1

New Theories / Re: Expanded: The dust and gas that completely envelops black hole is SOLVED

« on: 01/02/2019 00:29:52 »

Dont say centigrade, the correct term is Celsius.

Well, when talking about temperatures in the millions, the correct term is Kelvin.  Celsius is only for temperatures meaningfully compared to the human habitat.

2

New Theories / There is no scientific method

« on: 30/01/2019 21:14:44 »

There is no scientific method We keep hearing that what makes science science is the "scientific method"
but
There is no scientific method
x rays where discovered serendipity
penicillin was discovered serendipity
the micro wave was discovered serendipity
radioactivity was discovered serendipity
Einsteins cosmological constant ad hoc
Maxwell's displacement constant ad hoc

Go read Feyerabend "Against method" where he shows science is anarchy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method
Against method

Feyerabend summarises his reductios with the phrase "anything goes". This is his sarcastic imitation of "the terrified reaction of a rationalist who takes a closer look at history

Go read Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

the Structure of Scientific Revolutions introduced a realistic humanism into the core of science, while for others the nobility of science was tarnished by Kuhn's introduction of an irrational element into the heart of its greatest achievements

.

And read

Scientific method
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

these debates clearly show that there is no universal agreement as to what constitutes the "scientific method".[93] 

3

New Theories / Re: Could solar cycle be dominated by the barycenters of the Solar System?

« on: 30/01/2019 16:16:19 »

I suspect that this means that the Sun's orbit around the SSB is not an ellipse.

It is indeed not.

As a matter of fact, Dr. Ivanka Charvátová with her work on  solar inertial motion, illustrated that the Sun cyclically orbits the SSB in a trefoil-like trajectory.

4

New Theories / Re: Re: Have gravity modification experiments been conducted?

« on: 18/10/2018 22:57:36 »

The rate of a clock will be altered by the proximity of any mass. The question is whether it changes if the mass spins. There is no obvious reason why it should.

But it does at least explain a phenomenon that has puzzled me for years. The instrument panel of a light aircraft contains all sorts of delicate machinery which seems to work for years and years despite being boiled, frozen, vibrated, bounced around, flown to silly altitudes, subject to loads of g in all directions, kicked as you get in the plane, sneezed and vomited over, and parked on the grass in all weathers. Except for the clock. Probably the simplest, most robust, most mature piece of kit on the panel, and they never work. Electric or mechanical, all certified airworthy, and I've never known one to actually tell the time. Now I understand why - there are at least three gyroscopes on the same panel!

5

New Theories / Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?

« on: 09/09/2016 22:26:41 »

jerrygg38, Thebox

     No matter what you think of mathematics theory's have to follow maths valid. You are getting your knowledge from non realists. The Bohr Copenhagen interpretation. Where something comes from nothing and no one even bats an eye. I believe in mechanics that follow math. A photon cannot have mass and follow the equations of Relativity. I believe Relativity is the correct way to interpret our universe. A particle will have entropy. There is no perpetual motion even in light as a particle moving through space. Mechanics have to follow math. If you are trying to explain a photon within the realm of Relativity it cannot be a particle traveling through space. If you disregard Relativity than you can make it anything you want. Or use a weasel word like main stream, a magic virtual particle.

   Relativity is like religion. Some are relativity theists and others are relativity atheists. I am a middle of the road person. To me relativity is a mathematical tool to describe various aspects of the universe. It has many followers. You are a follower. I doubt very much that the strange math of Albert Einstein is more than a first order approximation to the universe. All the beautiful electrical laws that we produce ultimately are merely approximations. They never work perfectly. The Engineer always has to make corrections to them to get things to work. Thus art must be added to science since the laws never work perfectly. So now you believe that Albert Einstein has so perfect a mind that he correctly defined the universe. Yet 1000 years from now he will be long forgotten. His theory will be in the ash heap of science. Future man will laugh at how silly his ideas were.In fact future man will never even have heard of him except in the museum of ancient thoughts.

6

New Theories / Re: What is the true relationship of the electrostatic & magnetic field in a photon?

« on: 09/07/2016 02:51:23 »

Hopefully we can come to an agreement. There is a matter of semantics I wish to first address. It is not true that the photon has no charge. In fact the photon is completely and entirely filled with charge. Just because the sum total quantity is equal to zero does not mean that the photon has no charge which to me implies the absence of charge. The number zero in this case means a balance. We should agree that it just means that the photon is neutral and it does possess charge.

With this in mind your second example using the implication of no charge and neutrality are both negated. The photon is a moving charge that has an associated a magnetic field. The fact that it is neutral does not mean that it has no charge.

In both your examples you mention that the particles are neutral. Therefore, I think that you maybe trying to imply that since the neutron is neutrally charged that it has no charge. I disagree as the neutron is not really a fundamental particle but is in fact composed of 3 quarks. It has 1 up and 2 down quarks. The neutron once again is filled with a balanced amount of charge. Those quarks according to my calculations are moving at about 99% the speed of light. In this case we once again have a moving charge with its associated magnetic field.

You can go through the entire standard model and there is no example that will work as all particles have charge and all particles are moving. In no case that I am aware of does a magnetic field ever manifest itself without and associated moving charge.

Physics now has a bit of a conundrum it has a asymmetry that has not been addressed or explained. Static electrostatic fields exist. They are constant fields, which do not change in intensity or direction over time. Hence, static electric fields have a frequency of 0 Hz. They are not moving and in this case the magnetic field is absent. The only reasonable explanation for this is that the magnetic field is a torsional response in space to the motion of the electrostatic field. Moving charges create the magnetic field.
 

7

New Theories / Every moment in time is the same moment!

« on: 04/01/2016 23:33:53 »

There is no past just memories, there is no future, the future can't be remembered in the now, there is only the moment of now, moving on to the next moment of now, time does not exist, only the now exists, the now is zero, then zero,, then zero, then zero, not 1,2,3.