0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
You have more errors ... than I can count
Not bad for a philosopher.
Quote from: alancalverd on 24/08/2022 17:30:49Not bad for a philosopher.Thank you for this assessment
We really do need a "tongue in cheek" emoticon.
Quote from: paul cotter on 24/08/2022 14:07:45You have more errors ... than I can countindicate at least a few
New perspectives in physics
If - M, + ST matter loses then spacetime profit, it is distance - perspective, objects decrease with distance - ordinary contraction. If + M, - ST matter profit then spacetime loses it is bringing closer - perspective, objects increase in progress of bringing closer - ordinary dilatation.
How to build new theory I have shown in my article from March of 2006
If we are trying to express gravitation correctly we must go out beyond limitations that are accepting at the ground of electromagnetism (which were created old theory of quantums and its descendant, quantum mechanics, in one hand, it was a Planck's constant value, and first theory of relativity of Einstein, at the other hand, it was constant value of speed of light) and designate new field for phenomenon of gravitation.
We must use different measurement for gravitation and different measurement for electromagnetism.
We can say that there is, very much smaller than length of Planck, size right for quantums of gravitation, it is a new base very small size value is about 10^-65 m.
Electrons, quarks and gluons possess internal structure, consist of quadrillion of particles of size about 10^-35 m [they correspond with photons], these then from quadrillion of particles about 10^-50 m, these then from quadrillion of particles about 10^-65 m [they correspond with gravitons].
Invoking astronomy it can be in physics reach eg. conception of existence of atoms and their internal structure - stars, planets, planetary system.
Mass of rubbish fills present physics for example - cosmical branes giving beginning to big bang and creating other universes, multidimensionality, strings existing in 10 dimensions, parallel universes, spatiotemporal tunnels, microblisters, hyperspace and so on.
And several words about atomistic paradigm of Natural Sciences. Against claims of such philosophers as Popper atomism does not descend from metaphysical speculations. Democritus took over this view from Hindus during his travels in the east, conception of atoms existed there at the very latest about VIII century BC, and was based on paranormal perceptions of yogis - a source could be only paranormal activity, but for sure not philosophical speculation, in Europe spherical atoms appeared not before XIX century AD.
One of the biggest puzzles is the problem of how light in classical physics can be a wave, while in quantum physics it is in the form of photons or particles.
The light ray is a wave but the energy transmits matter in the form of photons.
The existence of matter waves was confirmed in 1927.
Wave-particle duality, the property of matter, for example electrons, in that in some conditions the wave character is manifested, and in others corpuscular character.
Recognition of the dual nature of matter is the basis of modern physics.
the fourth state which is the vacuum
This inconsistency is revealed in very much small scale, Planck scale. To solve it, one should discover the theory showing a deeper reality, it will be the TOE, explaining all phenomena in the universe.
Regarding paragraph 3
In addition, it can be assumed that there are types of photon-like particles and corresponding waves with significantly higher speeds than the speed of light.
From the point of view of scientific research, striving to refute the theory seems to be a kind of nonsense and is something illogical.
For example, General Relativity found confirmation in the Mercury orbit anomalies that Newton's theory could not explain. This confirmation is treated as proof of the validity of the theory.
Regarding paragraph 1, thus, objects that move away decrease and objects that move closer enlarge. This can be called an ordinary contraction and dilatation, respectively.
Alleged black hole is a kind of black star - with size about a star for our galaxy - consisting from condensate of small particles corresponding with gravitons.
Black because does not let go photons. More suitable name than black hole is for this object name black star. So called event horizon is identical with its surface, so called Schwarzschild radius relates to its real radius. Inside the black star in the center of our galaxy a tunnel opens which leads in to the core of a distant galaxy.
I see no physics being done. Poetry perhaps, but not a single prediction can be made based on what you’ve posted. So it isn’t science/physics.
that things nearby appear larger than things further away, which seems unrelated to the STM thing altogether
It perhaps attempts to suggest the naive model of atoms being little suns with electron planets orbiting them. That had been falsified long ago.
You seem to be referencing a work that we cannot access
like you’re doing is just going to label you as a crank
Quote from: Halc on 25/08/2022 00:15:36that things nearby appear larger than things further away, which seems unrelated to the STM thing altogetherThis shows the unity of spacetime and matter.
Quote from: Halc on 25/08/2022 00:15:36It perhaps attempts to suggest the naive model of atoms being little suns with electron planets orbiting them. That had been falsified long ago.The Bohr model is also called the planetary model of the atom, as recognized in physics
Not at all, it shows the principle of visual perspective, an effect of the angles subtended at the eye
The Bohr model is considered obsolete in physics...It has been replaced by more advanced models.
I will only answer a few of them.
It is prety amusing to understand that "we" accept that the contraction of space within RS is the reality and that we deny this possibility (it is the reality) for more simple facts.So almost any physicist agree that perspective is an illusion but space contraction within RS is reality : Why those double standards ?
Contemporary views on the structure of the atom are derived from the theory of the atom given in 1913 by N. Bohr.
I see that most of the participants in this discussion do not realize the importance of my discoveries. For example, the Galactical model of subquark particles, and actually three models, galactical, cosmical and supercosmical, is a discovery greater than the Bohr model, not to mention other theories.
It is not acceptable simply to post material onto this forum that you have posted elsewhere, except where the post is specifically pertinent to an ongoing thread. If you start a thread with a post that is for all practical purposes the same as you have posted elsewhere, we will generally assume that you are evangelising, and will act accordingly.