Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Yahya on 03/07/2016 13:19:33
-
Introduction :
all kinds of fields such as gravity , magnetic field and electric field are a kind of energy stored in matter , for gravity part of the energy forms the matter and part is responsible for the field, i.e energy is not all in the form of matter some is in the form of a field .
Experiments :
Experiment No 1:
imagine that there is a piece of iron one meter away from a permanent magnet , then I let go of the piece to move freely towards the magnet and stuck on it , I can now demagnetizing the magnet , with a flame above Curie temperature , then work is done , because I can take it again to its place -one meter a part - with force approaches zero , now we have kinetic energy coming from the losing of the field .
Experiment no 2:
imagine that there are two pieces of iron are one meter apart in space iron no 1 and iron no 2 , they are free to move, you can put each one everywhere in space with force tends to zero ,you magnetize iron no 1 , and iron no 2 is fixed not to move , now let go of iron no 2 to freely move toward iron no 1, there is work done ,so the idea of magnetizing caused work to be done , magnetizing itself is work done , notice that iron no 2 may not move and stay there forever , which means I did work by magnetizing and I want to store it and using it later that why field is stored energy, if also there are a large number of pieces of iron around iron no 1 and I magnetized it, all these iron pieces will be attracted towards it giving more energy .
Theory :
The energy stored to form field is the sum of the potential energy of a piece of iron put in every possible place in universe around the magnet until infinity , take in consideration that if a piece of iron is at infinity and it did work coming to the magnet then I can not take it from its place its place is used , another piece from infinity will come to stop over this one and so on ,also the larger mass of iron the larger the stored energy , in fact the calculation is for a total energy and not for the stored energy as in the equations below , the sum of all this energy is the total energy we can extract from it the stored energy to cause field. calculating this sum is mathematically difficult but it is possible because potential energy at infinity equals zero , so putting the iron at every possible place in space and calculating all possible potential energy until infinity will be a specific number and not infinity , this number is the total energy by which we can calculate the energy stored in a magnet or mass to cause field.
Equation :
The energy stored (E) in a mass (m) should be: E=km , where (k) is the constant of equation.
it is proportional to just the mass , now we see how gravitational stored energy is part of the mass itself , that why there is not a way of canceling gravity as canceling magnetism ,this energy will spread in universe until infinity , the larger stored energy the larger is a mass and the larger is gravitational force .That just like saying in the Newton equation of gravity let a unit mass be at constant distance from a particular mass M , when this mass M increases the force on the 1 unit mass will increase as well, because also the stored energy increased.
the gravitational force (F) between two massive objects is proportional to their stored energy, because the stored energy is just the collection of the all possible potential energy ,and the gravitational force is proportional to the potential energy , if we have two masses m1 and m2 , then we have stored energy in each mass ,E1 and E2, E1=km1 , E2=km2, and F∝ E1*E2 .
for calculating the stored energy in mass (M) by collecting all the potential energy possible for a mass (m), in a case (M) and (m) are attracted to each other , we actually calculating the stored energy in both masses, i.e the total energy U , U=E1+E2= k(M+m) , the stored energy in mass (M) , is when the mass (m) equals zero, U=E1+E2 = K(M+0)=kM.
for magnetism when we take two identical magnetic fields-identical magnetic fields are magnetic fields of two or more magnets , when a piece of iron is put at constant distance , it will undergo the same force in each of these magnets -one of these identical magnetic field is caused by electricity another one is caused by permanent magnet they should have the same stored energy, which can be calculated by the electric energy consumed.
now we can take two identical field one gravitational and the other is magnetic , they have the same energy , we take the calculated energy from magnetism and apply it in the above equation to calculate the constant K.
to get a identical magnetic field and gravitational field , we have a specific ratio between two masses , the same ratio between two magnetic fields , then the same ratio will be for their stored energies , if the force is equal at constant distances both the magnetic field and the gravitational field have the same stored energy.
the three field equations can be integrated in one equation , by calculating the stored energy for a mass , a magnet or an electric charge ,instead of mass , magnet and electric charge we have stored energy , that can be a factor in one equation for these fields. but that actually will not happen! we can't say amount of stored energy in a magnet is affecting a particular amount of stored energy in a mass, the mass and magnet won't attract , because they are stored energy but in different forms, take an example a non-conductor , electric current does not flow through it and does not have effect on it like producing light or heat ,etc , while the same conductor can be affected by kinetic energy. magnetic field stored energy does not affect matter.
Conclusion :
the process of magnetizing or demagnetizing results in a work done, this work does not come from nothing as the thermodynamics first law states, so it should be that the process of magnetizing and demagnetizing is a work done to be stored as energy inside matter to cause permanent potential energy.
this amount of energy can be calculated theoretically for all kinds of fields the same way, by collecting all potential energy for a mass , magnet , electric charge,for example when magnetizing a piece of iron and letting iron pieces to come from space to this permanent magnet , and calculating how much possible work can be done this way.
this article does not cover calculating stored energy by calculating the sum of all possible potential energy for a field , which is mathematically difficult , however for gravity the equation to calculate this field stored energy is : E=km, where (m) is the mass containing field stored energy (E) , and k is the equation constant.
-
all kind of fields such as gravity , etc is a kind of energy stored in a matter , for gravity part of the energy forms the matter and part is responsible for the field, i.e energy is not all in the form of matter some is in the form of a field .
Sounds good. Matter is constantly radiating gravitational waves. This causes matter to be reduced. The gravitational field is due to the radiation from the mass itself which is small plus the radiation from the Earth which is large. And of course the radiation from the sun and stars and the entire galaxy. The earth has the largest effect upon us but the earth itself is effected by the sun and not so much by the stars.
In effect your basic idea is excellent. Now if people do not deny your experiments that does not prove your theory is correct. It merely means they are not interested in it.
-
All fields are not the same, all fields are interwoven with space-time to create the overall force of gravity.
-
All fields are not the same.
the three field equations can be integrated in one equation , by calculating the stored energy for a mass , a magnet or an electric charge ,instead of mass , magnet and electric charge we have stored energy , that can be a factor in one equation for these fields. but that actually will not happen! we can't say amount of stored energy in a magnet is affecting a particular amount of stored energy in a mass, the mass and magnet won't attract , because they are stored energy but in different forms, take an example a non-conductor , electric current does not flow through it and does not have effect on it like producing light or heat ,etc , while the same conductor can be affected by kinetic energy. magnetic field stored energy does not affect matter.
-
All fields are not the same.
the three field equations can be integrated in one equation , as I said we can calculate the amount of stored energy of earth gravity field by imagining a particle and calculating all the potential energy possible for this particle when it is put everywhere in space until infinity, this energy can be calculated in magnetism and electricity the same way, now instead of mass , magnet and electric charge we have stored energy , that can be a factor in one equation for these fields. but that will not happen! we can't say amount of stored energy in a magnet is affecting a particular amount of stored energy in a mass, the mass and magnet won't attract , because they are stored energy but in different forms, take an example a non-conductor , electric energy does not flow through it and does not have effect on it , light , heat ,etc , while the same conductor can be affected by kinetic energy. magnetic field stored energy does not affect matter.
argg, sorry my mistake I pictured field to be something else, thank you though I just learnt something.
-
So , how does this stored energy cause field?
To understand this I had to invent a new concept which I call , the three existence levels , these are positive-existence , zero-existence and negative-existence or emptiness , the first two are intuitive , if you have mass -energy that represents a positive-existence if you have vacuum that represent a zero-existence.
The negative-existence concept :
negative-existence or emptiness is where there is (hunger) for mass-energy , it is a place where it needs mass-energy to fill it , field is a kind of negative-existence .
When stored energy exists inside matter in a form of positive-existence there will be a correspondence of negative-existence outside matter , which is field , however this will not be with specific dimensions or finite , it will be in infinite field , negative existence exists infinitely .
Why negative-existence exists?
If we consider vacuum as zero-existence , where in other words there is nothing , and mass is a positive existence , where in other words there is a specific a mount greater than zero , when this mass-energy which is positive is put in vacuum which is zero , it displaces something , which is field which is negative-existence, in other words it is the space-time curvature , because mathematically zero is not the least thing , so putting mass or energy in vacuum displaces field , because zero or vacuum itself is an existence, mass and vacuum can’t exist at the same place , there should be displacement of vacuum in a form of negative field.
Experiment :
imagine a massive lead ball in space , it will be at stationary , imagine a rocket coming from space it hits the ball , the ball will leave its position in space for the rocket to fill it , if the ball and the rocket are in constant speed , the rocket will run after the ball , and their positions will change in a constant
rate , it is like the ball has a changeable position , without external effect , so the rocket will only displace the ball if it accelerates more than the ball , if the rocket is going to displace the ball it should exert force on the ball , so something with positive mass exerts a force on the ball pushing to fill its place , the gravity is the same , something with negative-existence exerts a force on an object pulling it to fill its emptiness .
Conclusion :
Objects move towards higher negative-existence or emptiness , to fill it with matter , the emptiness has potential to exert force , it attracts other positive mass-energy to fill its emptiness , this negative-existence is caused by displacing vacuum by mass-energy , the stored energy inside matter which is responsible for field , will make this displacement .
-
All fields are not the same.
the three field equations can be integrated in one equation , by calculating the stored energy for a mass , a magnet or an electric charge ,instead of mass , magnet and electric charge we have stored energy , that can be a factor in one equation for these fields. but that actually will not happen! we can't say amount of stored energy in a magnet is affecting a particular amount of stored energy in a mass, the mass and magnet won't attract , because they are stored energy but in different forms, take an example a non-conductor , electric current does not flow through it and does not have effect on it like producing light or heat ,etc , while the same conductor can be affected by kinetic energy. magnetic field stored energy does not affect matter.
I had a re-think, if the equations can be integrated into one equation it is like I said and the fields are interwoven , not one field. A bit like white light is a mixture of frequencies the one field being a mixture of fields.
added- It would be wrong to say a gravitational field that corresponds to centripetal motion is the same as an electromagnetic field which has polarities which relates to both centripetal and ''centrifugal'' motion .
-
yes , they are one in origin and differ in properties , just like white light components. for magnetism I will think about polarity , but I do not think that will invalidate my idea , I still have a piece of iron rotating around magnet with only centripetal force.
-
yes , they are one in origin and differ in properties , just like white light components.
But if they differ in properties, they are different fields and different fields coming from the same origin.
added - what I am trying to express to you is that things that are generally different are not the same and cannot be the same because they are different.
-
it's just a title. they are the same by what I explained i.e they are stored energy
-
it's just a title.
A title that states all fields are the same, a new theory on field, that is what i read. You stated all fields are the same then say its just a title, sorry I am now confused. So what should your title say?
-
the title is " all fields are the same...." but you should read what it follows to understand what I mean when I say that , if you want to stuck on the title then choose your own one , because I can't express my ideas in one sentence.
-
the title is " all fields are the same...." but you should read what it follows to understand what I mean when I say that , if you want to stuck on the title then choose your own one , because I can't express my ideas in one sentence.
Ok, I think I can give you a title, but for now I am still a little unsure. Let us look at your opening statement.
all kinds of fields such as gravity , magnetic field and electric field are a kind of energy stored in matter
A kind of energy is general and could mean anything, the word energy itself is a general term , a group category if you like.
I would say that all fields are a product of process related to hf and ''matter'', not a kind of energy contained in ''matter''?
-
I would say that all fields are a product of process related to hf and ''matter'', not a kind of energy contained in ''matter''?
what is this process ? could you explain ?
-
I would say that all fields are a product of process related to hf and ''matter'', not a kind of energy contained in ''matter''?
what is this process ? could you explain ?
Could I explain with imagination , probably.
Could I explain with science , maybe.
I am not sure and I do not think there is a present answer. We know that ''matter'' is basically like a ''sponge'' and can absorb and ''overflow'' with ''energy''.
''Matter'' has an equilibrium state of entropy but the entropy is forever under change by hf.
We know things like, likewise charges repel, things that gain hf tend to increase in temperature and expand and when the hf ''intake'' lessens the object contracts back to form. The work done by gain and loss of hf.
Then there is the like of Kinetic energy, which I feel is a bit of a myth and more to do with how far speed takes you when redirected.
To explain the interaction I would imagine the interaction to be liking to a chemical reaction, forces mixed but having effect on each other if there is an entropy upset.
In simple terms, an equilibrium of the summation of all ''energies''/forces that is interwoven but can be offset to create work.
p.s probably always offset.
-
I always had problems with science , I was not able to be convinced with many scientific theories and models, the atom model of electrons rotating non-stop was a big problem..........what if we have a molten NaCl which contains sodium-ion and chloride-ion , and we pass electric current through this liquid , two chloride-ions will loose electrons to become chloride gas ( an atom) , but what about Sodium-ion ? it gains an electron to become a Sodium atom , but how an electron which left its accurate orbit position in a Sodium atom to return back again to its orbit and rotate again with the same speed before?!! I see rocks coming from space burning when they are close to earth and they do not have an orbit to rotate round the earth .
what I mean here is science has its flaws so keep on investigations.
-
I always had problems with science , I was not able to be convinced with many scientific theories and models, the atom model of electrons rotating non-stop was a big problem..........what if we have a molten NaCl which contains sodium-ion and chloride-ion , and we pass electric current through this liquid , two chloride-ions will loose electrons to become chloride gas ( an atom) , but what about Sodium-ion ? it gains an electron to become a Sodium atom , but how an electron which left its accurate orbit position in a Sodium atom to return back again to its orbit and rotate again with the same speed before?!! I see rocks coming from space burning when they are close to earth and they do not have an orbit to rotate round the earth .
what I mean here is science has its flaws so keep on investigations.
I do not deem science to be perfect and I do not really think science deems science to be perfect, but science gives us some elementary thinking and some advanced thinking to base our thoughts on to begin with, I would hate to begin from scratch with no prior knowledge.
Rocks coming from space ''burn'' because of resistance like a rocket tip burns on re-entry.
As for sodium ions etc, I have not learnt that so have no comments.
-
sorry for my English , I meant its hard for an electron moving towards a sodium-ion to obtain an accurate orbit again , its hard just like for a rock from space to obtain an accurate orbit around earth .
-
The idea of magnetizing or demagnetizing permanent magnets results in work done by ferromagnetic materials around ,in vacuum for a permanent magnet gaining or loosing magnetism , a piece of iron in all possible places in space can be attracted toward or taken away from this specific magnet and produce work done. The sum of all possible potential energy by this Ferromagnetic material in all possible position in space is an estimate of the energy contained on magnet to cause field from the first place i.e. when this energy is gone field disappear and that causes work done.
Consider gravity, the gravitational force between two massive objects is proportional to their contained energies, and their contained energies is proportional to their masses, for two massive objects (M) and (m) with their contained energies (E) and (e) respectively, and a gravitational force between them (F):
E=k*M
e=k*m
F ∝ e*E
(k) is a constant.
However calculating all possible potential energy for mass (m) in all possible positions in space with respect to mass (M) is in fact the total energy (U):
U=E+e
Taking the energy (e) approaches zero by (m) approaching zero gives us the contained energy in mass (M) which is (E).
-
Neither o you can see the forest because of the tree line. You cannot see the forest for the trees. It is your concepts that blind you trying to create an operating system from a lack of understanding the mechanics of relativity. Your first question to be answered is what causes the electron to move in the first place? The answer is c but then you need to answer the mechanical process for which c moves the electron and hf wave form confounded in every frame.
This would cause you to create a system of mechanical relativity which is more complex than saying all fields are the same. More likely all fields are created from the same dark mass energy (time). The interaction between dark mass energy and macro mass is described by relativity. Then you would have to separate dark mass energy and macro mass a two separate ideas. Dark mass energy causes relativity of macro mass. this would be a whole different operating system than the standard model in science today.
You cannot combine different operating models and make sense of either.
-
I think I can calculate the amount of stored energy :
just for reference :
I said if there is a piece of iron near a permanent magnet and this magnet looses its magnetism then there should be work done if there are more pieces more energy should be there and so on. but this energy is finite and has a particular number.
suppose we have two masses M and m , let mass M be fixed in space and let mass m be put in every possible position in space , the potential energy from infinity to schwarzschild radius is :
-GMm/Rs , but schwarzschild radius Rs is , Rs= 2GM/c^2 , potential energy= - (0.5 )mc^2 , but in fact the energy is double the potential energy , because we have two cases , whether M is fixed and m moves toward it , or m is fixed and M moves toward , I know if one work is done the other one can not be done but I am talking about the capability of a work to be done , we have two different capabilities for work to be done in different ways and stored energy is all about capability .
So the stored energy in m = 2(0.5)mc^2 = mc^2 which in fact is just what the mass contains of energy.
Now let's fix mass m , Rs=2Gm/c^2 , energy=Mc^2 which is energy in mass M.
-
sorry for my English , I meant its hard for an electron moving towards a sodium-ion to obtain an accurate orbit again , its hard just like for a rock from space to obtain an accurate orbit around earth .
It lies on density/entropy of the substance...
Different atoms are produced under different states on the same hf, once the "work" is done, or in a better sense "during" the process, any substance will experience a instability threshold, during the mix, one of both substances will be more favorable into gain electron, again entropy/hf...
I'm not sure, but one needs to consider that energy is not a particle on itself, that the "particle configuration" on energy/quanta of something, is also in correlation with the environment...
I mean the loss and gain of electrons does not simple, or only, lies on the atoms themselves, but on the environment/entropy the substance produces, diverging one from the other, releasing quanta from a chemical reaction, in other to produce a second substance, inevitable, when considering that electrons are configurations of the environment over the released energy, is expect that being both different substance with different properties, one of both should be more favorable to receive the electrons rather than the other, or the other to loose some, it's just a mater of perspective...
One need to account for space at C, or photons at C, otherwise the electrons does not need to spin, for they do not exist in the first place... A chemical reaction `visual effects` is only of our personal interest, it`s the medium that decides the equivalence in electron a determinate atom has, the atom alone can only pick between other atoms to bound itself, and when it does, is the environment again that will decide witch atom will loose or re-gain electrons...
Please could you define, why the electron is a particle?
Or why an atom to keep exiting requires electrons?
Does not need to be a deeper explanation, only the mechanics form where they are for, energy of space or energy when on space... I ask because if I understood it correctly all fields are the same, and everything else is "work done" and "work that can't be done", universe has than a limited amount of energy available and that is constantly being loss when a work is done...
Just curious into know if your universe(space) is finite and does not posses a structure, in that case you would be relying everything on a static field, where everything inside depends and relies only the photon, the different proportion not as being scaled on size by time, but why the different sizes?
-
if stored energy can cause electric field and electrons are charged particles , then electrons can be a kind of stored energy , we can think of electric current as a flow of continuous energy not photons and chemical reactions occur due to stored energy interactions , instead of a particle that have negative charge and can absorb energy , its stored energy that by itself cause charge and it itself is energy , they are continuous photons as a flow , an atom has mass as nucleus and stored energy around it as electrons. the existence of negative stored energy as charge make existence of positive stored energy in nucleus.
when rubbing amber , you transfer energy by rubbing, to be stored as (electrons) in an atom but that won't affect chemical properties because stored energy has levels of interaction, for example magnetism is stored energy , but does not affect say wood because they are in different levels , gravity affects all matter in a higher level.
-
these levels of interaction I mentioned above are missing in the current model , electrons can move from one object to another in electrostatic charging without affecting chemical properties , how that is possible?
-
these levels of interaction I mentioned above are missing in the current model , electrons can move from one object to another in electrostatic charging without affecting chemical properties , how that is possible?
Perhaps a free moving electron is not treated as an electron at all, perhaps a second configuration of the moving "quanta" of that energy, spited to the smallest size, till one got another point of reference (atom), there the quanta should be able to reform back into an electron or positron depending on the requirements for balance... The charge could be related only with their spin and orbits, and not with the energy itself, only with the configuration the receive from "the environment/space" in function of the requirements of the new atom they move in... If no requirement for electron or proton is presented, no need for electron, but spectrum...
I just suggesting that if a moving electron behaves or receives on that instant a photonic configuration, it would be free from stored mass, till it finds another point of reference to orbit, reshaping as an electron or proton, or keep as spectrum... Now if assume that the electron looses mass when it changes configuration, becoming spectrum, is to accept that the moving electron does affect the chemical properties, by messing with temperatures...
What's the state of charge of a traveling photon?
-
motion is the interchangeability between energy and matter , if an object with mass 1 k.g and kinetic energy 1 joule , this one joule will interchange with PART of the full energy in one kilogram causing motion , it does need to be consumed or to be taken from another source the exchange keep the same amount without loss , that why an object can not move faster than light because its kinetic energy exceed the actual energy stored which is 0.5mc^2 , the interchangeability is between equal amount and have the same origin energy -matter , so energy contained in mass m equals 0.5 mc^2 and not mc^2 , classical kinetic energy equation 0.5mv^2 applies to all speeds , when an object moves by c speed its kinetic energy equals 0.5mc^2 which the same as its mass-energy , I predict that if an object moves at speed of light and its pushed by say a rocket mechanism , it will heat up or emit rays , and it won't move faster , in other words the energy can't exchange with matter . it has another form rather than being kinetic energy.
I made a mistake by saying stored energy inside matter causing gravity equals mc^2 by assuming we should double the possible potential energy :
" suppose we have two masses M and m , let mass M be fixed in space and let mass m be put in every possible position in space , the potential energy from infinity to schwarzschild radius is :
-GMm/Rs , but schwarzschild radius Rs is , Rs= 2GM/c^2 , potential energy= - (0.5 )mc^2 "
however it should be just half the amount of mc^2 and it is the same as the energy stored in mass m.
-
another process same to motion is light production ( I am not sure about this process because I still need to first define an atom more deeply ) the process is :
when there is heat or electric energy in matter an atom absorb energy and continues in absorbing until the energy exceed the amount 0.5mc^2 where m is the mass of an atom , when it exceeds this amount it is emitted as a photon , so a photon energy should be 0.5mc^2 where m is the mass of an atom , with a certain frequency. it is the same as motion instead in motion atoms moves as a whole package towards a particular direction , heat will cause irregular motion in different directions .
it waits until the absorbed energy equals 0.5mc^2 , and emit all the energy as a quantum to absorb more energy and so on.
-
I think that why light moves at speed c because it is a kinetic energy of 0.5mc^2 !!
-
what if my hypotheses are valid ? how it would be acceptable worldwide ? will scientists accept a forum thread ?
-
what if my hypotheses are valid ? how it would be acceptable worldwide ? will scientists accept a forum thread ?
No.
I think that why light moves at speed c because it is a kinetic energy of 0.5mc^2 !!
You haven't described the reason for c as a constant. Main stream has the same problem. They claim light does not slow down than speed up going through different mediums. This is because there is no mechanism in their understanding. This is a limitation to understanding. c is fundamental energy outside of mass kinetic style energy. c moves electrons and allows motion up to c energy by photon spectrum but not mass. The logic of a photon slowing and speeding up going through different materials guaranties energy is outside of mass. Yet the standard model defends the idea of something for nothing. To change minds it takes a herculean effort similar to trying to convince the Pope God does not exist. Ideas on a forum falls on deaf ears.
99% of scientists will believe a 1% possibility to maintain the standard model. Science has become faith.
-
the decrements in speed happens due to absorption process , light has the property to be absorbed by atoms , at the time its absorbed , it will be a combination of both matter(atom) and energy (photon) , the speed of this combination will be less than c :
K.E = 0.5mv^2
kinetic energy is the energy of photon , m is the supposed mass the photon comes from, v=c, if there is mass the total mass will increase , but not the kinetic energy , in other words the mass will slow the photon , the mass itself needs energy, when mass increases while K.E is constant(photon energy) then v is decreased to be less than c.
photon energy differs from kinetic energy , photon behaves like mass and its energy can be absorbed by say solar panels , a mass will not increase due to increment in its kinetic energy, Einstein was wrong. its not that simple: if mass is energy and energy is mass then they are the same.the are equivalent but in not the same , energy being converted to mass and vice versa is not that simple.
-
photon behaves both as mass and energy, as mass because its a quantum and can move in vacuum without a medium and as energy because it can be absorbed in solar panels as electric energy.
-
It's more likely the quanta of the photon is absorbed by the already existing electron on the panel, the infusion of energy on such electron would make it jump away from the atom on another band, ultimately the electron has to keep existing as an electron and the only option is to expel the plus back into the medium as spectrum, that for its turn will be able to both, infuse already existing electrons with their own quanta, or even if necessary to cumulative in order to form a necessary electron or proton, depending on the stability of the atom they are serving...
I mean that the reality seems to be that electrons does not absolve that available quanta, but instead otherwise, where the constant attempt of the spinning quanta wants by any given instant to join with the electrons, sharing their own spin(mechanics of space) with the whole structure...
I do not believe the quanta of the photon can be absorbed by the solar panel walls but instead that the collision of that quanta with the stable matter, is causing entropy gain and loss, over matter(silica) that has a lower threshold, that causes a lot of entropy on the environment...
Se the reality behind my poor resolution?
The truth seems to be, that for broke down completely one cannot improve relativity over corrections, one like Einstein, need to have a "happier tough of their life" and figure it out on a clear instant by guessing, and than do the math over it...
We can't change already existing explanations for now different from back there, the alternative paths are parallel one with the other, you can't change relativity without explain quantum mechanics, and vice-versa...
Einstein could figure it out, for he was able to visualize the mechanics, and foreseen the whole 4D picture of the universe he predicted in real time, a skill that hardly can be learned, and even if someone does there is still the necessity of good relationships and background...
The only viable way humanity has to achieve this goal is to share all available information and improve their own calculations over someone else work...
Even Einstein struggles with math, lucky he asked for help, and he only received it, for he had foreseen the correct frame, otherwise the math would have being abandoned on the first part...
In reality, as many here, I believe that everytime someone record a unedited footage of a U.F.O. they are in fact recording the result of the private work of governments over censored data, I mean have you turn own the TV on 2016? Starting with chemtrails and many more lies, front hat point on is to imagine that relativity was figured out decades ago by some...
If you can visualize a way to express you theory into a practical way that suggest evidence it would be questioned, and that's a good sign for any theory... Newton, Einstein and many other genius have already took over the visual proves, as measurements of the orbits, relativity, quantum mechanics... What we are missing is practical devices exercising functions that may sustain proofs for inconsistencies, or a complete happy tough over the universal mechanics and why...
Take in consideration, we should not be this far, this is the sole reason behind our mind struggle to comprehend, we are only this far, for Einstein gave us a unnatural jump back there, and was only possible to achieve that by a combination of preparation and special trained mind... As if he was someone that relativity was intuitive to him, the only struggle he had was how to put in mathematical terms so we could understand...
-
is there any evidence for relativity like a rotating object at high speed will increase its weight ? if not why it should be "faith" ?
its not just about math, many theories can be verified mathematically yet they are not all valid.