0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Now - that scenario - those nested 'ifs' present the theoretical potential that a particle in a magnetic field may be extant and may be forever invisible. IF so, then it would be operating in a different time dimension to our own.
This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.JerryGG38OK - we're on the same page. I'm with you. I entirely agree. The only difference between you me and Vern is this. Vern says all is sufficient in the electromagnetic description. You say is all sufficient in the Electric description. And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.How interesting is that.
Quote from: witsendNow - that scenario - those nested 'ifs' present the theoretical potential that a particle in a magnetic field may be extant and may be forever invisible. IF so, then it would be operating in a different time dimension to our own.I don't understand why that would need to be that way. But it is possible I guess.
Therefore the whole basis of our universe is plus and minus differential time. Therefore in reality there is a memory of the past time.jerryGG38I've heard it argued that time is only backward flowing. Based on the observation that we can see the past but not the future.
JerryGG38 - are we comparing our different models and trying to prove the one right the other wrong? Or are we actually trying to understand each other?
This law enables the Doppler mass. The Doppler mass is larger in the front of an object than behind it. This is all part of the gravitational field. The moving gravitional field of an object occurs before the object appears.
Quote from: jerrygg38This law enables the Doppler mass. The Doppler mass is larger in the front of an object than behind it. This is all part of the gravitational field. The moving gravitional field of an object occurs before the object appears.I haven't heard of Doppler mass. I'll do some research.
JerryGG38 - are we comparing our different models and trying to prove the one right the other wrong? Or are we actually trying to understand each other? It takes way too much time and is way too boring to try and compete. I couldn't anyway. I don't know your language. Did you even read my posts? If you didn't and only glanced at them - I can understand. It's words. Not math. I think sophiecentaur's right. I don't belong on this forum.
Quote from: witsendAnd I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.Some physicists suspect that the two fields might exist separate from each other and that a magnetic monopole might exist. So far this has not been observed. A changing magnetic creates an electric etc.Edit: jerrygg38; our posts crossed [] We're on the same page.
And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.
Quote from: jerrygg38Now we have a t- universe, a t=0 universe and a t=+ universe. If we did not have three time universes, then differential equations would be eliminated. Our universe would be eliminated as well.I just always thought of the + and - of time to be properties of the time dimension.
Now we have a t- universe, a t=0 universe and a t=+ universe. If we did not have three time universes, then differential equations would be eliminated. Our universe would be eliminated as well.
Hope you can find something printed in regular papers. The Sperry Library was confidential and secret. However that was many years ago. The study was by MIT and other Universities. Why it was locked up is a mystery. Hard to understand why an important scientific concept should have been labeled secret or confidential 30 years ago.
all mass is moving relative to something. But I couldn't find anything on it in my searches today. Google just links to your thread here, and the word mass pulls up thousands of links to Massachusetts. Well, I guess you could call different times different dimensions. I just never thought of it that way.
Did it ever strike you guys that there may be some numerical issues with these ideas which may not be consistent with measured reality. Or would that be being a spoilsport?