[witsend (OP)]

I guess there could be other dimensions; I can make computer simulations of them, but I can't imagine that they could exist in real life. Vern

If we can get back to this point maybe we can move on.  It's understood that we cannot see a particle in the magnetic field.  It could be that - if it did comprise particles and they moved at a velocity that exceeds light speed, then we would not easily be able to find that particle.  Well.  What if it is entirely impossible to find this particle becasue, not only does it exceed light speed but it, itself, moves light.  Then, like the balloon being blown by the wind, we could mistakenly say that the balloon has energy.  In the same way we could assume that light has energy to move it.

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. 

Does that satisfy you guys?

[Vern]

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.

I don't understand why that would need to be that way. But it is possible I guess.

[witsend (OP)]

Vern - I know the concepts are different.  More than likely wrong.  But there's a kind of logic.  I've decided not go through the composites.  It's obviously boring you both.  Should we rather discuss some other aspect.  Gravity?  Something?  Anything?  You choose.  Clearly I can't seem to explain the relevance of (EDIT) magnetic fields in this context?

EDIT Actually it wont work.  I've just tried it.  Without some concensus this arguement's going nowhere.  It'll just get back to Vern asking the signifcance and JerryGG38 arguing the correspondence to his model.  I'll maybe try this again tomorrow.

[witsend (OP)]

Therefore the whole basis of our universe is plus and minus differential time. Therefore in reality there is a memory of the past time.jerryGG38

I'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]

This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.JerryGG38

OK - 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.  

I agree with Vern. AS an EE, sometime I may say the electric universe. To me the electromagnetic field is the same as the electric field. so both terms mean the same to me.
  However since you want to separate the magnetic field from the electric field, I will have to watch what I say.
   You want to make the magnetic field primary and the electric field secondary instead of both interconnected. Therefore to you the electric field is a product of the magnetic field. The magnetic field could exist without the electric field.
  That is what I understand you to mean. However why stop there?

  We could have a system where the motion of some other force such as a spin (radians per second) is the primary force. The force produces the magnetic field. The interaction of the primary force with the magnetic field produces the electric field. Therefore both fields are the product of a more fundamental field.
  It is always a possibility that something we canno envision is the main driving force of the universe. Yet it is very difficult to go beyond what we have encountered. We know the magnetic field and the electric field. We know Maxwells equations. We know from experiments that electrical theory adequately defines most interactions in the universe.
  One solution for my Sister equations is that coulombs = radians per second. What does that mean? I think it might be correct but it says that the entire universe is the result of a spin of a wave.
   An alternative to the plus and minus universe is a magnetic/ electric universe. This splits the universe into 3 dimensions of neutral, 3 dimensions of magnetic plus, 3 dimensions of magnetic minus, 3 dimensions of electric plus, and 3 dimensions of electric minus. Therefore 15 dimensions all separated by the tiny plank distance.

   I have no problem with a sandwich of 15 dimensions as long as the separation is basically zero time and zero distance. However that is just to understand what is happening. We still must adhere to Maxwells equations.

[jerrygg38]

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.

I don't understand why that would need to be that way. But it is possible I guess.

As I just posted, it is possible that the electric and magnetic fields are the product of some higher force which we cannot see or measure. However we reach a limit to our ability to understand. And even if we can sligtly undestand such things, it surely is basically impossible for us to discuss it with others.
  Vern, Witsend is attempting to go beyond the gound of our being and find the ultimate driving force of the universe. I try this as well. However in the end the greatest minds of man throughout the ages have produced concepts which are difficult to destroy. I can split the electric and magnetic field into different dimensions. That is okay with me. I cannot split the interactions between the fields because we have not seen such occurrences.
  The only thing that is lacking in modern theory is that the gravitational field is a bipolar electromagnetic field. The Earth spinning around the sun produces gravitational eddy currents in the sun and the produces the same in us.  Thus the bipolar field acts the same as the unipolar electromagnetic field.
   

[jerrygg38]

Therefore the whole basis of our universe is plus and minus differential time. Therefore in reality there is a memory of the past time.jerryGG38

I've heard it argued that time is only backward flowing.  Based on the observation that we can see the past but not the future.

   That is why I have a fast forward law.
   "The image of an object appears before the object at the speed of light"
   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.
  Physics has not accounted for the Doppler mass. Yet years ago in the Sperry Library were several studies of the Doppler Mass. The data appears to validate the Doppler mass but the change is so small that it is hard to prove completely. It is part of my space time equations.

[witsend (OP)]

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.

[Vern]

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?

My goal is simply to understand; I probably won't suspect that the concept represents reality. I may point out things that are similar to my own views or to other concepts that I know about.

[Vern]

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.

I haven't heard of Doppler mass. I'll do some research.

[jerrygg38]

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.

I haven't heard of Doppler mass. I'll do some research.

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. I cannot see any military value that a tiny amount of mass difference should have any significance. For theoretical science, the tiny mass difference is important. It means that the gravitational field in the forward direction is stronger than the rearward direction. This means that the gravitational field is no different than the photonic field.
  It is an important point. It is in my Doppler Space Time book and other papers. They used more complex equations. I only use a more simplified set of equations as I posted herein under Doppler Space Time.
   It would be nice if you could find something after all these years.

[jerrygg38]

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.

I think you are doing a good job. You are presenting alternate ideas which causes Vern and Myself to rethink our ideas verses your alternate ideas. Therefore I find your ideas useful.

[jerrygg38]

And 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.

My moving + dot is a plus magnetic monopole. The same is true of my minus dot. In a magnet which is the product of a spinning electron, you cannot get a singular pole. However the magnetic monopole dot is interesting.
   Plus dots spinning in the same direction as minus dots produce a zero net magnetic field. Plus dots spinning in the opposite direction from negative dots produce a magnetic field twice as strong.
  If you look at a bar magnet and look inside the field, you will have plus dots spinning one way and minus dots the other way. You cannot see the individual dots but the iron filings react to the dots.

[jerrygg38]

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.

I just always thought of the + and - of time to be properties of the time dimension.

Ok but that is three dimensions and not one dimension. In the here and now, a second ago does not exist but a split second does. Of course a billion years ago still exists in the flow of photons from far away.Thus the reaction of the past still exists at light speed. Yet in the here and now what happened three seconds ago is gone. Our minds remember it because we store it as static memory. The dynamic memory went away at the speed of light.

[jerrygg38]

In the same light we could also argue that the distance X of a second ago no longer exists. It is only differential X which exists as everything is relative to a split second ago.
  Now we are bordering on Einsteins relativity. In this case the universe of a split second ago no longer exists. (Very philosophical)

[Vern]

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.

It makes sense that there might be a Doppler effect in the gravitational field of a moving mass, and 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.

[jerrygg38]

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.

Sadly the reports were paid for by the government. They got locked away in filing cabinets. The delta masses were so small that it could be argued that it was not proven conclusively. However the authors felt they were correct.
  To me the moving gravitational field is an electrical bipolar field. As such it behaves just like a moving magnetic field. Everything has a Doppler component.

[jerrygg38]

PS: Different times is an easy way to look at different dimensions. In the same light we have a -X, -y, -z, universe and a X,Y,Z universe and a +X, +Y, +z universe. Then we only need to use ordinary time. Thus we always live in a simple 9 +1 dimension universe. No fancy math needed. No fancy curled up space time necessary. Just a simple differential universe.
  However this simple differential universe enables +dots and -dots to exist in the  + and minus universe and bipolar dots to live in the neutral universe.
  Therefore my ten dimensional universe is our ordinary universe. No fancy equations necessary. No strange curved up space time necessary as with string theory. Just a simple nuts and bolts engineering type universe.

[lyner]

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?

[jerrygg38]

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?

No, not a spoilsport at all. Please indicate what you think is wrong with these concepts! Glad to hear your views.