete Newton's 3rd Law you cannot have any unequal parts hidden in nothing. Nothing has to be exactly equal in every point. To hide information completely you have to rule out certain shapes. Let's just go to the shape that works best. Newton's kissing Problem.

Firstly the sphere is equal in every direction from a central point, that's what makes it a sphere in the first place. But it needs a position in space. Once you give a sphere a position it breaks equality unless that space is an exact opposite hole. That's what you want for a zero particle. A sphere on its own has no bonding force. It has a bunching set of rules, and the Bunching rules create fractals. To get a bonding force the sphere uses the hole.

The assemble of the fractal obeys Newton's 3rd law in that space hides itself in equality. The zero particles follow a stacking system that also obeys equality, and then the stacking system scales down so that no connections pass any messages along the chain which would break equality. The photon breaks equality as a message along the chain. Humans evolved to examine changes in equality.

Now we get to a Universe which is infinite, and infinity is actually a structure that obeys rules of equality, and hides itself away. But the rules didn't develop before the creation took place. The rules were part of the fractal that happened naturally. This means that the scale of all things is part of the natural fractal. Particles can be huge, and also negatively small. But entropy tries to hide all inequalities, so a large particle next to a small particle breaks equality. The large particle can be touched on every side by billions of tiny particles. This sharing of energy reduces the large particle down to a small particle. All particles in an area have little change, but a wave of change permeates through the Universe. However the Atom is a particle touched on the inside, and the outside. The change in scale is in both directions resulting in the atom being scaler limited... slowed down.

The scale of particles is due to entropy, but entropy is local. C is a propagation through a distance between particles, but the distance changes through entropy. Red shift is a scale shift, and pressure around particles scales them down. Everything is obeying Newton's 3rd law, but there is a delay which is a wave. It seems that everything must be scaling down around us as the wave tries to create a zero state. The wave will never create a complete zero state however because the fractal is never going to be perfect. Sphere can never surround sphere in a perfect zero state. There is an inequality that spins around a single sphere as other sphere try to occupy all spaces. This inequality creates chaos, and spin energy, and the spin energy is the butterfly effect with inequality as the cause. The 13th ball of Newton's Kissing Problem, the ball that never fits. That creates nature from the fractal.

So the scales of the sphere are a wave of entropy that large particles can be touched by many small particles, and so large particles can be said to be chipped away by many particles until all particles reach a state of equality... which will never happen (the 13th ball).

And C propagates over different distances...

Is C then a constant?

If you live in an area of larger particles, your fractal is larger. A human is larger, and so to that human scale everything is still equal to our scale. C is still C in that area, but from our area it is faster.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 21/03/2013 18:05:09
Should Time be renamed?

I think that time should be renamed, because the current use of the word 'TIME' is very inaccurate. There is no Past, Present, and Future. There is a series of physical events due to cause, and Effect, and because we are always local to events that affect our physical interactions we are always in the Present.

Walk from A to B.. start in the present, end in the present, start local, end local.. change of physics very likely.

I actually struggle to understand how humans are using time. It's like voodoo to me... humans use voodoo, and magic, and I feel like I am stuck 2000 years in the past. Humans believe in time travel, and a 4th dimension, and its voodoo, and child-like. Plus Bell's Inequality Theory, that everything that can happen does happen.

All mistakes because of the word 'time' being inaccurate.

It should be renamed to...

Point Scalar Energy... or Poise Time.. like a spring coiled and ready to act... per point.

It has a physical location. When you see X/Y/Z axes marker....

http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/311500/why-do-we-draw-the-xyz-coordinate-system-like-this (http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/311500/why-do-we-draw-the-xyz-coordinate-system-like-this)

It is the point where they all touch in the middle, and should be considered as the stationary location, scalar energy, and from that point X/Y/Z can go outwards using that scalar energy as a propagator.

POISE TIME



 
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 22/03/2013 09:41:54
Scribblings Of Location...

Above I said that Time is in the middle of XYZ, where the points meet up. That was an example, but XYZ is much more complicated when you try to program it into a computer. It's like braille, you have to feel your way around the Universe. Each point has its own scalar energy, and each time that energy scales it renews the XYZ properties. Plus the Energy creates spin, and XYZ spins around per point. This is a nightmare. I said that I can think through my program, and run it in my head, but location requires you to think of several things at the same time, and so I can't totally get a clear image of location.

Here's an example... In this video I am tracking the rotation of energy propagation. Energy can only propagate through interaction, and interaction in a fractal is fractalized of course, so the transmission of location rotates, scales, and moves...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd8RAQLTb7Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd8RAQLTb7Q)

I try to keep the numbers steady by having a corresponding link to each location. 12 points that can pass a message, each can scale, spin, and move.. a nightmare to track.

The Universe has the advantage of infinity, and trying to replicate infinity in a computer creates complications like the above. The braille type contact of energy is created by the scalar feedback of POISE TIME. The overlap of scalar information that converts distance, and speed to C. It's hard to replicate... well I'm not a mathematician, it's hard for me to replicate.

It's holding up my program.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 22/03/2013 12:02:13
So to clear up what I said above.. I use 13 dimensions instead of XYZ, and they move around, and are not always the same size. Because the Universe is constantly changing, a position has locality, but the location moves, but action is always propagated locally. If you build the fractal, and try to search for a particular particle bumping into another particle, you have to go through a link. The Universe just multi tasks poise-time, location, and scale. XYZ is not smooth, it is lumpy.

Dimensions in my theory are always local, I don't use any overlapping dimensions. Physics at my Quantum Scale obey the rules of regular sized physics, but scaling is much easier (inflation and deflation).

Deflation...

Deflation has an advantage over inflation. It is easier for particles to bump on the outside, than it is for them to bump on the inside. So in my theory deflation is happening rather than inflation. The red shift however is the same because I deflate to infinite points, which is the opposite than inflate to infinite membranes. I have switched the direction, and part of that is to do with removing pull forces. It makes a lot of sense though, because if you use a singularity as an example, then the Galaxy is doing what I am saying...

The galaxy perhaps has a singularity with a flow force towards it, that scales down matter.

Which agrees with my theory as a fractal of my physics. I doesn't agree with Einstein...

"A singularity has flow away from it, and inflates to move matter apart."

I don't see why matter would move away from a singularity, and I don't see how matter would have a starting location in a void, and I don't see how a void would begin, and how does time relocate through the matter? I see many problems, and quite a few paradox.

I have a CMB because I have propagated light through a grainy fractal. I have red shift because I scale down to a point, and I have no Aether wind because I propagate matter with light, and Gravity all in synchronization to local poise-time.

There is inflation as well, but infinite particles squeezing together is the hardest direction to go. Room only for one small child.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 22/03/2013 23:06:03
Gravity

Gravity is a positive scalar particle moving towards atomic holes as the area of least resistance. The atomic holes become quantum whirlpools, and generate energy. Therefore the atomic holes are electrons. To escape the whirlpool the gravity scales down to become electro magnetism, and becomes the next hole in the cycle. The holes then propagate out of the atomic structure to become a magnetic field.

This is a sort of reverse of Newton's Gravity. The mass is now a hole, and the pull force is now a flow force. The Inverse Square Law is a flow into holes through a grain structure from space. The mass is therefore reversed, and the mass is now in space, and is a scalar mass.

So the negative looks like this image...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 24/03/2013 13:50:14
In the previous image you can see that Gravity in my image has a higher mass than the Earth, and the Apple. The Earth has the lowest mass, and is therefore the area of least resistance. But Gravity mass is hidden by deflation which means that the particles are not connected, they scale away from each other.

Mass...

Mass is calculated by curvature. The total curvature of all surfaces combined. Gravity may be a single particle, and it resides in a hole, the total of that curvature is zero. However atoms contain many particles like an onion. The total of all of those curvatures can become a high number, but they also eventually scale down negatively, and become concave curvatures. So you add all of the convex to the concave to get the total mass. The electrons have an attractive force so they are holes, and so electrons are concave. Which means that the total mass with the electrons becomes negative mass. So Gravity at zero is higher than the Earth with a negative mass total. And the apple moves towards the Earth in a flow carried by Gravity towards the Earth.

Mass is calculated by all convex surfaces added to all concave surfaces that are connected. But you can just as easily use scale. If we look at the Universe which has a huge surface, we can say that the curved surfaces eventually straighten out... but that is a fallacy. Curved surfaces are relative to scale. If we scale ourselves up to match the Universe, the curves are relatively scaled to us, and now they are very curved again. So if you ignore the curvature, and use scale instead you get the mathematical match that you need for a fractal Universe. Now bumping is a total calculation of connected scaled sphere colliding, and some of the sphere are negatively scaled. Some sphere aren't bonded, but are touching.. that counts as a connection. Scalar particles don't always connect, the Universe should be thought of as a circuit board, and the sphere that touch pass the message of mass as scale.

So what is the Higgs Boson then?

I don't know what it is... Particles as fractals are identified by their fractal stage interacting with another local fractal stage. Because science never uses negative mass, it is very hard to even say what mass the Higgs Boson really is. The electron is Negative mass, but science gives it a positive mass, because it contains Gravity scaling into magnetism. Which bends particles towards it. If I were to guess at the Higgs Boson, I would probably guess that it is Gravity. Then it would be this false calculation of mass that science uses.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 24/03/2013 15:15:06
Curvature, and Scale to Bump Forces

When you scale up two particles at the same time their bump forces scale up with them. To a human, the lines of space seem to become straight, but that is relative to human scale. The curvature represents the bump forces so long as the curvature is convex. If the curvature is concave it represents flow forces of attraction. You are bumped at an angle where the curvature encases your position. Scale can switch the bend from convex to concave, and back again even though the curvature is not changing in reality, it is relative to you. This means that a photon passes through a lens, and water runs off it. The curvature is reversing for the photon... just about. The photon is at the limit of a straight line, and so it just about bends a curve from convex to concave with the help sometimes of an observer.

Two Universe collide and there is a very distinct curve which to us is a straight line.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 26/03/2013 03:20:41
Who am I to talk about a Theory Of Everything?

I like to watch videos of Richard Feynman, he is my favourite Genius type theoretical physicist. He Understood the Universe to the level that mathematics allowed him to understand the Universe. But Feynman admitted often that the mathematical proofs would all be replaced. To me, if a proof is replaced, then it was never a proof in the first place, and so a mathematical proof that will be replaced is a paradox. Therefore there are no mathematical proofs, and the mathematical proof is flawed in that it will be replaced some day.

Most people who visit science forums believe somewhat in mathematical proofs, and they believe in Genius like Newton, Einstein, and Feynman. But there is a turning point, that if you are a creative thinker, and you take all of the information available, and technology allows you to put that information into a computer... you can program the Universe to build itself in the computer. And that is what I want to do. But my PC is not up to the task. So what I do instead is test parts of it out individually. Like my snowflake generator.

The thing about my snowflake generator is that I didn't actually need to program it. I already could run the code in my head before I typed it into the computer. I just had a feeling that I would get a snowflake from some simple rules. Of course I was very excited to see that I was right, but my Theory Of Everything uses a similar set of rules. My theory is a fractal theory, and I am good at running fractals in my head. The fractals have physical qualities, like the snowflake code is based on the Bose / Einstein Condensate. I match the physics to the fractals. My PC cannot run the entire thing, but I can run most of it in my head the same that I knew that my Snowflake code would most likely produce a snowflake.

When I think I know something, and I can program it, the program has always worked. Now this is the important part of my computer program.. it self builds. The loop is small, but the loop builds the entire Universe.. everything.. including life... because I am attempting to copy the Universe as a set of rules, and not as a set of physics, and shapes. The rules are scale, and bunching patterns. Take Garrett Lisi's Theory Of Everything...

http://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html (http://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html)

He eventually talks of a Hexagon, and he spins it around in something like 8 dimensions. He has an image with rules. Then there is String Theory...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B0Kaf7xYMk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B0Kaf7xYMk)

Again here are a set of structures, each structure creates its own physics, but the structures have to be built to match the physics, and nobody so far has solved the map that builds all of the first structures.

The answer to all of this is a fractal that creates strings, and something similar to the Garrett Lisi model that turns into physics. My model creates Knots of energy. Each knot can be open ended, or closed. The knots are Newton's Kissing Problem acting as a propagator. The propagator happens because the Universe is Infinite, and particles have to stack in a certain way.

But back to me...

Who am I to talk about a Theory Of Everything?

A person has to have a theory of themselves to test against their reality. I have always been top of any class, my IQ is about 130.. not great I suppose. But I seem to have a creative IQ which has recently been discovered by science, and my creative IQ I think is extremely high...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rbynt (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rbynt)

This is where I fit in. I decided in 1980 that I would learn to program, and I used the Basic coding language. Then I learned C. In those days you had to learn from books, there were no colleges teaching computing. I found however that in C I had lost the ability to think of the Code in my head. Basics is like English, and it has a lot of English words, and I can use those words to think of a computer simulation without actually writing it. I just see the images creating themselves as if I pressed RUN. What I see is that 1 + -1 = 0 has a physical attribute that creates the Universe. But to Code it you have to code its rules which are hidden in the simple sum.

But back to me...

Am I deluded?...

It's unlikely that I am deluded, because my life has been a series of achievements that most people thought were impossible, or unlikely to happen. Like I worked on some top computer games, I beat a professional pool player, I passed a MENSA test.. little things really. But those little things all added up together say.. "This guy does what he says he is going to do."

I do what I say I am going to do, I don't talk for the fun of it. But here we have a problem. I want to program this fractal, but my PC can only handle 60,000 particles. It will be hard for me to see any form of proof in 60,000 particles. It will be hard for me to even see if the correct fractal is forming. I run it in my head with infinite particles, it's all a super liquid. I can't get that smooth with 60,000 particles.

So I don't feel very obligated to program something that I can't run properly. I want to see it run properly, and that is inspirational to me.. to see it. But to not see it, and to program 60,000 particles is not inspiring.

Anyway, the problem is with location. The location programming requires multi tasking per particle.. or.. a lot of memory.

Faking Infinity...

It reminds me of Facebook. Each particle needs to store all of its neighbours positions like friends on Facebook. Each friend leads to 12 more friends, and that repeats. For 60,000 particles you have this repeating data 720,000 storage locations. This routine makes a location follow a particle around so that it knows its new neighbours, because X/Y/Z doesn't work in my theory. You can update the position of friends that are next to a particle when you need to create a wave. It's faster than trying to find out which particles are next to each other after a bump occurs.. it's pre-calculated. A friend finds 12 friends, finds 12 friends, finds 12 friends...

What then is the Universe doing?

The Universe is folding inwards to do the same thing, and that is Poise-Time. Trying to add that to a PC would be crazy. It's just too fine to program, so that part is faked.

The true fractal of the Universe is partly faked to fit in a computer, but I do know how all of it works. It would be amazing to program the entire thing.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 26/03/2013 13:34:46
A Proof That Creates Mathematics

Calculus is used to define physics. So in a way the maths creates the shapes that we see. I am attempting to do the reverse. My method is for the shapes of sphere, and Newton's Kissing Problem to create the mathematics. It's the total reverse of Calculus. My program changes the scale of the sphere, spins the sphere, and moves the sphere. The sphere create the locations for virtual particles, and virtual energy. The locations move, the virtual particles move as well, and the calculus is missing. To get the Calculus you would have to take measurements from the moving objects. That is what I call a proof. That the measurements happen from physics, and not the other way around. The physics are not even programmed, but have no choice but to occur from rules...

That Energy moves towards the area of least resistance.
That trapped energy scales out of the way.
That particles have curves that are used for calculations.
That touching particles count as accumulative forces.
That a sphere has an inside, and an outside surface.
That the surfaces can reverse from negative scale.
More rules...

These rules are the Calculus in reverse. These rules create calculus from physics. The program creates its own proof. And this is an attempt to copy the Universe using the Universe's own language. Until you get a game of life....

http://www.bitstorm.org/gameoflife/ (http://www.bitstorm.org/gameoflife/)

... but using the Universe as its rule book.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 26/03/2013 14:34:35
Sometimes I find articles that have some finds similar to my theory. Today I am posting these....

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23317-bigger-isnt-always-better-for-becoming-multicellular.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23317-bigger-isnt-always-better-for-becoming-multicellular.html)

The above is part of my fractal theory. That the snowflake is a dominant structure in the Universe, and creates the natural shapes of Earthly Creatures. The inward flow of particles is the Snowflake which changes to an outward flow which is the sphere. The above article includes both flow forces in nature.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130325111154.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130325111154.htm)

The speed of light might not be a constant has some relevance to my theory. I have particle pairs that create spacetime grain, I just call them 1 and -1, and both together make the zero particle. Their scale determines the energy propagation of C. Which is similar to what is suggested above. However, I include pressure, and I suggest that the Galaxy is like a packet of Rice Crispies, and the pressure is negatively towards the centre. So particles towards the centre scale negatively which can look bigger, which is the bump in the middle. I add Dark Matter as a Negative scale, and I get an image like this...

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 26/03/2013 17:11:22
In my theory I use black holes as a hole, an area of least resistance. It works...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23318-gravityless-toy-black-hole-solves-cosmic-puzzles.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23318-gravityless-toy-black-hole-solves-cosmic-puzzles.html)

...but I change Gravity into Negative mass, which is a hole. So rather than not use Gravity, I remove it at C.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 26/03/2013 17:24:40
The switch that I use to remove Gravity is like folding a tennis Ball inside out, I fold gravity inside out. In fact any particle can be folded inside out. Take liquid Helium...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z6UJbwxBZI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z6UJbwxBZI)

In my theory that would be an example of helium folding inside out.  It's bump forces vanish (it doesn't bubble), and it propagates in reverse.

Anti-matter is to fold a particle inside out. Science sometimes mislabels anti-matter for spin direction, and other properties. Science has physics that explode, I have physics which reverse, and cancel out. But a hole reversing into a particle will create bump forces which could be explosive as the energy has to escape somewhere.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 28/03/2013 15:40:37
Finally figured it out.... Location is scale

You have 4 sphere (particles as sphere)...

2 the same size (or just 1 planck unit difference)
1 smaller
1 larger

Now you take these positions from points. So they inflate from holes at points. They never have to cross paths so the membrane doesn't mean anything. Only the interaction per point means anything. So basically you have balloons inflating inside balloons.

The smaller one doesn't collide, it just fits inside.
The larger one doesn't collide it just fits outside.

The two equal ones share the exact same space, so collide.

So now you have locality as a physical set of rules that you can program into a computer, and the use of X/Y/Z which doesn't have any physics, now has scalar physics.

The Black Hole in the middle of the Galaxy scales the physics outwards in a spiral, so you basically have the physics happening there, and a rainbow using X/Y/Z instead of R/G/B now has a relationship to scale.

You reach out with your hand, your hand is red shifted, so you can connect with the particles at that position.

You can see your scalar shift happening here...
http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/amazing-tunnel-illusion/ (http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/amazing-tunnel-illusion/)

It's all very nice. Now I am free using X/Y/Z as scalar physics with a solution. I don't like using anything with no solution.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 28/03/2013 15:44:22
So entangled particles at a distance using scalar X/Y/Z...

The particles have been scalar frozen in time, so now they are located as matching scalar X/Y/Z. Which is a local position. In other words they have stopped red shifting, but it is unlikely that you can check them without red shifting them.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 28/03/2013 16:12:51
The little Bee Dance...

I like to include all sections of science in my theory, including biology, so to add scalar X/Y/Z to the bee dance is a bit of fun really. I think that there are other ways to make this work but anyway...

The optical illusion of the tunnel effect could well be a scalar illusion. Because X/Y/Z is that red shift is a scalar shift, and particles that are the same scale collide.

Bees dance and vibrate against a scalar background. Scalar particles scale by being bumped. Scalar bumps create redshift and a tunnel illusion... so....

The bees could be visually seeing a tunnel illusion to a location. Which is much simpler than an X/Y/Z coordinate system.

Quote
Now.. you could create a telescope with a super fast vibration, and maybe actually see the tunnel effect in real life.

So there you go, an actual experiment. (Maybe you have to include a slight prism in the optics as well?)

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 29/03/2013 14:14:18
Quantum Mechanics....

I like Richard Feynman, and I have just started watching the YouTube videos of him. I like his enthusiasm, and he says some things the same as I do, and asks the same questions. I still think however that his limitations were to do with using mathematics. Here he talks about Quantum Physics....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeBkMzSLA8w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeBkMzSLA8w)

Sometimes, I find that his thoughts are what I call pre-computer thoughts. The mathematics wasn't so visual as typing a program into a computer, and watching the physics for real.

This video includes water tension, and jiggling atoms...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pYRn5j7oI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pYRn5j7oI)

And again I find that his ideas have strayed slightly away from real images. So maths isn't working to portray images all that well.

At the end of the Quantum Physics talk RF wants a real image of an atom, and he wants to know about the real image of an electron. He says that mother nature will always make us ask new questions, and simple physics will never be revealed.

Quantum Physics is very simple. We tend to surpass it with our ingenious thinking, and evolution. You have to become the person that doesn't agree with X/Y/Z location as a Relative position. Don't take anything for granted, and don't be smarter than the Universe.

The atom, and the electron are quite huge compared to time. Now most people don't imagine time as a set of physics, but it is just a scalar liquid. So physics are simpler that RF thought. The reason that electrons behave in a strange way is because they are holes...

The mysterious Electron...
 A hole in a flow of gravity is dependant on the flow to reveal the hole's nature. So imagine the electron as a hole, and Gravity as a scalar liquid. This scalar liquid turns into magnetism, and magnetism flows out of the hole, and so the hole is empty for C, and then fills with Gravity. The hole also has a whirlpool around it, and any overflow fills the nucleus. The nucleus scales down into time, and time is a storage of energy which can flow back out again to make a sun if it is compressed enough.

So I have created an image there of the atom. How many patterns can you make from these physics? Well the field is a field of points which are the outflow of magnetism scaling down to become areas of least resistance. The wave is a scalar wave, and works like a packet of Rice Crispies with small bits passing big bits. The nucleus is usually full with an outflow which you can call Poise-Time. The electron orbits are just whirlpool holes, and observation of these holes fills them up, so moves them to some other area of least resistance. And the formation of the holes, and their patterns obeys Newton's Kissing Problem.

You can go smaller than that.. there are Quantum, Quantum Physics...

Which is where I started off many years ago. I worked forwards from Quantum, Quantum physics to the atom. It made it easier. The really small physics are just points, and bubbles.
And that is where 1 + -1 = 0 begins. And that is where location, and direction, and speed, and acceleration are stored as scalar physics, inflation, and deflation.

I wish I could talk to RF, I think I have gone way smaller than the atom, and I think that it is thanks to computer programming. I wish I had the computer powerful enough to run it all at the scale of a Galaxy.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 29/03/2013 20:51:53
Nature have posted a new video of atoms...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/29/nanoparticle-3d-imaging-atom-dislocation-video_n_2972249.html?utm_hp_ref=science (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/29/nanoparticle-3d-imaging-atom-dislocation-video_n_2972249.html?utm_hp_ref=science)

Could there be the same fractal in there that I am using?...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 30/03/2013 20:20:28
The Gravity Tearing of Spacetime

This is a very important post for those that can follow it. It describes the creation of everything.

Spacetime is made from a scalar grain structure. All you have to do is imagine a lot of bubbles that obey particle stacking rules... they do not stick together in other words, they scale down slightly so as not to touch. Without touching they pass no message, so the planck telescope cannot see them. It tries to get an image of spacetime, but they scale out of the way. This scalar property is the main part of the creation of all things.

Get each part in your head. So make sure that the above is consciously available to you.

OK so the next stage is that the scaling away from each other is like Braille, so they scale up to touch, and then scale down to avoid. The scaling is circular like 360 degrees back to zero, which means that the energy never has to stop moving. But it is also negative...

6,5,4,3,2,1,-1,-2,-3,-4,-5,-6

Where the negative numbers are actually areas of least resistance for the positive numbers, so act as holes.

So 360 degrees works better as 180 to -180 degrees wraparound scaling.
Most of the time however the scaling is minimal.

The important image that you need in your head is to create the Galactic Black Hole from this scenario. So trap some scalar particles in an energy crossover from scaling patterns. You have all of these scalar particles doing a sort of Braille dance, and eventually some have to scale negatively, and the positive ones are bumped by scalar forces into this hole as though balloons were inflating next to them.

You should have an image of a forming Black Hole.

Make sure that you have some sort of Black Hole forming in your mind.

The next stage...

This part is the spacetime tearing to create the spiral arms.

With a hole appearing there is an inflation force towards the hole. There is a curve to this inflation direction. I can explain it in water tension. So now switch your mind temporarily to water tension, and a bulge.

Gravity on water in the Y is bent to a sphere, because a drop of water also has force in the X, and Z. It's pressure from Gravity as a push force. This is complicated, because there is air to add to the gravity pressure. All that the air is doing is adding weight to the gravity. The Earth was formed this way, and the moon without air, just a lighter force.

Get the image in your head of the water bending from forces in all directions. When you put the Earth below the Water there is a direction removed from any sort of option. Water can now tear diagonally through the structure, and pressure from above and to the sides firms up these directions. The fish evolve, and the shapes of these diagonally weak areas are part of the fishes shape. The fins diagonally through the weak areas, and the fish are flat in directions of pressure. The Octopus is the conical sort of shape, and the suckers show diagonal spherical forces. It's all there.

But now back to the Galaxy. You have a Black Hole forming, and it is the area of least resistance. The tearing that happens to water to create fish is much easier using scalar particles. They will scale themselves out of the way very quickly. The pressure is space itself towards the hole. You get these diagonal sliding scalar particles. You should have an image a bit like a snowflake forming. The particles sliding towards the Black Holes bump together in a grain fractal structure.

Get the image right. the particles are sliding towards the black Hole, the curves are like the curves created by water tension, the bumping is scaling down and tearing in lines, and the lines are twisting towards the hole like a screw from the rotation into the black hole.

The next stage of images...

Where the lines bump create weaknesses. More scaling, more holes. These new holes have new particles moving into them. This is sort of like the octopus tentacles with the suckers. The diagonal lines spin more in space so create whole sphere for suckers. The sphere filling with particles are suns. They are suns where the scalar bumping is creating light, and energy. Filling holes, scaling, bumping, and flashing.

Ok you got that?

If you have this image correct, think of this....

Diagonal tear towards Earth with bright filling light....

Lightening!

I hope some of you understood that. It's the creation of a Galaxy.. almost. The planets are the dust left behind near to the tearing.

That should give you a complete picture. But here's an image to help...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 30/03/2013 21:10:19
That image I just gave you is fantastic if you can visualize it in your head. What you can now do is see a tree in reverse...

http://theoutdoorsnation.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/view-of-a-pollarded-hornbeam-tree-with-a-split-trunk-hatfield-forest-c2a9ntpl-paul-wakefield.jpg (http://theoutdoorsnation.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/view-of-a-pollarded-hornbeam-tree-with-a-split-trunk-hatfield-forest-c2a9ntpl-paul-wakefield.jpg)

Look at the tree, remember the cracks in spacetime, the areas of least resistance are the trunk. The leaves are the scalar particles feeding towards the trunk, and being squashed flat trying to get into this area of least resistance. So the areas of least resistance are in reverse, and the tree grows into these areas. So you wonder how they begin with a seed? The seed must be the reason for spacetime to tear at that point, and the reason for a tear is a hole. So a seed must contain some singularities. A bit strange in the standard Model, but very common in zero particle theory. Electrons are holes, but seeds must contain bigger holes than electrons that warp spacetime enough to crack it.

You may think that this sounds like a strange theory. However it is the standard model that is strange compared to the Universe. The Universe is the way that things happen, anything else is strange.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 30/03/2013 21:50:25
Oh yeah, I've figured out how the seed tears spacetime to make a crack to grow in. The roots grow like a hand tearing through paper in reverse if you can imagine that. They create spin spin towards a big singularity. The big singularity is at the centre of the Earth. Thus spacetime gets a tear, and the tree can grow in the tear. So lightening hits a tree, because the tree has already started a crack for it to go into.

Ace.. I can't believe how much I am solving today.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 30/03/2013 21:58:54
So Earth has life because Earth has a singularity, and the spinning magnetic field. It allows energy to split spacetime, and remove the gravity force for enough time to grow into. The other way is for water to shear to make gaps to grow into.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 12:06:43
A sun is a scaled up Octopus Sucker

That might be the strangest thing you have ever heard, but it's stranger than that...

The Sun is a scaled down octopus sucker.

Scale is often seen as a negative scale. The sun has more energy because it is the area of least resistance for gravity particles, so it has less scale than an octopus sucker, it is negatively scaled.

If you take a rainbow, the red is the largest colour, but is negatively scaled, so red is negative, and blue is probably positive. I haven't quite decided if blue is positive or not. It could be just less negative. So you look at the Earth, and the sky is blue, and the sand is red, and the plants are green it's all reversed.

This is all important for the Inverse Square Law anyway. As you move outwards with scalar particles they can fill a larger area. They still use Braille to touch, and scale down, so they create the Inverse square Law. This scalar touching passes a message which can be photons, and the Michelson and Morley experiment shows this to work that light will travel to the Earth quite nicely. It means that you can use the word Aether again. Here is an example...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 12:10:19
Where is all of the Anti-Matter?

Matter sits in an anti-matter hole all of the time. That is how a seed grows roots to split spacetime to grow a plant. All that the seed is doing is moving matter away from anti-matter. Us, and the plants are located inside spacetime.

We wear spacetime like a suit.

Maybe the sun is an Octopus sucker isn't the strangest thing afterall.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 12:32:19
Just in case you are reading the thread from the end without reading the beginning...

The sun is an octopus sucker's fractal physics. My theory is fractal based, and the fractal is not only scalar, but also alters the physics at the same time. It can be programmed into a computer to create the entire Universe. I just need a powerful enough computer to create a Galaxy, and that is the Theory Of Everything. A computer program that creates everything in the universe using a simple set of rules that repeat, and scale.

The sun is an octopus sucker shows how scale, and physics mean a lot. The sun is fractally the same, the way the sun begins uses the same physics as the octopus sucker. But water is replaced by Gravity Spacetime. Water and space use the same fractal. But water is scaler limited, and space is a scalar particle. Scalar particles create more energy than water because they have more freedom of movement. If I use capital letters to represent freedom of movement you get X/Y/Z/IN/OUT for space.. X/Z/y/in/out for water. The loss of energy in water reduces the power of the Octopus tentacles from a hot sphere, to a cold half sphere... a sucker. The tentacles are the Galaxy spirals. The energy is all reduced to the Octopus because of the atoms containing a lot of trapped particles. The trapped particles restrict the scalar ability of the atom. Like a bag full of rubbish is harder to squash down than an empty bag.

It isn't that strange in a fractal universe. Anyway I find the standard model strange with Past, Present, and Future, and Wave Particle Duality, and Action At A Distance, and Electrons with mass, and Pull Forces, and a Big Bang.

That's all very strange to me.

Look carefully... a Galaxy...

http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/field_notes/assets_c/2011/06/octopus_males_large_suckers-thumb-608x456-23825.jpg (http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/field_notes/assets_c/2011/06/octopus_males_large_suckers-thumb-608x456-23825.jpg)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 13:51:29
Check the sanity of this guy!

If you just type fractal nature into Google Images....

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=fractal&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=uzI&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Fy9YUYX4F4eS0QXm_4HQBw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=939&bih=622#hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=YKy&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=fractal+nature&oq=fractal+nature&gs_l=img.3..0j0i24l6.27654.29144.0.29545.7.5.0.2.2.0.58.287.5.5.0...0.0...1c.1.7.img.R7kpD3x1NPA&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44442042,d.d2k&fp=cd39a805ea130be7&biw=939&bih=622 (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=fractal&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=uzI&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Fy9YUYX4F4eS0QXm_4HQBw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=939&bih=622#hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=YKy&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=fractal+nature&oq=fractal+nature&gs_l=img.3..0j0i24l6.27654.29144.0.29545.7.5.0.2.2.0.58.287.5.5.0...0.0...1c.1.7.img.R7kpD3x1NPA&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44442042,d.d2k&fp=cd39a805ea130be7&biw=939&bih=622)

Of course everyone knows that there are a lot of fractals in nature. But what is a fractal in nature?

A fractal in nature is a repeating set of rules combined with scale, and physics. Which is what Zero particle Theory is as well. The zero particle represents fractal scale zero. So it represents the first fractal that creates the Universe.

When scientists knock particles out of atoms they are nearly always in 6's. That's a fractal as well. So from the zero particle we are going up in 12's actually, because there are the anti-particles. And 12's are Newton's Kissing problem fractal.

So getting the shape right, and the physics right, you have a self building set of rules. Every up-scale needs to fit around, or inside the previous scale. Atoms represent a scale, and a rainbow represents the atomic scale in colour, and position. Change the colour, and change the position in the rainbow through the Rice Crispy effect.

I have tested parts of this in a computer, so it's the Standard Model that makes people crazy enough to think that I am crazy.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 15:47:41
Turning Arrows of light....

Richard Feynman came up with some interesting mathematics for light colour, and reflection...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdZMXWmlp9g (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdZMXWmlp9g)

He said that nobody understands it. It actually has a very similar principle to the physics that I am using for particle location, and Relativity Physics. Now, I am not sure if I am talking about the same thing, or not. All I know is that my physics use turning arrows, and create colours from scale during spin cycles. So it probably is the same thing. So I can explain in physics what is happening in Richard Feynman's video... I think.

Particles have directional physics, and relativity is physically embedded in spacetime. It's to do with the area of least resistance for a scalar particle that can fold inside out like half a tennis ball. And it is to do with Newton's Kissing Problem. Combined together you can figure out the physics of relativity.

The spinning arrows.
12 scalar particles can surround 1 scalar particle of the same size (Newton's Kissing Problem) there is room for a 13th ball that can never be fitted. the 13th ball can be used as the area of least resistance through newtons 3D structure. This area of least resistance is the spin of the arrows in Feynman's lecture... I think. You see, particles move towards this 13th ball as a direction memory. It's a scalar particle where the 13 ball is a guide. All of theses scalar particles have to sit in a hole in spacetime. The anti-matter is the hole that they sit in, and again you can just use half a tennis ball, and fold it inside out to create the anti-matter of matter. The colour is the scale of the tennis ball. So the rotation through for example red is larger than a rotation through blue. Pressure of a red sun is less than pressure on a blue sun, so the scalar change is a pressure change is a spin change, with a 13th ball of Newton's Kissing Problem creating all of these arrows that Feynman is using.

The arrow of direction moves towards the area of least resistance which is the scale outside of the particle. I call that the bow shock. So you have this internal arrow pointing towards the bow shock. The bow shock is the scalar collisions in spacetime between the space scalar grain. Earth has its own bow shock, and creates a scalar change in the grain structure around it. That is the area of least resistance Einstein called the bending of Spacetime. It is the scaling of spacetime in fact. So the arrow pointing towards a bow shock is where a particle travels, and if the particle moves near the Earth its own bow shock is added to the Earth's bow shock. So the Earth's gravity is added to the particles Gravity negatively. The area of least resistance therefore is towards the Earth now.

Now the rotating arrow, and the bow shock combined are like adding convex curves to concave curves. The total needs to be negative to move into the area of least resistance.

And that seems to match what Feynman was saying in the video.... I think.

So there are the physics which he asks about during his lecture.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 21:25:14
Past and Future Doesn't Exist... Time is a constant of the present.

I've found a video, that tells me why science uses the words Past and Future...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kab9dkDZJY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kab9dkDZJY)

Which tells me something about why scientists are so confused. You use pull forces, so obviously you can easily reverse physics, and I never thought about that before because I have no pull forces in my theory. Plus science uses mass for attraction, and I use holes the opposite.

Time is a constant of the present...not mass...not pull...but holes. If you are moving into holes you get this Rice Crispy scaling effect.. the holes get smaller as you move into them, you have to be smaller to move to the next level down. Big particles are pretty much stuck at the beginning. When the particles get really small they turn negatively into holes. The movement is created by the convex curves pressing against convex curves, a sort of balloon inflation propagation towards holes. Then holes fill up with smaller particles, and they become convex again. It's a sort of weather system like steam to rain to steam. Convex to concave to convex.

So the physics are cyclic, circular, never-ending, and so the physics are a constant. Time eliminates itself to a zero state. The snowflake is In, and the Sun is Out. There is no arrow, there is In, and Out added together = 0. Zero equals the present all of the time. Just the Present, and the present has no direction in particular. But there is always this inflation propagation, and no pull forces to reverse it. Particles are pushed into a hole, the hole fills up, pushes the particles out.. push.. push..push...push..... no pull.

It's strange that people really believe in Past, and Future. I always thought that the words were for science fiction movies like Time Machine. It's only recently that I realised that people actually thought that they were real. I'm 50, so for 50 years I have never believed in past, and Future.

Mind you.. I have never done any science. I wasn't taught science at school, and never had science at college. I taught myself using my own theory from scratch. I decided that I would ignore science, it is a bit kind of crazy.

I was just watching a video on the Feynman Diagrams. I mean he had time correct in those diagrams, so he should have realised what it is. He drew a sort of spring between motions, that is correct. I mean amazing being as he believed in pull forces.

I went somewhere else where the rules are simpler...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kab9dkDZJY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kab9dkDZJY)

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Ethos_ on 31/03/2013 22:07:01
Past and Future Doesn't Exist... Time is a constant of the present.

I've found a video, that tells me why science uses the words Past and Future...




For once, I find myself agreeing with you Pincho. I also don't see the need for these concepts.
The Present is all that makes any sense to my way of thinking. Nevertheless, I don't quite understand
what you mean by these holes you speak of. A hole in the fabric of space sounds a lot like string theory
to me. With the added dimensions this theory brings to the table, one might be able to add the concept
of holes. But that would need a completely new understanding of space.

What is the physical nature of these holes?
Can you describe them mathematically?
If holes exist in space/time, how do we prove they existence?
Without empirical evidence, this only becomes philosophy and not science.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 22:31:35
Past and Future Doesn't Exist... Time is a constant of the present.

I've found a video, that tells me why science uses the words Past and Future...




For once, I find myself agreeing with you Pincho. I also don't see the need for these concepts.
The Present is all that makes any sense to my way of thinking. Nevertheless, I don't quite understand
what you mean by these holes you speak of. A hole in the fabric of space sounds a lot like string theory
to me. With the added dimensions this theory brings to the table, one might be able to add the concept
of holes. But that would need a completely new understanding of space.

What is the physical nature of these holes?
Can you describe them mathematically?
If holes exist in space/time, how do we prove they existence?
Without empirical evidence, this only becomes philosophy and not science.

Well I will start off with Feynman again, because he could have grasped my ideas, he was so close. Yet he would have hated my approach of not using mathematics....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITpDrdtGAmo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITpDrdtGAmo)

A hole in spacetime is just a negatively scaled particle. Imagine with water, and a sponge. We put a heater in the middle of the sponge, so that any water entering the sponge is evaporated away at the same speed that the water enters the sponge. So the sponge is always empty. That is electro magnetism. Gravity goes into an electron hole field in an iron bar, it is spun around by the spinning field that was created by the coils earlier on. The Gravity is evaporated away to keep the Iron Bar constantly empty of Gravity. Now its a bar of spacetime holes.

Why don't I use mathematics?.. because it has never worked for genius like Einstein, and Newton. So what chance have I got?

I intend to write a computer program instead. It's better, because it creates the maths instead of the other way around.

EDIT: Oh yes I forgot to complete the physics for the spacetime holes in this post. Spacetime in my theory is a scalar grain structure. So it isn't a vacuum, or a void. It's almost completely full of material, so you only need to separate the matter to make a hole.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 31/03/2013 23:37:14
The relation of Physics and Fractals

Feynman lectured The Relation Of Mathematics, and Physics...

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SrHzSGn-I8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SrHzSGn-I8)

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IESoWfM3cyc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IESoWfM3cyc)

And in this discussion he has an idea for Gravity, and he quickly dismisses it. Mathematics he says is the answer, and the ideas don't seem to work.

Well, in fact it seems to me that he had the right idea, and blew it by turning to mathematics. He was lacking the complete idea, because he had mathematics to turn to, and the mathematics drew him away from the real answer.

So I use a fractal of physics instead. Total physics, that I can scale up, and down like an Abacus of physics.

The real answer to the gravity problem was that as the Earth moves towards the scalar particles they scale down faster, and that is the bow shock. It is scale that creates the force, so the force is scaled down by the movement towards it. The Net result is zero change. You evaporate the Gravity faster in a sense.

So I believe I am right that with such a huge theory as the Theory Of Everything, it is better to have a solution that you can work with like the Universe works with physics. The Universe doesn't know mathematics, it creates fractals, so I think in physical fractals, and then they can go into a computer.

And a picture of the Bow Shock which explains it a bit better...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 01/04/2013 08:50:13
So I have been talking about natural shapes being created from a fractal. The fractal is based on the fact that I use spherical particles in my theory, and sphere stack in a particular way. I use sphere because a force in every direction from a point is a sphere, and the force from every point I use is scalar energy, and that scalar energy is what you call time.

To actually see the diagonal shearing through a liquid I can show you a video, that not only includes the shearing, but also includes nature's shapes...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqAAlSba7Ns (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqAAlSba7Ns)

If you watch carefully, the shapes start off with diagonal lines through the liquid. The diagonal lines are due to the particle stacking system, and the pressures on that stacking system. You can get starfish shapes in this liquid. But really all you have to do is look at the ocean for diagonal shears in creatures.

Then when you realise that liquids with forces often break diagonally, and you change space into a scaler liquid. You can recreate the physics, but now you also have heat. Because scaler particles create photons, and electrons. So the same patterns have extra energy.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 01/04/2013 08:58:42
Earlier I showed my bow shock bubbles, Voyager actually found them some years after I posted about them....

http://www.universetoday.com/86446/voyagers-find-giant-jacuzzi-like-bubbles-at-edge-of-solar-system/ (http://www.universetoday.com/86446/voyagers-find-giant-jacuzzi-like-bubbles-at-edge-of-solar-system/)

But the difference is that I use them for all particles as locating physics.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 01/04/2013 13:56:13
Mathematics to Physics

Energy
e = mc2

Force of Gravity
f = gm1m2/r2

I often say that mathematics isn't much of a proof to physics. Well not in my theory anyway. If I describe the mathematics in my theory it uses different physics than is implied above.

If I start with e = mc2, and I describe it in my theory...

Energy equals the flow of Gravity into and around electron holes, creating spin, scaling down into a new hole at C squared, and flowing out again. That's what I say is happening.

If I was writing the Calculus it would be..

e = HoleC2

Only the description has changed. But physics is a description, and maths is a measurement. The proof is the description + the maths. I feel that if the description is wrong then the proof is wrong. Anyone can measure something, the description is the tricky part.

f = gm1m2/r2

My version... The flow force of Gravity is taken from the holes in one body compared to the holes in another body over a distance. The direction is towards the area of least resistance which is the body with the most holes. Which is...

f = GHole1Hole2/r2

Still no change to the mathematics. Just a different description. Mass is made from holes, and the important part of the description is that it removes the pull force, and changes it into a flow force.

My description is different, the maths is the same, but.. you can't have a Big Bang with my description. You change history just by changing a word. That's my point about mathematics not being a proof. The maths can work, but the words are just as important, or maybe even more important.

So I just use the words, skip the maths, and use a fractal, which copies nature. I'm a sort of Darwin of Physics. I explain nature like Darwin explained evolution. In fact I slightly change evolution into some fractals as well.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 01/04/2013 15:51:13
Rubber Bands and poise time

I have no pull forces in my theory, so rubber bands need explaining to account for a stretch which moves back together again. It's quite simple really...

With Gravity playing the part of the push force towards the rubber band it plays the part of the compression. The outward flow is against gravity, and flows from holes in the nucleus, and that is poise time. Poise time is a bit like shaking a can of fizzy pop to create an outflow. The particles are inflating, and acting like a geyser from a hole. It's like removing the plug from the hole, and then Gravity can flow in faster. Rubber is squeezed out of trees, and has been through compression forces. It is the spin, and compression of material into the nucleus that creates the scalar energy of poise time. Now you may think that gravity is too weak a force for the elastic contraction, but Gravity is a flow into electron holes, and rubber must have quite a few electrons in it for a better flow force. Well rubber has static electricity so there is a sign of electrons there.

(Poise Time is time as Point scalar energy without past present, and future)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 10:52:09
Converting My Theory Into The Standard Model

OK, I hate using words like Pull, and Polarity, and Standard Mass, but nobody seems to be able to understand the Quantum Physics that I am using. So for once, here is the theory using the standard model, and your own words....

The Zero Particle is a Positron, and an electron combined 4 times. Positrons are scalar particles that can scale negatively into an electron by folding inside out, and electrons are also scalar particles. The positron has a push force on its outside, and if you flip the positron inside out, the push force pushes inwards to become a pull force. It turns into an electron, and with the forces pushing towards an electron nucleus. The electron nucleus creates scalar pressure, and can scale particles down even further. Electromagnetism is to scale down combined positron electrons acting as Gravity into electron positrons acting as magnetism. There is a speed limit to the scaling of C, but scaling can get trapped to slow down like at the end of a magnet to get a repelling force. Space is made from positron electrons, but science is not acknowledging that Positrons are scalar particles, and is not acknowledging that they can fold inside out. Positron electrons scale away from each other so as not to touch each other. This means that they do not pass a message in space, and become invisible. If they touch, they scale down, and then they scale back up again in a rhythmic pattern until they touch. This creates the Cosmic Microwave Background energy. The flow of this rhythm creates waves as the scales start to match between particles due to entropy. These waves of positron  electron energy sweeps through space, and create scalar waves, and photons.

The pattern that positron electrons create is a particle stacking pattern based on them all scaling to the same size. It obeys Newton's Kissing laws. So the patterns that they create eventually in nature show signs of a particle stacking system. But first you have to get the positron electrons to flip inside out into electron positrons. To create electron positrons you have to trap positron electrons in a scalar wave from all directions. If you look at newton's Kissing Problem...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kissing_number_problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kissing_number_problem)

... you are trying to trap a positron electron in the middle of 12 other positron electrons with a force that will knock it into an electron positron. The electron positron will then attract more positron electrons, and they will become trapped, and scale into electron positrons. Electron positrons combined with positron electrons, and trapped together create singularities that can stay open. So if you get enough of them you have a black hole. The spin from the positron electrons entering the pull forces of the electron positrons creates energy, and the electron positrons are trapped in the middle of the spin.

Now to keep this simple from now on an electron Positron will be called an electron again, and a positron electron will be called a positron again. You just have to remember that they can flip inside out to change polarity.

Electrons are also scalar particles, they scale negatively, so become bigger pull forces. The electrons on Earth are not trapped, so are not behaving as scalar particles. Scalar particles only scale slightly until trapped. When you see the sun sending out solar flares, they are scaled up electrons behaving as holes for even more particles. A hole is a pull force that positrons fall into by scalar bumping each other into the hole. When a positron sits in an electron hole of exactly the same size the forces are neutralised, and you cannot see either the positron, or the electron ( Going back to positron electrons the zero particle is 4 times positive negative, neutral, negative positive remember?), so you get the Zero particle... space.

Just to remind you again... The Zero Particle is Positive, negative, neutral, negative Positive. It eliminates all of its forces to become...

1 + -1 + 0, + -1 + 1

The zero is a gap in spacetime. The gap in spacetime is sitting in a much larger particle the size of the Universe. We can't communicate with this huge particle, so the gap acts as a straight line through a curve. You can imagine changing the numbers...

Convex, Concave, flat, concave, convex.

Which is an apple shape with an apple core, and a stem. Nature is taken from all of these forces.

So that is part of my theory explained using the standard model. I feel strange using words like pull etc, because they are incorrect. I can't really use the word Positron, electron, neutral, electron positron. So I call it the zero particle. It is like a bubble with layers. But scales out of trouble, and so cannot be destroyed in any way.

The electrons in electromagnetism scale down positrons into electrons, and then scales down electrons into larger negative numbers. Large negative numbers actually grow in size. The reverse of what you might imagine. So you get large hollow sphere which act negatively as holes. But if you can trap the expanding sphere even more, the negative sphere growing larger will flip back into positrons.

If you now understand the physics, you have no need for Dark Matter, or Quantum Physics. This solves all of the problems in science. But I don't like explaining it in this strange way.

Oh yeah.. time.

Time is the scaler effect of the electron nucleus which forces scalar particles to get stuck in the middle. These particles build up energy when the electron has nowhere to scale to get away from the forces. If a particle becomes scalar locked like this it has a nucleus that we call time. Energy trapped to escape as scalar energy is time. I call it Poise Time.. Point Scalar Energy Time.

The electron therefore creates the atom with a nucleus, and scalar energy as time. Combined electron, positron forces create everything in the Universe, and I know how to write the computer program to do it in a computer.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 12:10:40
Still using the standard model....

So let's take a look at some nature. The tree...

The zero particle using polarities...

1 + -1 + 0 + -1 + 1

and converted to...

Convex, concave, flat, concave, convex

That's an apple shape. The interesting part is the zero where the apple stem sits. To eliminate gravity forces the (electron electron) have been forced together by using the tree roots as pull forces. This creates the neutral zone. The tree then grows into the neutral zone, because the forces are zero against it. Oddly this means that the tree sits in an area made from the Universe itself. A huge particle that encases us. It seems that life bulges out from this neutral zone. We sit inside a hole in the Universe made from a huge particle.

very odd...

My theory is very odd. But that's what it is. It's the maths that creates this oddity...

1 + -1 = 0

To get zero you have to combine opposite forces. But to get a Universe you have to sit particles in those opposite forces. The particles can't sit in themselves so they sit in a bigger particle. This infinite regression means that you end up sitting in the Universe itself as a huge particle.

To be more precise we sit in a huge Positron Electron. We are in the electron centre which is full of positrons. It's a bit of a tongue twister.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 12:52:15
Still Using the Standard Model...

The photon is the positron to Positron message as they touch and fold inwards to electron electron. So....

Convex folds to concave, and back to convex.. the message is passed through the folding curve as a cloud of positron electron at a smaller scale. It reminds me of a bubble of soapy liquid in which  a thin layer of water is sandwiched between two layers of soap molecules. The photon is like passing the soapy water through the air as the bubbles touch.

So you can imagine that infinite regression builds the surfaces of the positrons as they touch. The smaller positrons pass along. the larger positrons scale down because they lose the smaller positrons that build their surface. The photons move into the electron space as a small positron cloud, and scale up the next positron. This creates a scaler message. The photon.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 12:56:57
You have to remember though that to me talking in the standard model I am sometimes talking backwards. And talking backwards like this leaves you with Dark Matter, and Quantum Physics. So to get rid of them you need to understand my real theory without pull forces.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 13:27:12
Try the standard Model The creation of a galaxy

The Positron forced to bump together due to an energy wave created in the CMB scale down. The scalar size becomes negative until the positrons are electrons. The electrons scale down negatively as large holes with pull forces. The pull forces pull in more electrons to make a cloud of positrons that are trapped. The positrons bump together even more, and start to spin to escape the forces. They spin very fast until they start to escape the huge electron area. The positrons moving into the electron area, are hit by the positrons spinning through the electron area. High speed positron positron collisions create photons, and also scale into more huge electron holes with pull forces. Suns are huge electrons containing trapped positrons. Positrons scale into electrons as holes, and so the sun has sun spots. Electrons shoot off the sun as magnetic bubbles, capturing some more positrons. All of these scalar forces acting together trap particles inside particles. Eventually you get atoms. Atoms are electron positron arrangements layered like onions. These layers break the scaling mechanics, and so atoms have a scale.

Humans live in the atomic scale not knowing that they are made from fundamental scalar particles in fact. We think that scale is fixed. For scale to be fixed there would need to be a creator who chose that scale of particle. No... we are scaler broken, and we don't know that scale is not supposed to be a fixed size.

The galaxy therefore creates all of the particles from Positrons, and electrons. Actually mainly positrons, because in our Universe positrons create electrons. Cause, and effect starts with the positron in other words.


Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 17:09:27
I just noticed that my positron description works in Wikipedia. And instead of time moving backwards I have time scaling into the nucleus of the electron. So great. I should have looked up the positron before. Pity I never did any science...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 18:56:24
Today's science, matches somewhat with my spiral arm description earlier in this thread....

From the link....
Quote
According to Vogelsberger and Hernquist, the new simulations can be used to reinterpret observational data, looking at both the high-density molecular clouds as well as gravitationally induced "holes" in space as the mechanisms that drive the formation of the characteristic arms of spiral galaxies.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130402124821.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130402124821.htm)

My version...
Quote
Where the lines bump create weaknesses. More scaling, more holes. These new holes have new particles moving into them. This is sort of like the octopus tentacles with the suckers. The diagonal lines spin more in space so create whole sphere for suckers. The sphere filling with particles are suns. They are suns where the scalar bumping is creating light, and energy. Filling holes, scaling, bumping, and flashing.

My version sounds strange, but my descriptions actually represent more hidden physics than the computer model.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 19:31:48
The atom...

This is how I re-write the Wikipedia text....

The atom is a basic unit of matter that consists of a dense central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons. The atomic nucleus contains a mix of positively charged protons (scaled down positrons) and electrically neutral neutrons (The point of change from positron to Electron) 

Wikipedia...
Quote
The electrons of an atom are bound to the nucleus by the electromagnetic force.

I change the above to...

The nucleus of the atom is held together by a large electron hole. Inside this electron is a cloud of Positron particles which are cancelled out as Dark matter. The positrons scale down towards the centre of the atom, and this is the force which holds the nucleus together. As the positron scale down they eventually become electrons to create a neutral force.

OK, so electrons do no annihilate positrons as anti-matter. They merge together, and the merge creates a cloud of photons which just looks explosive as the positrons vanish into Dark Matter. You end up with everything existing in one sphere which is the electron membrane. The membrane however is Dark Matter, and hidden from observation as the positrons pass over it.


Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 02/04/2013 23:51:20
I'm just looking up Quantum spin now. And there is a strange relationship between my Concave curve apple core, Newton's Kissing Problem and a 1/2 spin for an electron...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern%E2%80%93Gerlach_experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern%E2%80%93Gerlach_experiment)

I believe that spin may actually be the curvature that I am using. So 1/2 spin could be convex curve. Well anyway its shown like an apple core... it may be a coincidence. And Newtons Kissing Problem creates the Concave curve because the shape has 3 particles at the top, and 3 particles at the bottom, and 6 particles around the middle. The 6 around the middle fill with positrons so fade away as though the middle was concave, but is actually hidden as Dark matter. So it's an apple shape, but the core is more dominant than the membrane area. You see the top, bottom spin, and the middle is cancelled out.

This works with my tennis ball example as well. If you invert the tennis ball you get the apple core shape.

The seeds of an apple are part of the same fractal. It suggests that an electron also has these seeds. If the stem of an apple is neutral, then the seeds resemble the same material as the stem, so neutral zones in the electron would match the seeds. This is one of the good things about fractals, you get to see something that is impossible to actually see in real life.

Anyway, it makes Quantum Physics... physics again. Convex, and concave are physics, and a tennis ball is physics, and an apple is physics, and I worked it all out using physics.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 03/04/2013 00:18:06
This is all easy to program so far. Imagine being able to program the Universe with all of the physics working, and self building like Conway's Game Of Life.

I just need a super computer. I have contacted Oxford, and Cambridge. I doubt that they will help me.

 
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 03/04/2013 10:13:32
Today's science link is this...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/21966304 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/21966304)

My match up is that I have been explaining..

Positron Electron = PE
Electron Positron = EP

Their difference is in the forces. PE has a convex force. EP has a concave force. In sexuality the man is PE, and the Woman is EP. The convex penis, and the concave Vagina. In other words the woman is more electron, and the man is more positron.

And I have explained elasticity of the Rubber band using more electrons.

The extra stretch of the octopus is therefore more electron.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 03/04/2013 12:11:50
Proposal for the physics of Cancer

PLEASE READ THIS  POST WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS A BEST GUESS BY SOMEONE WHO MAKES GOOD GUESSES. THAT'S ALL IT IS.

This isn't meant to be a hope, or a cure scenario. I merely mention cancer because of the physics that PE, and EP create.

PE = Positron Electron
EP = Electron Positron

According to me (It's a weird theory that you teach yourself things), the PE is a convex force, and the EP is a concave force. The human body is made from a mixture of electrons, and positrons. These particles work together just fine so long as none of them get stuck. But the particles have scalar properties if they do get stuck. The scalar properties of electrons, and positrons are not good for our health should they occur in our body. They will either scale up into lumps, or scale down into holes. Fixing this scalar problem is the solution, and unblocking the particles. Radiotherapy can shake them free, and then entropy will gradually restore their scale. But hopefully with my explanation there are other ideas that can come along.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 03/04/2013 12:43:43
The physics of Relativity

Relativity is treated as an observational science. It's not observational, it is physical. So I will go through the physics...

We have a Universe made mostly from Positrons that can invert into Electrons, and Vice versa. The flip happens like folding half a tennis ball inside out. The Positron is convex, and the electron is concave. Concave acts as a pull force, and convex acts as a bump force. The overlay of the two particles creates...

1 + -1 = 0 which is Dark Matter

The inside of a positron is negative, and the inside of an electron is positive. The physics inside are a reverse of their outside forces. The shape inside of a sphere is the reverse of the outside if you were looking from each location.

Relative Motion

If you take a cloud of positrons as the exterior form of a sphere, and that cloud is held together by the concave forces of the electrons then the positrons will strike other positrons convex to convex. Which is a bump force, and a scalar force. The particles in front of the moving body are therefore scaling down. Positrons scale down into electrons, and the curve reverses from convex to concave. I call this the Bow shock. The moving body now has a scalar bow shock which is the area of least resistance due to the bump forces changing to pull forces.

If this were a train, and you stood on this train, you now have a matching bow shock to the train, because these scalar particles are infinitely stacked like virtual sand. Space is made from these scalar particles.

Time

Time builds up in the concave body of the electron, because the concave flow into the electron sends particles to an electron nucleus as a scaler change. This nucleus with a motion is restricted from incoming flow forces. Because time is made from a scalar flow I call it Poise Time (Point Scalar Time). The relative motion of a train therefore creates a Poise Time flow for the passengers, and a matching bow shock.

I will post more on Relativity later. But it's just physics.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 12:07:24
The AMS Results using my theory...

The AMS result in my theory shows that my push gravity system has Positrons confirmed as a push propagator. It shows that pull forces are exactly as I said, not pull forces but electrons being used as holes for scaled down positrons. The positrons collide, push us to the Earth then invert into electrons as the push scales them down. Electrons act as holes, or containers if you like with a spin force of hidden particles trapped in a concave apple core shape.

Using my theory there is no need to look for Dark Matter. There is a need to reverse the mathematics of the Standard Model so that Dark Matter is eliminated. To account for changing Gravity in far away systems all you do is trap more positrons to create more pressure towards a mass of holes.

Mass = Holes
Energy moves towards lower energy.
Positrons = Positive Energy
Electrons = Negative Energy

Energy moves towards lower energy. Isaac Newton used the word pull, and science is still running around in circles looking for Dark Matter. What Positrons, and Electrons create is Neutral Matter.. which is Dark. It's not a new Dark Matter substance, it's the substance that would have been there all along if Newton had said Push instead of Pull.

What the AMS doesn't find is the Neutral Particles, because they vanish. There will be a high number of Positrons that cannot be found because of this. Searching for Neutral particles may be impossible, because you can only change them into something else... virtual particles...

Neutral particles are just combined forces of Electrons, and Positrons, but the forces can still be undone. There are still two particles there, they just cancel each other out. 1 + -1 = 0.

The collisions create relativity as I mentioned in my last post. So AMS also shows that my relativity idea has the physics in the right places for it to work.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 12:47:45
Time and Distance not the same thing...

I just want to talk about time, and distance, because I just saw this...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130403141446.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130403141446.htm)

The Universe is a fractal, there is no time, and distance formula that is easy to use. The changing shape of the Universe can happen almost anywhere. In fact I am looking at some nearby Nebula to see if they are creating Galaxies. But that's not the physics that I wish to discuss.

The physics for locality are scale. I use the rainbow as an example, and I use a packet of Rice Crispies as a comparison. Particles move into the area of least resistance. So a packet of Rice Crispies scales down, and a rainbow scales down negatively from Red (Negative) to Blue (Which I call Positive). The Universe does that as well. So when you look back in time using the Standard Model what you are actually looking at is the positioning of scale through a grain structure. So our Milky Way for example will move into a physical area that resembles itself over time. This area will then look like a natural progression of evolution in states of the Universe over time, but it isn't... it's the Rice Crispy effect. If two Galaxy Collide to become bigger, then they will move through space to this bigger position.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 13:20:33
To Add To The Above...

Earth Moves towards the Sun because the sun is a bigger hole. Electrons are holes, and scale is location. So mass is a hole. We move towards the Earth because the Earth is a bigger hole than us. We have less electrons than the Earth. The Rice Crispy effect is Gravity. Hot air rises, it scales up, cold rain water, it scales down.. etc. Time is scale, not distance. Poise Time (Point Scalar Energy Time)

When you work out scale, you must add the electrons negatively to that scale. So an Elephant looks bigger than us, but when you add the electrons it has more, so it has less scale than us. We exist in a negative environment, so scale works backwards. But to understand it properly you must say that we are smaller than the Earth negatively.

This all leads to subduction of course.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 14:06:26
The really easy way to imagine scale in reverse is to think of a bathroom sponge.

The holes in the sponge are the electrons. So the holes are very insignificant. The elephant is a big sponge, and the human is a small sponge. The positrons are the water, and Gravity. So now the more holes you have creates the most weight.

But this is the point where Quantum Physics gets strange...

The holes have no walls. So the elephant is just holes. The Human is just holes. The walls are the spinning Positrons. So really the holes act as points for the positrons to move into. The positrons are something that we carry along with us, but are not us. We are the points.

That is hard to visualize. Just say that a membrane is not the material inside the membrane, the membrane is a container for the material. A balloon can hold water. We are the water, we are not the balloon. We are not our skin, we are connected to our skin.

You might struggle with that. But that's how quantum scale works. Our scale is the negative of our mass.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 14:23:41
Another way to explain it....

If it were a sphere the entire Universe would look absolutely huge. But Quantum Scale makes it the smallest. So that would put it right in the middle of the entire structure. Now that sounds strange until you take a position from it..

It's X/Y/Z would be 0,0,0. And if you create a sphere in a computer, and make it huge, and use it as a container like a balloon full of water, then the Universe would have an origin at 0,0,0.

Do you see what I mean?

Points are the location of the object. Points are taken from holes, and work negatively to mass. Negative mass.

Electrons therefore have negative mass, and negative energy. An elephant is bigger than us negatively. But don't confuse that with a pull force. Its a flow force from outside of the electron holes.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 14:49:33
The Bar Magnet and Iron Filings

If you take scale as location, then the bar magnet is a scalar magnet, and iron filings are the scalar equivalent in location to the bar magnet. Just like the Milky Way moves into an area to match its scale, the iron filings are moving into an area to match their internal scale. The iron is dragged along by an internal scalar change.

The spinning magnetic force is a scalar force which transfers to the iron filings. Therefore the filings, and the iron bar match scalar forces. This means that they share the same location... just like I said earlier.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 14:55:56
A change in location is propagated by Positrons...

Positrons are the messengers that touch to pass a signal. Like a circuit board they do not always touch. They pass a message to move to the area of least resistance. You go there. The iron filings go there immediately because the positrons are touching them. They receive this message in a strong way because the scalar forces of the magnet are so fast. The positrons cannot scale out of the way as fast as the spin inside the magnet. You get this magnetic push force from the positrons unable to scale out of the way fast enough.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 15:23:04
Scaler Subduction and Relativity...

Ok so we are taking scale negatively from an elephant to a Human even though the entire volume looks bigger. The volume is mostly holes. The Rice Crispies at the top are mostly holes. Subduction behaves like the Rice Crispy effect. The plates follow the rice crispy effect because they have a shape where the holes have a low surface area at the front of the plates. Scale is taken in 3D X scale Y scale Z scale. If a direction is scaled smaller, you can go in that direction. Relativity is to scale down a bow shock in the direction that you are travelling. Relativity is like scalar subduction of a moving object through scaler Positrons.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 15:54:15
The Two Slit Experiment Solved...

The two slit experiment contains positrons without an observer. So there are bump forces, and wave forces. With an observer the electrons neutralize the Positrons. So the wave forces vanish into neutral forces.

We do not find positrons most of the time because electron forces neutralize them from our observations quite often.

Positrons are abundantly around us all of the time.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 15:57:10
I have definitely 100% solved the Theory Of Everything. I know everything.

I just need a computer to program it into.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 16:22:56
Entangled Action At A Distance...

Your scale determines your true area of least resistance. A small body can pass through smaller spaces than a larger body.

Time is a scalar Point Origin of electrons, containing positrons.

Entangled particles share the same origin as scalar information. Which you could call a scalar spin force, like iron filings share the same scalar spin force as a magnet.

Two photons entangled share the same scalar spin force towards an origin. They are behaving like iron filings towards a magnet.

When they are not observed their positrons are active, and that makes the photons neutral with an electron.

When observed the interaction of electrons changes the polarity from positive to neutral. So now the photons are active again with zero mass.

The photons now turn towards their scalar origin.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 18:07:56
What is an origin?

Where science uses location as X/Y/Z you change to Scalar X / Y /Z. The area of least resistance from scale.

But there are two more locations.. In, and Out. Which is the scalar time location.

You can think of this like an hour glass with sand. X/Y/Z/In/Out with In as the hole in the middle, and out because the hole works from both positive, and negative scalar factors.

XYZ and into a hole, and out of a hole. The holes are points in the middle of electrons the nucleus of an atom. The sand is positrons moving towards points. The photon is a bunch of touching positrons passing a signal.

So the entangled photons are also entangled positrons, inside electrons, and thus a lot of cancelling out is happening...

1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + -1 + -1 + -1 + -1 to get zero mass for a photon.

But the observer uses some sort of charge to observe. You cannot observe the cloud without changing the polarity a bit.

Whatever a spin becomes is part of the observation.

Entangled particles share the same origin, because they share the same scale as a force added together. Like Rice Crispie atoms share the same origin when they are part of a rice crispy. They have no choice, their scale is added together, and their total scale determines their location, and where they will move to next.

Because Spacetime is a grain structure, this sharing of a location like Rice Crispies travels through the entire Universe. It plays the part of propagating Action At A Distance, but is in fact

Local Area Of Least Resistance From Scale
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 18:28:13
Today's science match....

Watch this scalar origin come to life in a new printing device...

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2013/04/3d-printed-tissue.html (http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2013/04/3d-printed-tissue.html)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 04/04/2013 19:44:47
Say it with flowers....

http://www.newser.com/story/163260/flowers-use-electricity-to-talk-with-bees.html (http://www.newser.com/story/163260/flowers-use-electricity-to-talk-with-bees.html)

The shared origin of entangled particles can be taken advantage of. The Positrons that pass messages, pass the origin, and also share the origin of whatever they touch. Positrons are scalar particles, they can touch at a certain speed to pass a message. You can make a whole line of them touch if you send the message fast enough, and that line will all share the same origin. The bees can also create a positive charge like a Positron. So the bees can create a message through the positrons to a flower, and that message will pick up the flower origin and pass it to the bee as poise time. The bee now just allows the poise time to reverse back to the flower. The bee dance can be used in this way. Cause Positrons to share an origin by touch, and the bees will pick up on it.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/04/2013 10:52:18
We eliminate positrons by observation...

Observation eliminates positrons on Earth. If you put the positrons back into the picture you get...

Unobserved photon = Positron
Unobserved photon  = +1
Unobserved photon  = Convex sphere

Observed Photon = Positron + Electron Pairing
Observed Photon = Neutral
Observed Photon = Flat

So whenever we see a photon we add an electron to a positron. Therefore the photon is a positron until observed. Observing a photon means giving the photon an origin to you, entangling it to an electron. The electron acts as a locator, the locator is like iron filings around a magnet. The photon gets an origin to locate to.

A rainbow is the arrangement of photons to an origin based on scale. The rice Crispy effect of scale through a grain structure. Distance through scale from Red to Blue (example) to origin.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/04/2013 11:07:36
You also get a push Gravity from the missing positrons. You also get mass from the push gravity. You also get Dark Matter from the neutral Photons.

Simple. Just one word 'Pull', that messed science up since 1640's.

Tell Isaac Newton.... Maths is not proof.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/04/2013 11:26:07
People ask Why Is The Universe Expanding?

The structure of the Universe is granular. Colour has location to origin of observer. When an observer observes they set a new origin to the photons. Scale towards the new origin creates a new rainbow with Red furthest away. Spacetime grain flows to the area of least resistance which is always in the location of a Black Hole (which may not be a black hole). By looking at the Milky Way you can see that the grain builds up to a dome at the black hole location (which may not be a black hole).

The particles are probably negatively scaled towards the black hole location, or blocked in the Black Hole location. Anyway, you can see a change in scale towards the black hole location.

Red shift is to do with the arrangement of scale through a grain structure towards an origin. One origin leads to the next origin in a fractal pattern of Newton's Kissing problem.

The change between origins has to do with entanglement.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/04/2013 11:30:09
What is a black hole?

I'm beginning to think that it isn't a black hole. More like an hour glass with two bubbles spurting out material. The point at which the two bubbles touch is flat, and neutral. A neutral hole would be a bit like a Black Hole.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23248-giant-milky-way-bubbles-blown-by-black-hole-merger.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23248-giant-milky-way-bubbles-blown-by-black-hole-merger.html)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/04/2013 11:34:31
What are the bubbles?

Huge Positron and electron flow collisions changing to neutral photons. Or the reverse, that the material is moving into the bubbles.

The scale of the Milky way is from thin to thick in the middle. I need to run it on my computer to get a more accurate description of it.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/04/2013 11:52:14
The thing is that the Universe could be scaling down from very large to very small. It means that particles split into smaller bits all of the time. 1 becomes 13 bits. This becomes a new origin with the central bit as a neutral location to move into. The middle is invisible, so that leaves 12 bits that can be seen. 6 positive, and 6 negative.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 05/04/2013 13:28:51
All particles are the same...

There are just two particles in the whole Universe...

Positron and Electron

The photon is a positron that changes to both combined in a flash to become a Neutrino.

The other particles are different scaled versions of the same particles, and the scaling is a fractal, so easy to reproduce.

So therefore just 2 particles, a bit of scaling, and that''s a Universe. What's that? 100 lines of computer code at the most. Probably more like 20 lines.

A Universe in 20 lines of code... just need a fast PC.

My speed problem is here... 4 frames per second, and hardly any particles...
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/04/2013 08:50:38
My Role In The Theory Of Everything

My current role is to say as much as possible to help as many people as possible in their particular problems. But it is not to be 100% involved in any particular subject just yet. So I am not 100% precise, because I don't stop on one subject for longer than a few minutes. In plate tectonics for example I said that an object has scale in the X / Y / Z, now a more precise version is to use vectors for force of Gravity so that an elephant's feet sink into mud. Even that is not 100% precise. If I sometimes stop to fix mistakes, I can do it, but then I have to stop on a subject for a long time. Which subject do I stop on? It's a Self Teaching Theory Of Everything, I probably can keep solving things for the rest of my life. Do I stop on Cancer, do I stop on Invention, Do I stop on the creation of life? No, I go with the flow in my head at the moment, and the computer program that I write  will have details in it to measure.

You should say...

"I know what he means, but it isn't very accurate, I will fix it myself."

Or

"He got that part wrong."

So let's just stop a little longer on Plate Tectonics as an example.

The Force Of Gravity a bit deeper, and tectonics...

Because of Positrons being scalar particles they melt into a surface of electrons. This melting has its own physics that work as flow through a structure. The flow acts as jets, and the surface acts as a pipe. An elephant's feet act as an outflow of Gravity from above, so act as exhaust pipes of a flow towards Earth. An asteroid acts as a pipe towards Earth from an outside flow. The asteroid also has a bow shock as it moves forwards. A bow shock is the melting away of Positrons.

Positrons melt away, move into electron spin, the spin acts as a caterpillar track, the caterpillar track creates a jet, and the jet is the magnetic push force. So the resistance towards Gravity is countered by a jet. In other words a push force Gravity should not work on a sphere towards Gravity as the side of the sphere moving forwards would exhibit higher pressure. But the jet force counters the higher pressure, and so you get a zero net change. So you can move the Earth into a push flow, because the push flow is then a jet flow. The shapes of the flow act as pipes, and an elephant's feet are acting as exhaust pipes for scaled down Positrons which will be new particles of push magnetism.

Plate tectonics includes all of these forces. It can be worked out very precisely. It is not for me however to get fixated on a subject. I have to work on everything. I don't have time to stop on a subject. I don't have time to do maths. But I have an image of plate tectonics in my head including moving the origin of a plate's X/Y/Z, and including the Gravity, and the jet forces. But the fun part is leaving this to the mathematicians.

Mathematicians should use me as a first step towards solving a problem. That is my role in the Theory Of Everything.

My second role is to create the computer program of the fractal.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/04/2013 11:10:33
THE MOST IMPORTANT POST OF ALL TIME

Feet, Legs, and Bodies As Jet Streams...

The Missing AMS Data....

Dark Matter....

This is quite important actually. AMS picked up Electrons, and it Picked up Positrons, what it didn't pick up is both combined which makes Neutral particles.

IMPORTANT MESSAGE!!! NEUTRAL BUMPS NEUTRAL

It's the missing piece of the jigsaw puzzle, it's the Dark Matter.

The Neutral flow is of course zero, but an electron is -1.

Energy moves towards lower energy...

Neutral bumps towards Electrons.

The jet stream of particles from an elephant's feet is Neutral. It crushes you, but it's neutral. Gravity is a constant C, but the two forces combined are not a constant. There can be more positrons involved, or more electrons involved in the mixture. The Neutral is the Gravity as a combination of both forces.

If you take feet as jetstreams they match the body of an animal to take their weight. I'll give you some very nice examples...

A deer walks through mud, it's neutral jetstream creates hooves into the mud. You can see the stream jetting in that direction, and as a slight diagonal flow force.

A tree has roots, it's neutral jetstream is into dirt. You can see the jetstream wiggling its way through the dirt as its roots. The tree itself is Newtons 3rd law, that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

We have flat feet, and our opposite action is our hair.

But IMPORTANT news....

Dinosaurs feet do not appear to match their body size. Something is wrong. That needs looking into. Is G a constant? No it isn't, it's based on Positrons and electrons mixed. We would not feel much of a change if gravity changed, but our Neutral jetstream becomes stronger. How strong can a neutral jetstream get? Unknown. But I would say that the jetstream can become unhealthily strong as a pressure inside our bodies.

I also would like you to take a look at hieroglyphics. There is a message in them that I don't wish to discuss on here. The clue is in the Pyramid Lightbulb, and another clue is in the Ankh.

Neutral Gravity is not a constant, it is just Neutral, and always zero, but that doesn't make it a constant.

The change is in the jetstream like a magnet can have a change in jetstream. The spin increases to counter the flow. If you have a spin, and put pressure on that spin it increases. When an ice skater pulls their arms in they go faster.

Our internal body spin counters our Neutral Gravity flow. And that spin speed I think can become unhealthy.

The T-Rex has feet the area of an elephant, but only two of them. That's not right. The Brontosaurus is huge, it's feet don't seem to match.

Egyptians built a pyramid, what for? Maybe there is a clue?

Sometimes you have to just go with what you are thinking. If it's a bit strange to scientists, I'm a scientist too. I don't treat science as 100% accuracy, because I am the most accurate that science has ever been, and I know that science has only ever been about 5% accurate. I am about 90% accurate. Who cares if I go with what I am thinking, and I don't use maths? My accuracy is greater than maths. My computer program is greater than me, but I am then not playing my important role of talking to everyone.

When I watch Richard Feynman, people complain that he wasn't talking enough to the public. It's true, I like it when he talks to the public. If you sit doing maths as proof, you might get 5% accuracy if you don't know what you are doing.

Is G a constant... no.
Is the maths a constant... yes. G = A Neutral Force.

Ok so now you can fix the maths by using some sort of jetstream formula to take into account Positrons, and electrons, and their Neutral combination as a bump force, and combined with a total pressure from Positron scaling with a delay.

I shouldn't use maths myself, I shouldn't reduce my talking time. I have the physics in my head, and that's all I need.

I can tell people a lot. I can get a noble prize every 5 minutes. That's how fast I solve a problem. In fact whilst I am typing I am solving things in real time. By the time I get to the end of a post it is solved in the post.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/04/2013 11:22:59
I now have enough information for the Computer Program.

I think I was waiting for Neutral as a bump force. That's the final part that I only figured out from the AMS data. My next post therefore will be the computer program.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/04/2013 13:39:56
I started more of the Computer Program, but I still have a lot going through my head.

I have the red shift figured out as physics...

Colour is spin in a scaled container. So like an Ice Skaters arms the colour is fixed to spin speed by pressure. The Universe has pressure, it's made from scalar particles in a grain structure. Red is the least pressure, and blue is the higher pressure.. etc. Pressure through scalar spin is visible in a rainbow, the red is at the top, low pressure, and blue at the bottom, high pressure. Spin speed, and scalar changes.

So red shift is due to pressure in the universe rising. The red moves into an area of least resistance. Away from the centre, and away from all points.

It's great because I can make my computer program use mathematical colours even for invisible particles. Just follow those rules but change the scale for a Quantum Human.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/04/2013 13:57:54
The Universe is splitting into finer pieces.

A pressure change in the Universe will scale us down. We must be constantly scaling down. The physics are to split particles into 13 parts so that the new parts are scaled down from the old part. It doesn't actually end the Universe or anything. It makes the Universe have a higher resolution, and more chaos. Which is actually a good thing. If you watch a HD TV, and the old SD TV it is better to watch the HD TV. The Universe is getting more HD as time goes by. People get more intelligent, and evolution has more to work with. The Universe has a fractal, and by looking at trees you can see that the fractal is getting smoother from the old Hexagon shape.

Yes the universe started off with just 13 points, separated by a great distance. It splits down, and each split is a new set of physics that can be used in evolution.

It works for germs too, they can become more complex. In fact the germs have first pick of the  new physics. You can imagine that the physics match a germs scale better than our scale. So it can grab a weapon that we can't.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 06/04/2013 20:26:22
Today's science match is almost perfect for my zero particle...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21829115.200-peaceful-matterantimatter-pairing-looks-more-real.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21829115.200-peaceful-matterantimatter-pairing-looks-more-real.html)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/04/2013 01:16:40
Earlier on today I was setting up the program that will hopefully create the Universe. I expect it to do some strange things, and program itself. But after a few lines of code I saw a scaling sphere on the screen. I was a bit shocked because I didn't program that, and I thought that somehow I had tapped into the Quantum Physics of the computer. But it's a really good optical illusion in fact. I am just moving 12 points towards the middle of the screen. It's a bit like those human dancers that you can find that are made from dots. YouTube blurred the quality, but the illusion is here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfMafhyovSY&feature=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfMafhyovSY&feature=youtu.be)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 07/04/2013 18:32:00
More news about pairing Electrons with Positrons...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21593-have-we-summoned-the-mysterious-majorana-fermion.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21593-have-we-summoned-the-mysterious-majorana-fermion.html)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 09:04:40
Life, and Intelligence emanating from the Earth...

Is it possible that life comes from the centre of the Earth as an outflow? I have been studying gravity, and its outflow, and there is an Inverse square law in both directions. Everyone knows the inverse square law of Gravity, but this inverse square law is more interesting.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, so the inverse square law has an equal, and opposite reaction on the Earth. Now Gravity is cancelled out by spin, and flow, and so it is hard to actually measure mass 100% accurately. If the Earth contained a flow force similar to a singularity, it would be cancelled out by an inverse outflow. This outflow would be able to create life by creating particles through the Earth from pressure.

Well, I found a relationship to this information. It is in the skin of animals, and life...

The Outflow of life

The Inverse square law is visible in the skin combined with the mass, and combined with the contact with the Earth of points, and distance from the Earth. So for example...

1/ You have the low end of the scale. The bird which is lightweight, with feathers flowing out in every direction. It's outflow is high compared with its body weight. Two spindly legs, and spends a lot of time a long distance away from the Earth. Call this the light scale.

2/ Low to medium weight you have the cat, and the dog. The cat with 4 legs in contact with the Earth, covered in fur, and outflow relating to the 4 points in contact with the Earth. So fur on the back where fur is on our head is a relationship to outflow in the same direction. Spends most of the time up to about 2ft away from the Earth.

3/ You have a human, about 10 stone, two legs touching the Earth, 1ft square contact. This human has smooth skin, some hair at the top, and some genital hair. The smooth skin, and the hair are the outflow forces. 6ft away from the Earth. This is the exact middle scale, which you can call the Neutral scale. I think that this neutral scale is important to intelligence.

4/ Getting bigger, the cow. 4 legs in contact with the Earth. The nails are starting to become hooves, the fur is getting shorter from the cat, and the dog. Th skin is still smooth. 5ft away from the Earth.

5/ The elephant. 4 legs in contact with the Earth. The nails are thick. The feet are flat. The fur is dwindling away. The skin is starting to become wrinkled. The wrinkles are related to the outflow changing back to an inflow, like a snowflake, and a Bose/ Einstein Condensate. 8ft away from the Earth.

6/ The tree. Multiple contacts with the Earth as roots. The feet embed into the ground. The fur has become leaves, and the skin is extremely wrinkled. A powerful inflow, and outflow combined. The tree has taken on its own life giving properties like the Earth. It's height is divided into roots flows, hard to measure per root.

I believe that this is the inverted Inverse Square Law as Newton's 3rd law that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

The flows are also related to temperature. So lizards have a different flow force, and are also very close to the ground. Like snakes.. you never see a fury snake.

Insects, extremely close to the ground. Exoskeleton.

I also think that bones are a neutral change location.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 10:45:24
Hexagonal Fractals in Nature...

I say that trees are smoothing out an hexagonal fractal. What does that mean? Well it is better if I show you. These next two examples have a clear hexagonal structure, because they are the perfect mathematical size. It's a bit like the perfect woman, you want the best symmetry, well these trees have the best symmetry... 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51035740406@N01/5669558892/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/51035740406@N01/5669558892/)

http://urbanist.typepad.com/creature_of_the_shade/2008/07/confronting-vegetation-petrophile-sessilis.html (http://urbanist.typepad.com/creature_of_the_shade/2008/07/confronting-vegetation-petrophile-sessilis.html)

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 11:08:04
Holes

Think of a Black Hole as power. A hole is power, and energy in a flow of particles. The whirlpool spinning around a hole is locating energy to a circular space. Locking it there means that it can be used. An electron is a hole, it's energy is a neutral spin around the hole, the same as the flow of water around a whirlpool. Holes are power, and the Earth has a lot of power, so I say that it has a hole.

I want to also add that the important part of atoms is their holes, and their flows. The nucleus is Neutral, but can flow towards negative holes, so the Nucleus can flow towards electrons, and that is time. When a Neutral force moves around a hole, it takes on the hole spin. So then the Neutral force becomes an electric field. Static electricity is the Nucleus flowing through the electrons to become a static electric field. So a balloon can be rubbed, and Neutral forces will change to static electricity. The rubber is not good as a conductor because it is Neutral, but the Neutral easily changes into electrons. You could say that rubber is not a good container of water because it is a full bucket of water already.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 11:34:45
The Bose / Einstein Condensate

The condensate is the opposite flow of static electricity. In static electricity the nucleus flows out towards electrons, takes on the electron spin to become energy. The snowflake reverses the flow towards the nucleus.. electrons take on positrons, and move towards Neutral areas. The condensate exaggerates a snowflake to its final solution. Time is flowing backwards.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 11:36:21
Where are the positrons?

You see them as photons. Whatever science is calling a positron, isn't a positron. It's probably a double positron. Call it a dirty positron for simplicity. There is some sort of scalar change happening very fast, and it is so fast that a photon is taking on the part of 3 other particles. I think that time is faster than C, so that might be why.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 12:01:04
Solving Everything

It may seem hard to believe but over the years I have been solving everything as an independent witness of science. I never studied science so I had to re-invent it all from scratch. That was for fun. So I re-invented things right back from before Newton, and didn't read anything. I came up with Gravity, and Time, and Dimensions, and my own set of particles, and my own set of rules. I have solved almost everything now. It is interesting however to read my old posts. For example when I invented Dark Matter...

http://theabsolute.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=4962&start=100 (http://theabsolute.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=4962&start=100)

My posts started in 2003, and get progressively better over time. But in the above example I am calling Dark Matter.. ghost. That's because I just invented it. I also invented Dark Flow. The words were not in use at the time, so I just came up with the physics, and gave them my own names. You may think it is strange to call Dark Matter 'Ghost' but I don't think that anybody had heard of Dark Matter in 2009. It had been out of circulation for years. I also invented the Aether, but of course it was already in use. I just didn't know about it. I also invented the Aether sink holes, and spurt holes as time holes.

When I say invented, I mean re-invented without knowing it. To me.. I have solved everything in the Universe, but to everyone else.. I came after somebody else.

But my point is that I have played the parts of Newton, Einstein, and everyone else, all on my own.

This gives me a great deal of vision of the Universe in my mind. I have a real connection with it. I can fly around the Universe, and see everything at any scale. It's amazing.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 12:25:46
In the above as well, you have to remember that Dark matter came up in my theory because I was using a push Gravity system. Not because some Galaxy was spinning wrong. Dark Matter is a natural occurrence of a Push Gravity system, and so are bubbles.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 08/04/2013 12:42:19
Then this link, has yet another link where I think of Dark Matter in 2004, but unfortunately the link has gone...
http://theabsolute.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=115168#p115168 (http://theabsolute.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=115168#p115168)

That post caused NASA to notice the Pioneer Anomaly. I asked NASA in Feb 2004 if their spaceships were slowing down, and they said no. Then in August 2004 they had a meeting and found the Pioneer anomaly from some old data going back to 1970.

In the end though it turned out not to be Dark Matter afterall.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 09/04/2013 00:19:10
Cause And Effect

Cause and effect are added to Newton's 3rd law that every action has an equal, and opposite reaction.

The very first cause...

Inflation from a hole. So you get the sphere, and the hole all at once. Equal, and opposite. Newton's 3rd law.

The effect
Zero is created. The sphere, and it's hole added together equals zero, equal, and opposite. 1 + -1 = 0. You get neutral space.

That happened once, it happens infinitely from infinite points. It equals zero, the opposite of zero is infinity.

What you do here is create an infinite rule that cancels itself out. The positions of the sphere are cancelled out by Newton's Kissing Problem, which is a shape that has a pattern of symmetry from natural cause, and effect.

The next stage is filling in the gaps. There is always a gap to fill in.

Then the particles start to touch each other. Now Newton's 3rd law is to to the opposite to touch.. move away.

Then infinity squashes all of the particles together from inflation. The opposite is to shrink down.

Anyway, eventually form Cause, and effect you get now. And what has happened is that all of the rules of Cause, and effect, and equal, and opposite forced only one possible outcome for the Universe. Zero Particle Theory.

But I say that pull doesn't exist. What is the equal, and opposite to push?

The half tennis ball shows you that the equal, and opposite to a bump surface, is a dip surface. Convex, and concave. So pull, is actually flow into a hole.

And then people wonder how do we start a thought off in our head. What is the first cause of a thought...

The energy of thought is the inflation from a hole the same as the first Cause of the Universe. Not much has actually changed in billions of years. Just a constant set of Cause, and effect, and Newton's 3rd Law.

So why is science so complicated?

In 1746 Isaac Newton became very famous with his ideas on Gravity. A celebrity status, with a bold man as the role model with more men to follow him. I think of the seagulls in Finding Nemo all saying "Pull, pull, pull pull pull, pull..." with trill voices. By turning physics on its head with a pull force instead of a push force science became the most impossible puzzle to solve. Everyone trying to fix this problem, and anyone saying that Gravity is a push force is a joke. It's the Emperors New Suit that you are stupid if you don't call Gravity a pull force.

Then everything started to work nicely backwards, because of Newton's 3rd law that things can be worked out by their opposite reaction. But pull is only similar to flow into a hole, not exact enough to work forever. You end up with Dark matter as a push force.

Now you have a pull force, and Dark Matter as a push force, and yet they are both the exact same force. The problems aren't over yet...

You get this mass where there should be a hole. Nobody used the tennis ball idea, so nobody has the holes in the Earth in the right places, they have mass in the holes. And Electrons get a mass.

Now electrons have a mass so Quantum physics is messed up. because the electron is now backwards, and so the Michelson and Morley experiment is not towards holes it is towards mass. The photon should be in a wind from mass, but not from holes. So that is all backwards.

You have another problem. You don't have electron holes, you have electron mass, so in that hole you have a particle missing. The missing particle is playing the part of gravity. So you have gravity missing. So you need a particle for mass, and come up with the Higgs Boson. So now you have invented a new particle to replace the one in the electron hole. You have really found a scalar particle of some sort, and it doesn't really matter which one it is, because the electron, and positron are scalar particles that make all of the other scalar particles.

So you have missing positrons, and you start the two slit experiment. Guess what, you find the missing positrons, but you don't know about them. So now you think that weird things are happening to photons.

Anyway, it goes on like Bizarro World in Superman comics...

http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/i-found-bizarro-economics-world.html (http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/i-found-bizarro-economics-world.html)

I turn to these people who can see the emperor in his new suit, and I say "Pull, pull, pull, pull..." in a trill voice. Scientists shout "Banned, Banned, Banned, Banned..."

Brilliant! 1746 is strong in the Bizarros.

Einstein doesn't help. He takes advantage of the mess that science is in. basically, at this point you could say almost anything, and get away with it. With science backwards lets just take physics away completely and give it to the observer. So now the observer is reverse rolled into the physics.

You have a pull force where there should be a push force, and you have an observer watching a train to account for the physics on the train.

Then there should be a flow towards the Earth, but you have a pull, so Einstein decides to bend Spacetime. Oh brilliant!!! The bend was the flow, now it's a bend. You may as well add a twist to the bend because its a plughole, so Einstein adds a twist to the bend, but backwards.

So now you have a pull force that bends spacetime with a twist, instead of simple physics, a flow into holes with a twist.. it's a plughole. No difference.

Then you have a Black Hole with a pull force, and a twist that is a Galaxy. It's a whirlpool. There's no difference.

And out of 7 billion people on Earth, I'm the only one to see it. I don't even feel that clever to work it out really. It's just too obvious to be called clever.

I live on a Bizarro World, all backwards. They tell me to do the maths... it's a joke.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/04/2013 10:38:27
Nucleus propagation and C

First you imagine Frog Spawn. A separation of the egg by a distance of jelly. You turn this into a Newton's Cradle. This is the passing of information by egg. To get the eggs to pass information they must bump each other. So they need to rock around in the jelly. Frog Spawn has a separation distance, and angle similar to Newton's Kissing Problem. If you look at Frog Spawn...

http://doubtfulnews.com/2013/02/goo-up-in-the-trees/ (http://doubtfulnews.com/2013/02/goo-up-in-the-trees/)

... you will quickly find the Hexagon. That's the Kissing Problem of stacking sphere. The jelly swells up in water, and we will call that scalar for this example. We will call the eggs Positrons. We will think of the jelly as Electrons. We will call one Kissing shape of 13 particles the Zero Particle. And to complete the Zero Particle we will scale all of this down to a gas. So now the jelly is a cloud, and the positrons are floating in the cloud. The cloud bumps in the directions of Newton's Kissing Problem. The positrons swing in the Directions of the bumps. The positrons are swinging like a Newton's Cradle. When the positrons bump they act as Photons. When they don't bump they are hidden in the electron cancellation. 1 + -1 = 0.

The act of creating the Newton's Cradle is both random from the CMB, and also Observer propagated. All you have to do to get the flow in a certain direction is degenerate the cloud. We degenerate the cloud of electrons at an angle through the Newton's Kissing shape to change the Two Slit Experiment from a CMB wave into an Observer Propagated wave. The CMB wave looks different to the Observer wave because it has no direction apart from a newton's Kissing Problem structure, which is mostly hexagonal. Particles passing through a hexagonal structure move in a wave pattern. Hexagons link to other hexagons in a wave formation.

The propagation of light is a Frog Spawn Fractal.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/04/2013 10:49:25
Propagate light, propagate physics

The light, and the physics are related. They work the same way as each other. If you propagate light using the above method, you can propagate mass the same way. If you haven't downloaded my snowflake generator, here it is... press the spacebar to make it work...

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxton/Snowflake.rar (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxton/Snowflake.rar)

It is the Frog Spawn propagation of matter that creates the snowflake.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/04/2013 10:58:35
The propagation of Gravity

The Propagation of a galaxy

You can keep going.. they are all the same. Everything uses this propagation method. All that is missing is the scalar information for the other particles, and the periodic table of missing eggs in the frog spawn. The protons create an initial pattern of propagation with missing Positrons, so the propagation is a different shape. Instead of a Hexagon you might get a five pointed star. So you get the periodic table. You also get weak shearing through the propagating material as positrons can move to a free area.

Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/04/2013 11:27:22
My science match for the previous posts moves to another Frog Spawn Fractal...

http://www.space.com/14258-space-bubbles-star-evolution.html (http://www.space.com/14258-space-bubbles-star-evolution.html)

Notice that the fractal is both physically a fractal that energy is in the centre of a bubble of gas, and visually a fractal that the light is a sphere within a sphere. The egg of the frog being the movement, and the jelly being the food.

So...

Tadpole = Movement

matches

Sun = movement


Jelly = Food

Matches

Gas = Food

Sphere in a sphere is both a physical, and aesthetic fractal. The Universe is made from fractals that obey fractal laws.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/04/2013 12:14:33
I sort of wondered if you could actually make a magnetic version of this Newton's cradle. You could try liquid iron, and oil with an iron core suspended from a wire. The wire being attached to an electric current. Put the oil in a trough touching the cores, then switch on the current in a linear direction passing along the wires. The oil should propagate along the iron cores to the end of the trough. If you made the trough a see saw, it could rock back to the beginning again. So now you have an electric rocker switch using Frog Spawn propagation.

If you could make a jelly version with magnetic cores, you could get some nice natural shapes in the jelly. Watch the jelly change into a starfish for example. Or some bouncy balls that start to bounce on their own.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/04/2013 13:08:06
The fractals smooth out.

As the fractal splits, and splits, it smooths out. But when you understand the fractal, you can still see it. I can just about see it in a tree for example. I can just about see it everywhere in this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJyUtbn0O5Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJyUtbn0O5Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

But it is very smoothed out by now.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 10/04/2013 21:08:32
Time and Dilation to local points...

The time that I call Poise Time is located inside points. It is at each point of the Frog Spawn, and curls up in there as energy. Per point means local, and local time means that matter must be local to a point to use that time. The outflow of time separates distance of matter to time. So the inflow being local uses the nearest time nucleus, and not its original time nucleus. So when time flows backwards to make a snowflake, it is not backwards to its original location, it is backwards towards a point, where In flow is backwards, and Out flow is forwards. So movement reorganises time backwards from forwards, but different to the the Standard Model time does not have an arrow. It has locality to points, In, and Out.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/04/2013 00:09:56
Growing Old...

In a fractal Universe I have a fractal description of time using holes separated by Newton's Kissing problem. Time flows out for energy propagation, and heat, and time flows back into the nearest local hole for negative propagation, and cold. The negative flow towards holes folds inwards to create snowflake fractals. But it also flows inwards when energy is running low from that hole. Points require energy to hold them open, and that energy is like a plug in the hole. If a point starts to empty, then the plug is out of the hole, and time travels into that hole.

Humans are a DNA energy pack of time. It flows from the holes, and propagates our shape. It uses scalar energy to keep flowing forwards.. but it runs out. At about 40 your time flow has run out, and so time starts flowing backwards for you... yes backwards.

You are not flowing into your past (well just a bit with memory slowly working backwards), but you are taking in energy from the opposite direction... like a hand saw. Energy out, energy in for 40 years to complete the energy cycle.

This change in direction at 40 hits you at first. The slow down is a low peak in your mental abilities. But it gains speed back to something close to before. But now with energy flowing inwards you start to wrinkle. You are taking on the energy of the snowflake fractal, and it isn't smooth, it is wrinkly. Like a balloon going down. You can only last so long on backwards energy, it is like an extra fuel tank.

But the nice thing about it is that you are being stored in holes. So it gives your imagination the chance to say that there is an afterlife, because your energy went into holes. Which is another way to examine DNA... is DNA a person stored in holes?

That is fantasising a bit. Anyway you get older by reversing the energy of time back into holes. You brain starts to pick thing out in the wrong sequence. And then you forget names, because those names are in the wrong order to work in reverse.

Say Tommy is 48, and you remember Tommy at 12. You look at Tommy, he looks to old to be Tommy. Your flow is backwards.

But time itself is only energy. Any reference to Past, and Future is a misunderstanding. It's just a flow force from holes. No need to add anything paranormal to it. It may be fun for scientists to think of these paranormal events, but science should be accuracy, not fun.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/04/2013 10:35:32
The time / origin displacement

Connected particles share an origin. Particles connect locally in X/Y/Z/In/Out/Flat-line. Time connects locally just the same. In / Out / Flat-line are the origin of the force of particles. At the point of In / Out / Flat-line there is scalar regression. Scale works like curvature, and time starts at flat line In / Out. Time is a bit like a trampoline combined with inflation. So if the trampoline is concave you get inflation filling the concave dent. If the trampoline is convex then time is feeding outwards, and you have inflation. We share a fractal with a Universal Membrane. X/Y/Z, and Out are local to us, but In, and Flat-line are local to the Universal membrane. Action at a distance is really local to In/ and Flat-line. The sorting order of the Universal Membrane is scalar. Colours most likely sort to pressure in a Universal membrane, but still appear to us at X / Y /Z coordinates.

Mathematically the origin can be tied to particles as vectors. Physically the origin is tied to particles in the Nucleus of the particle in a hole. The hole in the standard model would lead to the 4th dimension, but the holes are too fragmented to work in the standard model.

The problem with the standard model is that it has no physics for time. So you can make anything work that you like. I always use physics, and I don't know how to get the physics of time working as an arrow. But anyway, my fractal time works better than an arrow, because it allows free thought. If a body is connected to its own time energy it only uses its own time energy locally, and that allows an individual to separate themselves from the rest of the Universe. So that person then has thoughts individual to themselves.. free thought.

If time were an arrow (which I find impossible unless you just use words, and no physics) then free will becomes connected to an arrow of time, and you have no free will.

Anyway Gravity is local, so time should be local, that makes more sense.

I always use physics when I talk of ideas, I have no ideas without physics. I have physics for Gravity, magnetism, time, and nothing. I think that's why the Standard Model is so incomplete, and can get away with just saying the 4th dimension.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/04/2013 11:06:02
Today's science link....
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130410141541.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130410141541.htm)

So earlier I was saying that at 40 time starts to flow in reverse for you. The order in which you sort information is taken in reverse. You adapt to this reverse thinking pattern, because you sort things backwards.

4 + 3 = 7
3 + 4 = 7

You don't notice.

But I can give you an example. Sometime soon the World Snooker Championships begin. There are older commentators who used to play the game as World Champions. They often talk about loss of concentration in their older years, and a common complaint is forgetting to pot the ball. This is how snooker works...

In order of thinking...
1/ You calculate the white angle towards another ball to pot that ball.
2/ You look at the next ball that you would want to pot. Calculate how to get onto the next ball within about a 1ft radius of accuracy.


That's the correct order, but a problem begins in older players, that they forget stage 1, and take it for granted.

So the older player...

1/ Calculate how to get onto the next ball within about a 1ft radius of accuracy.
2 Forgets to calculate the white angle towards another ball to pot that ball.

Their thoughts are occurring in reverse order, but so good at potting that the final stage usually doesn't matter. If a professional snooker player could train themselves to think in reverse, then they could become fantastic again.

It is often the first thing that is skipped in older years. because the timing of that first thing seems to make the least sense to you...

"How did I forget to pot the ball, that is the main thing?"

The main thing is turning up last, and you skip it by rushing.

"I'm at the final stage now, the positioning of the ball. So I can't have missed anything out."

But the above link gives you some idea of how we sequence thoughts, and if that sequence is messed up, it is time reversal. But time as an energy source, not as Past, Present, and Future.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/04/2013 14:32:30
The Universe as a local object...

The physics that I use depend upon curves, and the curves need to cancel each other out to get a zero state Universe. If you start with any set of physics they need a location inside something. You have to be careful how you work this out, because to keep the zero state you are putting particles on top of something. So if you have a single particle with a hole, you have a set of curves, and the convex curves are the particles, and the concave curves are the hole. They are inside a huge version of the same thing. In scale curves start to look like straight lines. So at the point where the Universe is large you can maintain the zero state by putting the particles inside a huge object with straight lines. This connects your inner particles to the outer membrane when they are cancelling each other out with...

1 + -1 = 0

1 + -1 = merged with the Universe.

Which sort of allows an action at a distance, because the distance has a dimension that is connected to a much bigger particle. Two photons with zero mass can be connected to the zero line of the whole Universe.

This is maybe convenient. I would prefer just to connect two photons to the Aether. It feels like there is some missing information still. A vacuum is used to move the particles, and there is no such thing as a vacuum, so it's a very cheated experiment anyway.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 11/04/2013 15:18:34
Amazing Evolution...

Zero Particle Theory uses fractals as life shapes. Especially the Hexagon through Newton's Kissing Problem. That in a particle stacking system 12 particles can surround 1 particle, and you get a common Hexagon fractal. So most creatures are already covered before evolution, and DNA are required.

What does that mean?

It means that you can almost build all of our nature from fractals without evolution, but the shapes would be missing some features.

The one thing that I am always drawn to from evolution is that baby's feet are flat. That means that the baby is ready for Gravity, and Cause, and effect are backwards because the baby has never walked on the ground before. When Cause, and effect are backwards it shows that something in DNA is very amazing.

You can say that a person with flat feet survived better to pass on their DNA, and it works in a computer simulation. But how far can that go? How many people today are born with hooves? How long would it take to change feet into hooves?

1/ Nobody today has feet with hooves. The DNA could not be passed on.
2/ DNA Cause and Effect need memory to change the human into a human with hooves.

Something has to be stored during a human lifetime that adds to DNA. And that is Poise Energy of Time. Time as an energy flowing backwards into holes accounts for Cause and effect playing backwards. The baby can be born with flat feet, or even hooves if necessary.

The computer simulations work if humans can be born with hooves to survive better, but that doesn't happen. So instead you need DNA memory. For each person with harder feet you will eventually get hooves, but the harder feet have to be memorised at each stage.

DNA requires a memory system. Feedback into holes. The snowflake.. Bose Einstein Condensate.. time reversal.


Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 12/04/2013 20:45:24
Today's science match is about evolution. It doesn't match what I said, but it gives an alternative idea that I like...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130412132407.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130412132407.htm)
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pincho on 13/04/2013 09:51:09
Ok so I have been programming for a couple of days now, and the physics are starting to self build. The program is creating physics that I never thought about. Like when two bubbles stick together the centre of mass moves, and the bubbles spin around a new mass point. Although I was not programming sticky bubbles, I accidentally got those physics, because my program isn't finished yet. But the interesting thing is that the sticky bubbles really work properly, and that is because of a bow shock. I use physics for relativity, and the physics for the bow shock automatically switch the mass centre, and create the centre of rotation, and rotate the mass all in one go. No formulas to work out, just natural events occurring from a bow shock. It may even turn out that I need sticky bubbles, because a Galaxy rotates as one object I think.

When I imagined my snowflake program it worked. Now it seems that my imagined physics for the Universe are going to work as well.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: yor_on on 18/04/2013 23:59:22
Pincho, it's time for you to check up on the terminology of science, just not loose sentences. You have a good and original mind, but you need to set it into a context. And using too many self defined definitions makes it very hard to read. Sit down and check out how main stream science define it. Then look at what you think, but use the words, and science, that already are there. I think you're young :) And impatient. Relax, time is enough.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: yor_on on 19/04/2013 00:05:43
Yeah, I know. the more your idea differs, the harder it will be to find the right words. Don't give up though, they exist, you just have to search, but I promise you will recognize them when you see them. and they will also give you more ideas. Don't assume you're the only in physics with a good mind. We all stand on shoulders, just by growing up.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pmb on 02/05/2013 06:08:50
Pincho - Since you complained so much when I explained to you what the scientific method was and corrected your incorrect beliefs about what science is all about I thought I'd come on your turf and see if you'd justify any of your claims.

I saw only this and one other thread that you started. Before I added this post this thread consisted of 145 posts, 143 of which are yours. What are you attempting to accomplish?

When you make claims such as
Quote
You may think it is strange to call Dark Matter 'Ghost' but I don't think that anybody had heard of Dark Matter in 2009.
it's hard to take you seriously. You claimed to have never learned science and decided to reinvent it from scratch. If you never learned science then how can you expect anybody to take you seriously? In the other forum you didn't even seem willing to explain what you meant when you use the word "science" because its clear that what you mean yu that word and what others mean by it have little to do with each other. Then you make an erroneous statement like this one where you believe that nobody had ever heard of the term dark matter in 2009. You can't be serious. Only a crackpot would make such a terribly erroneous claim like that. It's unheard of to find an astronomy, cosmology or astrophysics text published within the, say, last 30 years, which doesn't talk about dark matter. Even my GR texts discuss it

So tell me. Are you willing to

(1) Define the term science as you have chosen to use the term.
(2) Explain why you're unwilling to justify any assertion that you've made to me in that other thread.
(3) Justify/clarify/explain your belief that you don't think that anybody had heard of Dark Matter in 2009.

I'd also like to hear why you'd reject science when you yourself have told us that you don't know anything about it. How you you be certain that you're talking about the same methodology that everyone else uses? I.e. how do you know that when you make a statement or attempt to make an argument hat you're doing so with sound logic?

And no. I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm sincerely trying to understand you even if it doesn't come across that way to you.
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Ethos_ on 02/05/2013 17:33:44

And no. I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm sincerely trying to understand you even if it doesn't come across that way to you.
Good luck Pmb, I've also tried to communicate intelligently with this fellow. There is only one jerk involved here in this discussion and it isn't you. Nor is it I, we have both given it a fair effort but sadly, to no avail. Like yourself, I was interested in understanding Pincho's ideas, but he resists any and all corrective logic. I'm afraid our efforts have been terribly wasted!!!
Title: Re: Zero Particle Theory
Post by: Pmb on 02/05/2013 17:56:01

And no. I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm sincerely trying to understand you even if it doesn't come across that way to you.
Good luck Pmb, I've also tried to communicate intelligently with this fellow. There is only one jerk involved here in this discussion and it isn't you. Nor is it I, we have both given it a fair effort but sadly, to no avail. Like yourself, I was interested in understanding Pincho's ideas, but he resists any and all corrective logic. I'm afraid our efforts have been terribly wasted!!!
I agree. It was extremely frustrating trying to talk to somoene who is only willing to make unfound claims and refuse to back them up.