1

New Theories / Re: The two-blade hacksaw

« on: 02/04/2023 18:52:17 »

Can this be an efficient tool? Can it replace the ordinary hacksaw?

IMO it looks like a solution in search of a problem.

2

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How can I start learning quantum physics alone?

« on: 01/10/2022 08:56:07 »

Newton did what physicists do: constructed a mathematical model that matched and then predicted actual observations. Nothing to do with quantum mechanics - and quantum gravitation still remains an undemonstrated hypothesis.

The best introduction to quantum mechanics I think is to follow its historical derivation via Planck's explanation of black-body radiation and the photoelectric effect, then to consider how line spectra can occur. This will at least put some "visual"  framework in your mind. The conceptual difficulty I found was incorporating Schrodinger's wave mechanics into my thinking but it gets clearer if you approach it from the point of view of stereochemistry (why are molecules the shape they are, and wobbly?).  Whatever you do, don't get sidetracked by Schrodinger's cat or anything that smells of philosophy or psychology - it's just physics, chemistry and mathematics.

3

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How can I start learning quantum physics alone?

« on: 30/09/2022 18:19:36 »

 Depending on your previous knowledge and the depth of understanding you desire, there are a number of different ways you could approach learning more about quantum mechanics. If you are new to the subject, a good place to start might be with an introductory book or online course that will give you a basic understanding of the key concepts. Once you have a foundation to work from, you could then move on to more advanced texts or tutorials. Alternatively, if you are already familiar with the basics of quantum mechanics, you might want to focus on a specific area that interests you. For example, you could study the mathematical principles underlying quantum theory, or learn about the experimental techniques used to test its predictions. Whichever route you choose, expanding your knowledge of quantum mechanics is sure to be a rewarding experience.
Good luck

4

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How can I start learning quantum physics alone?

« on: 30/09/2022 08:51:49 »

This is as good a place to start as any.
https://www.khanacademy.org/

5

New Theories / Re: Space-time curvature is impossible in a 3-dimensional space

« on: 24/09/2022 14:07:30 »

This shows that space-time curvature whether it is pure volume or (x,y,z,t) the curvature we now cannot happen.

What then do you propose as a model to explain the curvature of space-time which is produced by the effect of gravity through the mass or energy of an object?

6

New Theories / Re: A message to the University of Cambridge

« on: 15/04/2022 21:41:48 »

Hi again.

    It looks like you @Yahya A.Sharif  have had replies about your new theory - it seems to have been in the "new theories" section under the title   "The theory of the human body special mass".    They may not have said exactly what you wanted to hear and some of them weren't even all that friendly - but that's a slightly different issue. 
Your new idea and your time and effort to write it down wasn't  just ignored. 
    I'm sorry if the comments weren't what you may have wanted to hear.  Most new proposals are challenged, quite often a new proposal does not survive this sort of scrutiny and the work is never published.

Best Wishes.

7

New Theories / Re: The theory of the human body special mass

« on: 07/04/2022 15:23:53 »

What do you think will happen then?  will any university try to do the experiment to make it public?

If I am on a scale and I weigh 60 kg, if I raise up on my toes the scale will not read 120 kg as I am rising up, I believe that is your experiment.  But that result is the expected out come based on simple physics.  You seem to think the scale should read 120 kg but no one who has a basic grasp of mechanics would come to that conclusion.   

8

New Theories / Re: I'm a discoverer

« on: 29/03/2022 08:17:54 »

What is the x force on the scale ?
Why an x appears when I lift my body?
When I lift my body the x force appears, what is the relation between the force I press on the scale and the value of the x on the scale?

When you lift your body from a stationary position, the center of your mass must first accelerate upward.
The force x = your mass times your acceleration. But since parts of your body have different acceleration, then x must be integrated from parts of your body. Your toes are not moving, hence 0 acceleration. On the other hand, your head experiences greater acceleration.
x = ∫a dm
Once you reach highest velocity upward, you need to decelerate (or accelerate downward). Otherwise you would fly away from the scale. Gravity would normally provide this downward acceleration, and you only need to reduce your acceleration upward. The weight scale would read lower than your normal weight. In this case, it would read 60-x.
x is the effective deceleration rate, which should be calculated by integration, for the reason I said above.
We can omit the integral by saying that x = a.m, where a is acceleration of your central mass. But when your body changes stance/posture, your central mass will be located at different point in space.
When you stop moving and stay at the higher position, the weight scale will return to show your normal weight, and x=0.

9

New Theories / Re: I'm a discoverer

« on: 27/03/2022 22:02:01 »

What is the x force on the scale ?

The force on the scale when you are not moving is about 588 N.
If you take 0.5 seconds to stand on your toes your 'X' would be about 8 N.

10

New Theories / Re: The unique normal force on human body: a massive human can stand on weak toes

« on: 10/09/2020 22:02:32 »

Today, just for the sake of it, I decided to test your claim with an experiment of my own. I put on a backpack, added weights to it, put weights on my ankles, held weights in my hands and, for good measure, hung a computer-carrying bag around my neck. The total amount of weight was 62 kilograms (I know this because I measured my weight with a scale both before and after I put all the weights on). Then I tried to see if I could still stand on my tip-toes despite carrying all that extra weight around.

I could. Without much trouble, either.

So each one of my calf muscles easily lifts much more than 31 kilograms (because that's not counting the weight of my own body). I don't even include calf exercises in my workout routine, and I'm a fairly average individual in terms of height and weight (well, for an American, anyway). So this pretty much proves that calf muscles in an average person are capable of lifting a 60 kilogram body. So I know from personal experience that you are wrong.

11

New Theories / Re: How does a massive human body stand on feet weak toes ?

« on: 27/01/2020 09:16:40 »

It is biological that this phenomenon appears only to humans.

And several other bipedal species from Tyrannosaurus to chickens. And all quadruped mammals walk on fewer toes than bipeds.

12

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is it possible that human body has its own physical laws ?

« on: 14/01/2020 07:48:31 »

Our body with all its components exists, something exists must be made , why we can't build and explain how the body made? then we don't now the process of building it , and we don't know the laws behind that , right?

As with rockets and bridges, there's a huge gap between knowing (physics) and doing (engineering). In the case of living cells, the entire planet worked for about 1,000,000,000 years to produce the first one, entirely by accident, and didn't leave any notes as to how it was done. It will be a supreme (if pointless) triumph of human intellect and ingenuity to make another, and whoever does it will almost certainly be accused of "playing god" and crucified for it.   

13

Technology / Re: Will this rotating chair be useful?

« on: 22/09/2019 10:02:45 »

It would be convenient if you was sitting in your garden on a balmy summers night observing the heavens with your binoculars the rotation rate would of course have to be siderial

14

New Theories / Re: Redefining simple Arithmetic Expressions that contradict physics

« on: 09/08/2019 20:30:47 »

I would also like to add that I think that the case of ∞*0 is also very important in many areas of maths and physics.
- But you can't say what the answer is without more information.
- The process of mathematics (mostly) gives you that information.

Integration may be used to calculate the distance that an object has fallen under gravity.
- Technically, integration divides the x-axis into n small segments of width Δx
- Integration is a limit of nΣy(x)*Δx as n approaches ∞
- Integration (when it works) is effectively the result when n=∞ and Δx=0
- If you have an equation for motion (eg v=gt), then the equation provides the necessary additional information (provided the equation meets certain criteria such as smoothness and lack of infinities at this location).
- Integration is a basic function in maths & physics, and it (mostly) works well, provided you are a bit careful

15

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How does gravity exert its influence infinitely?. Times two

« on: 01/08/2019 20:42:27 »

when i view images of the cmbr, i see possible evidence of a cyclical expansion. the temperature gradiant appears to swirl in a fairly consistant manner and direction.  now, consider this cyclical expansion an oscillation of an expanding universe, a universe that is expanding and then rescinding, as described by the cyclic model. if the universe experiences periods of oscillation, then the oscillations must be examined for causation, with gravity being undoubtedly a component. so if, gravity plays a part in the contractions of the universe. how does this comport with its infinite or finite reach?

in the cyclic model each oscillation is followed by an expansion. the size of the expansions and contractions remain uniformed to the previous expansion. so that when a contraction takes place an increase in matter ensues, followed by an increase in gravity. when an expansion cycle takes place, the universe expands proportionally in response to the increase in gravity via a repeller/attractor model for dark matter. in this case dark matter constites the hidden atractor that forments the expansion cycle. 

if the above is represenative, gravity is reduced to a secondary status during the expansion phase, which in essence limits it's effect. can anything that is limited, truly be infinite? logic dictates, it cannot.

16

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How does gravity exert its influence infinitely?. Times two

« on: 01/08/2019 14:34:21 »

This theory explains what happens after the big bang and after the initial singularity, even though matter didn't exist , high density energy exited.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)

That link is misleading.
Try this one https://profmattstrassler.com/2014/03/17/my-new-articles-on-big-bang-inflation-etc/

Other models exist, which are also only theoretical. That indicate that as the expansion of space accelerates, and matter becomes separated another inflationary phase will be reached and another big bang will happen. forget the singularity, its a result of a outdated mathematical model. 

De sitter universe is interesting too, inflation will take place in the absence of mass and cause a big bang, if I understood it right. 

Edit a better link on inflation https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/relativity-space-astronomy-and-cosmology/history-of-the-universe/inflation/

17

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How does gravity exert its influence infinitely?. Times two

« on: 02/06/2019 19:26:14 »

You're perfectly correct,
It can't, everything breaks down at 'infinity'

Although it also involves a arrow.
And it´f the arrow is'c' while 'space' is 'ftl'`?

18

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / How does gravity exert its influence infinitely?. Times two

« on: 02/06/2019 19:23:57 »

" f space-time is infinite ,how gravity extends to infinity?
 we know infinity is unreachable because it continues forever and no-one reach a finite point.How gravity extends to infinite distances while  infinity is unreachable? how gravity bends and curve space-time everywhere while space time end is unreachable? for gravity to bend space-time everywhere it should reach its end , how gravity bends space-time end while this end is unreachable? " By  Yahya A.Sharif