0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I have some ideas about what is the true nature of the universe. Others here have other notions. I wonder if we can start with a few postulates and create a new vision of reality. Can we find that principal that John Wheeler talked about when he said, "Some principle uniquely right and uniquely simple must, when one knows it, be also so obvious that it is clear that the universe is built, and must be built, in such and such a way and that it could not possibly be otherwise."As a first postulate I suggest Maxwell's idea.Postulate: The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.
Quote from: Vern on 17/11/2009 14:15:44I have some ideas about what is the true nature of the universe. Others here have other notions. I wonder if we can start with a few postulates and create a new vision of reality. Can we find that principal that John Wheeler talked about when he said, "Some principle uniquely right and uniquely simple must, when one knows it, be also so obvious that it is clear that the universe is built, and must be built, in such and such a way and that it could not possibly be otherwise."As a first postulate I suggest Maxwell's idea.Postulate: The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.I have a theory that can explain cause of Bang !
Now boys; behave. Let's be diplmatic and reasnable within ourselves when considering each others theories.
Quote from: Mr. Scientist on 17/11/2009 15:10:42Now boys; behave. Let's be diplmatic and reasnable within ourselves when considering each others theories.sir, why don't you use physics Journals to publish ??http://journals.aip.org/
By your theory vern magnetic charge inside a photon i effected by a curvature, or it dissipated until it follows a linear path again. The is a prediction well-worth noting.
hv describes quantum energy. It contains only a constant and the rate of electromagnetic change over time. If the electric and magnetic amplitude reached during the change were variable it would need be in the equation.Now, is that reasoning valid?
May be we can begin with the one reality we have postulated. That only photons comprise the universe. We can see how far we can get with that notion and still remain self consistent.Given the postulate, we might wonder why the electromagnetic field always presents itself in quantum chunks. I have proposed that it is because empty space can support only so much electric and magnetic amplitude. I suspect that is true because electric and magnetic amplitude is not part of the equation for quantum energy.hv describes quantum energy. It contains only a constant and the rate of electromagnetic change over time. If the electric and magnetic amplitude reached during the change were variable it would need be in the equation.Now, is that reasoning valid?
Quotehv describes quantum energy. It contains only a constant and the rate of electromagnetic change over time. If the electric and magnetic amplitude reached during the change were variable it would need be in the equation.Now, is that reasoning valid? If that reasoning is valid, we immediately see that there are some obvious realities that have not yet been stated in physics. The numerical value of the electric and magnetic amplitude limit that empty space can sustain is one. This number should be significant. It would be a primary constant from which Planck's constant derives. It would be the primary cause of the quantum nature of the universe. It would be the originating factor in the mental affliction we call Quantamania.(newly coined word) It should free us from the need to identify everything in terms of quanta.
Postulate: The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.
Let me start by saying,Perhaps there was no such thing as big-bang, that life itself existed FOREVER, we are applying Human concepts that something MUST start from somewhere, by implying it starts - gives it an implication it must end, life starts and ends. But the universe never started, it was just THERE to begin with (Or rather to not-begin with...), perhaps the earth was made via big-bang, but not the universe. Could be just a giant contradiction Correct me if I am wrong, but the Big Bang is about the creation of the UNIVERSE - not the earth? ***This being said, reality is such a bore I have discovered my truth, I make my reality the way I want it - and to me, existance is just is. (Intened wording)Everything is just in a state of energy, it is knowlegde that shapes what our perspective of things are.Though, I seem to be lacking energy to go on my ramble Back to violin practice.
Edit: *** ANSWER: ''Correct me if I am wrong, but the Big Bang is about the creation of the UNIVERSE - not the earth?''
Quote from: Mr. ScientistEdit: *** ANSWER: ''Correct me if I am wrong, but the Big Bang is about the creation of the UNIVERSE - not the earth?''When the Catholic Priest first proposed The Primevial Atom the idea was that the material universe sprang from one point and swelled into empty space. Now, the notion seems to have developed to have space and time being created in the event. It takes a magical religious mind to conceive a nothingness even more void of stuff than empty space. Yet, that is what is advocated; astonishingly some folks actually believe that.