Zero Particle Theory

  • 148 Replies
  • 29396 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Zero Particle Theory
« on: 28/02/2013 02:25:10 »
The zero particle is a scalar particle that fills space time. It's called the zero particle because its opposing forces cancel out all forms of physics that we could establish a connection with. It's the same to say 1 + -1 = 0, and the zero is the particle made from opposing forces.

The zero particle builds all other particles, and it does this when it loses its scalar ability. It loses its scalar ability when it gets bonded with other zero particles. It can't scale down, because to scale down collides with an inner particle. It can't scale up because zero particles are infinite, and take up all of space. Zero particles are the spacetime grain structure.

The opposing forces of the zero particle, are mass, and negative mass. They are most easily defined as convex, and concave. Convex is mass, and concave is negative mass. You can imagine the two halves of a sphere divided in the middle. So imagine a tennis ball cut in half. Now you have the convex, and the concave, and the physics that the half tennis ball can perform are similar to the physics that the zero particle can perform.

1/ The concave half can hold more particles. So for example the tennis ball can hold water on one side, but not the other. This is the flow side, and is the equivalent of a pull force. So a pull is a flow into a concave particle.

2/ The other side deflects particles. This is the equivalent of the bump force. Convex bumps, the tennis ball bounces on the convex side.

4/ You can fold it inside out to reverse the physics. Bump becomes a hole, and no longer bumps. This change from bump to flow we see as magnetism. The spin force around the iron bar scales down the particles until they flip inside out.

The scalar physics are created by spin. So convex is the outer spin wall, and concave is the inner spin wall, and the more particles that spin, the larger the scalar particle. But the fact that they are infinite has restricted the upper limit.

Now the concave, and convex design relates to the size of the particles moving towards each other. For example, a lens in convex for water which is a large particle, but is concave for photons which move through the lens, but interact inside the particles concave areas.

The Universe begins with these infinite scalar particles. They scale until they touch, and then they scale down. And this becomes a rhythm, and a vibration through space time. The energy from this vibration spreads through an empty universe. It forces the particles to obey particle stacking rules. So a fractal begins to form. The fractal obeys Newton's Kissing Problem for 12 particles around 1 particle...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kissing_number_problem

The transmission of this energy eventually crashes together on the central particle of Newton's Kissing Problem. This particle then folds inside out, and becomes a hole to move into by bump forces from the vibration. The particles which move into this hole are then in the line of flow from 12 directions, and so they must scale down, and flip inside out... this is what we call a black hole. It is the energy of a hole, that has a flow force, and collapses the particles moving into the flow force. The particles scale down, flip inside out, and escape. It's a fractal, so it creates the spiral Galaxy shape.

This repeats forever. And the Galaxies start to appear from cross energy flow forces. The Galaxies are not lined up by time, but more by pressure. So red shift is a scalar shift, and not a time shift. The further you look out into the Universe has no relationship to the age of the Galaxy that you see. If one Galaxy is surrounded by more pressure than another Galaxy it will look older than the Galaxy under less pressure. A red dwarf is under less pressure than a white sun as well. Gravity is a flow force of these zero particles that pass through your body, and into atoms of the Earth.

The Earth has more holes than your body, so the flow is more like a flow into a plug hole. The bending of spacetime is a scalar bend of zero particles into the Earth. The twist of spacetime around the Earth is just a fluid twist the same as you see when water spins around a hole.

The grain structure of the Zero particles eliminates the need for Dark Matter, and eliminates the strangeness of Quantum Physics. Particle, wave duality is just a particle travelling through scalar particles. Action At A Distance is just the push force which is gravity, and now its local, and not at a distance. The fractals that are created by this particle stacking system relate to all of nature. So any shape, like human, or fish is part of this scalar fractal of infinite particles. Trees are a sort of inverted version of the fractal along with lightening bolts. You can spend years just going through all of the physics of life, and all based on Newton's Kissing Problem.

Because this fractal is a simple matter of allowing scalar particles to trap one another, and scale down, and fold inside out, it is easy to simulate the entire Universe in a fractal algorithm. If you have a powerful enough computer you have the proof of the theory, by watching a Universe self build.

I have started the computer program. My computer is not very good. I can only handle 60000 particles. That's useless. I am writing the program open ended however. So if you have a super computer you can run as many particles as the computer can handle.

I believe that the fractal can create life in a computer, but the computer must be able to assign each particle with its own calculations individually, so totally multi-tasking. My program is based on 'The Game Of Life'...

http://www.bitstorm.org/gameoflife/

Using this self building method, but using the rules of the scalar particles. Not too many rules, and so the Universe has been simplified. But on a bog standard computer the fractal will be linear, and the energy flows will not be very natural. The future is Quantum Computers, and total multi processing.

It's best to think of the Universe as a simple set of rules that repeat, and then program this fractal to get the periodic table.

My work has started, and the tests are building up. My early test doesn't do much, but eventually the program will be a total 3D simulation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggRxyHjimxM

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #1 on: 04/03/2013 15:51:55 »
I would like to talk about time in my theory, as it is so different to the standard model version of time.

I have singularities situated like a fractal that are similar to Newton's Kissing Problem for 12 particles around 1. Each of these points is not an X/Y/Z location. It can be converted to X/Y/Z but is much more limited. If you try to move pixels on a computer screen you only have 8 directions that a little pixel man can move in. It's the same with space time. You can only move in 12 directions that match Newton's Kissing Problem, plus the central particle, which is the observer position. So consider yourself  a hole looking in 12 directions.

From that hole flows time. It is a scalar particle, and could be called a squirt for out, and a sink for in. Now we convert 'out' to forwards in time, and 'in' to backwards in time. The Bose / Einstein condensate showed that time can be reversed, and the Atoms moved 'In'. A snowflake also has a fractal that displays 'In' The in hole contains a sort of Russian Doll effect, and is a rebound trajectory that creates 'C'. So the rebound happens faster than 'C' in the hole to a scalar point, and back out again to result in 'C'.

So time doesn't even move forward, it moves in 12 directions, plus in, and out. And that is from a point. Now we move into the next point, and time is set up completely differently. You have to start all over again and you have only moved a possible Planck length.

So in this sense, time is almost completely impossible to calculate. You can average it out. But when it comes to complications like a Worm Hole, you are only swapping the time reference to 14 possible positions plus a 'C' scale. It's not really going to move you anywhere in time. You are always the central hole, and you always have to start from scratch after every change in location.

In a way, time is scale.
« Last Edit: 04/03/2013 17:05:18 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #2 on: 05/03/2013 12:46:35 »
So you may ask, "Why do I have the need to change the physics of the Standard Model?"

My answer is because I have no pull forces in my theory, so every action must use energy propagation, and a bump. Even 'C' must be propagated, so you need faster than light propagation. The propagation of C is a scalar rebound action. It changes a convex curve into a concave curve, and back into a convex curve. The net result is that a photon is created from those forces. The forces are internal to the photon which scales out of those internal forces to produce 'C'. The rebound action is sometimes weak (without an observer), and strong (with an observer)

The Two slit experiment shows the difference between the weak rebound action, and the strong rebound action. The strong rebound action can travel in a straight line turning all of the convex curves into concave holes. The concave alignment forces particles to its centre. The weak unobserved force leaves behind some convex curves. These convex curves are similar to bubbles, and throw the photon to the sides of the curve. The bubbles group together to create a wave, and so a wave pattern is shown as a result.

Zero Particle theory turns Quantum Physics into every day physics. The reason that science has Quantum Physics is all down to a single word.. 'PULL'.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #3 on: 05/03/2013 13:00:12 »
When Einstein was considering "What Is Action At A Distance?" he should have considered a push force Gravity. But instead he bent space time. The bending of space time does happen, but is an effect of gravity, and not the cause of Gravity. Einstein gets Cause, and Effect backwards at this point. The reason for this is his own, but it appears that he avoided changing some of Newton's ideas. He avoided changing the Force calculation which needs a replacement for mass.

Mass of an electron is determined by sending a particle near to the electron, and the curve can be worked out to be a mass. But science considers the curve to be a pull force. So science considers the result to be a mass result. The result is a flow result, and is the same as a flow around a whirlpool. A boat moves towards the flow, the particle moves towards the electron.

Now force is a flow, and mass is a flow into a hole, and all forces are push forces. You have been measuring a bucket full of water as mass, instead you need to take the water out of the bucket, and put a negative sign in front of the electron mass.

With a negative mass for the electron the force formula will work OK. A lot of formulas need reversing, but you lose the Big Bang in the end.

« Last Edit: 05/03/2013 13:01:44 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #4 on: 05/03/2013 13:15:18 »
The replacement for the Big Bang changes some more physics. First you need to get rid of the pull forces that build the Universe. They all have to become flow forces into holes. The singularity needs a flow force towards it, and all of the particles need to create singularities.

To create the singularities you use the Zero Particle. The meeting of the vibration on a central point between the zero particles as they scale up, and down. They fold down a central particle into a singularity. The singularity takes over the physics, allowing energy to build up and produce new physics. These particles all become a fractal as 12 surround 1, and the fractal is a connecting pathway for energy to transfer by bump forces. The snowflake is a perfect 2D representation of the 2D fractal, and the 3D fractal only happens far away from Gravity. Gravity uses up the Y propagation particles so the dimension on Earth start to strip away partly to 6 from 12. Although we can struggle to use up probably all 12 of the Dimensions against the incoming forces.

So the dimensions are propagated through Newton's kissing problem. Energy must be propagated, so we have 12 dimensions from a single central point.

As you can see, all of the physics that I am working on are necessary to remove the 'PULL' forces from the Standard Model.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #5 on: 05/03/2013 13:27:35 »
Instead of the Big Bang you only need to create the Galaxies at intersecting points of energy. Time is not a line through this Universe. Time is fractal. But Galaxies do help to create new Galaxies by directing the Energy along the fractals. So there is a connection that has linear time in it 'SOMETIMES'.

The central hole of a Galaxy has collapsed, and a whirlpool is created. The vibrations propagate through the whirlpool, and fold into more singularities. The new singularities create suns with an outside force, and an inside force. The sun is suspended like a bunch of ping pong balls on air. At this point I need the periodic table to start to develop. That will need to be calculated by my computer program. But sometimes it appears that we use the word Iron to replace some singularities. I know that I said that electrons are singularities, but they are small. Some larger singularities are needed that will create a mass like iron but without the iron due to the spin speeds of the electrons. So those dark spots on the sun are those super spin speeds, and when a planet is made we should consider that some of the iron is perhaps a black hole.

I'm pretty sure that we sometimes mistake black holes for Iron Cores. Although they may not be so black as to push in the photons when you replace pull with push.
« Last Edit: 05/03/2013 13:32:43 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #6 on: 05/03/2013 16:12:29 »
The propagation of light is something that I have discussed, and I use a scalar particle changing convex into concave, and back to convex. The scalar effect is into a hole, and the propagation is by a Russian Doll type setup.

There was once a theory of the Luminiferous aether, and it was discarded due to a Michelson and Morley experiment that suggested a wind factor was missing from the physics. How does the Aether connect all things together? It can't follow both the sun and the Earth and all other products of the Universe. Is it moving, or is it stationary? How can it do both? Why is there no Aether wind?

Well I propagate all forces, not just light. The Earth is propagated, and the photon is propagated, and the electrons are the holes that propagate the physics along with Gravity flow, and scalar rebound forces. All things propagated together at the same time from a stationary scalar force. All linked together by a spin spin towards the electrons...

https://www.amherst.edu/aboutamherst/news/faculty/node/457128

And the spin spin is a rotation through the zero particles.

What you have here is a stationary frame for all physics. All physics propagated at once due to the scalar rebound force. A physical animation frame. The frame is internal to the particles, the energy escapes as magnetism. Magnetism is a push force that creates a spin that screws particles towards itself. A screw is a push force that acts like an attractive force, eliminating pull force.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #7 on: 05/03/2013 17:49:26 »
The single frame reference also contains the next stage of physics. If energy moves into a hole, and that hole was the area of least resistance, it is no longer the area of least resistance. The next hole along is now the area of least resistance. You can imagine an asteroid travelling past the Earth. It is travelling into the area of least resistance, and it drags the next frame along with it as a bow shock. We normally associate a bow shock with a high Mach speed, but even the slowest speeds store a bow shock internally to the particle. The bow shock is a scalar shock, and scales the zero particles down, and this scale down is the area of least resistance. Gravity has scaled down an area around the Earth, so the asteroid bow shock now adds to our own gravity shock. So the asteroid moves into the combined area of least resistance.

If you move towards the zero particles faster, and faster, they scale down ahead of the asteroid. A sun exhibits a huge bow shock, and it's a scalar shock wave. This is a storage of physics relating to the next frame of a time index.

When Einstein said that Gravity is the bending of Space Time he got cause and effect backwards. This bow shock is a scalar flow following on from a movement towards a hole. If you imagine moving through ice then you are an object melting a path, and the heat is ahead of you, and behind you is a cold flow that seals up the hole.

Apart from the bow shock there is the spin spin. As mentioned earlier, the spin spin is the rotation that takes place pointing towards a hole. This readies you for the second stage frame. Energy travels inside the spin spin as a shell. It inflates the shell, and the shell becomes the next particle along. Encased in a shell like this energy propagates like a hose pressure.

Something in the next frame creates entanglement, and action at a distance. Probably the spin spin.
« Last Edit: 05/03/2013 17:51:38 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #8 on: 05/03/2013 19:56:27 »
The information that is stored in the physical frame has physical qualities that are about to happen. This is where relativity gets written into the environment. You stand on a train, you take on the bow shock, and now you are stationary to the train. You both share the same bow shock. The area of least resistance is in the same direction. The scalar effect is also matched, so time is stored as a motion through scaling.

Relativity is the storage of the frame, combined with the next frame.

Does time stop for a photon travelling at C?

No, the internal scalar rebound force is still happening, else energy would not be able to propagate the next frame.
« Last Edit: 05/03/2013 19:58:27 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #9 on: 06/03/2013 02:42:25 »
Why do all of these strange physics exist, anyone could make them up?

Each time I use a new type of physics it is because at that stage in energy propagation the physics are required to get the energy from A to B if there was no such thing as a pull force. There is no explanation for a pull force that satisfies my mind, I find it impossible to have pull forces. Each time somebody says pull, you examine it closely, and it is a push force.

So let's take a look at a scalar force more closely. It took me years to figure out how to create movement from a standing start. The scaler force like balloons inflating next to each other push one another along. That's a standing movement, and it's not made of many physical parts. I limit part numbers, I don't want mechanics in my theory that look like they were manufactured. I don't have pull, and I don't have mechanics. I call mechanics simple things like waves, and strings. I don't use waves, or strings on their own. My waves are particle waves like a fluid, and strings have to be self building if they exist.

I avoid anything that sounds too good to be true. Making up new physics requires the natural procedure of a fractal algorithm. I am a programmer, and I work on computer games. Physics for computer games are sometimes simplified from the normal every day physics. I wanted physics that self build, without human intervention.

The physics that I use are self building physics. Each stage is an advancement from the last stage..

1/ The zero particle. It is the creation of separation. If the Universe had to start from the very first mathematical formula it would be 1 + -1 = 0. Which would be my fractal formula. You dig a hole, you get a hill, and a hole. In cause, and effect it is one of the few things that creates two effects from 1 cause that are equal. It is one of the few physical qualities that can be hidden. You put the dirt back in the hole, and you get a flat line. You can hide the hole, and the hill, and still have both physics sharing the same space. So just like virtual particles the zero particle can be the first building block.

2/ Time. Why is my time so different? Just like I needed a zero particle, I needed a standing start. Scalar Inflation from a hole was the only standing start I could come up with that wasn't very mechanical. But when I wondered about it, I figured that zero particles must be infinite, because zero doesn't really create anything. But once the zero particle is infinite it is forced to create everything. It runs out of energy free positions. The area of least resistance starts to spin around, because I use Newton's Kissing Problem. Newton's Kissing Problem has room for another particle hidden in its structure. The 13th ball that can never be fitted on the outside of a single ball. So what took me several years to come up with was a natural fractal of inflation, and movement from zero.

Each progression of physics is worked out from the last. The stages of my physics pass from zero to zero, with no net gain. The only reason that anything gets built is due to shortage of space in a infinite environment. The shapes that are created match nature. Newton's Kissing Problem matches the fractals of nature. The grain structure of the Universe that I use matches the fractal for Galaxies, and the fractal for humans, and the fractal for snowflakes, and the fractal for sea life. All of the fractals are forced from a particle stacking problem that happens naturally.

So I don't really invent any physics at all. My knowledge of computer games lets me know how to create a fractal that will self build the Universe. I am used to thinking of physics in this way. Unlike a game like Mario you can make a system that just happens. Getting each step correct as written on these pages is a carefully calculated procedure. I use the simplest form of physics for each stage. Only simplicity can be correct for a Universe with no knowledge of what it is about to create.



It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #10 on: 06/03/2013 12:53:11 »
What does a particle flipping inside out mean?

I gave the example of half a tennis ball, and you can fold it inside out, and historically this has been called matter, and anti-matter. I don't use those terms, because I have the physics to explain those terms, and the annihilation is only virtual annihilation, the annihilation is 1 + -1 = 0. There is no annihilation.

Without the physics at first it is easy to use vectors to create the phenomenon. In a modelling package when you create a vector sphere with a positive number you can say that it has a scale of say 5. If you create a vector sphere of scale -5 it looks the same, but the physics have reversed. The structure is now mapped on the inside instead of the outside. It's comparable to folding the half tennis ball inside out.

Now we scale right down to quantum physics. We remove the vectors, and we are in a grain structure. To recreate the physics without vectors you use scalar particles.

What is scale?

Scale is relative. you can only judge scale by comparison. Compare an egg to a football, and a football to an apple, and an apple to an atom.

But the very first particles have no relative comparison at all. They aren't restricted to a scale. They are restricted to infinity. Infinity is a fractal due to the way that spaces are used up. And like Newton's Kissing Problem infinity has to obey the rules of a particle stacking system. When the atom arrives through the evolution of zero particles, the atom has become scalar restricted. We as humans only ever witness a scalar restricted environment. Trees grow using a scalar restricted growth method. A scalar particle grows because infinity has filled it with Russian dolls of itself.

Infinity uses infinite regression of scalar particles, but the physics of the infinite regression fold inside out like a negative scale vector sphere. This changes infinity into a scalar loop, and so you get a 12 point X Y Z field instead of permanent infinite regression. If you prod a soft ball with your finger the properties change from convex to concave. In the scalar particle version, the particles that are touched first scale down first. So the convex to concave change is more like a melting away of energy, but the energy is actually dividing into Newton's Kissing Problem. If you wonder why the LHC gets particles in groups of 6 then think about Newton's Kissing Problem hit from one side. The result is 6 particles that flatten, and 6 particles escape. Groups of 6 particles with 6 opposite particles. The energy then becomes less in the middle of a concave curvature. Water would gather in the curvature because it is the area of least resistance. The scalar particles fold a structure inside out, and now the reverse physics head in the opposite direction, and you have a bounce.

Here is the scale written out in numbers...

5,4,3,2,1,-1,-2,-3,-4,-5

As vector sphere, you see a ball shrink, and grow. The negative numbers are a growing hole. But gravity fills all the internal holes, and magnetism fills all of the external holes, so its a growing solid. Its a solid that shrinks, and grows because gravity or magnetism fills all holes. It either fills them internally, or externally, but to our point of view time never stops. The scalar rebound of time uses positive, and negative numbers to create a bounce back without having to stop at zero, because as a hole the hole is filled instantly. All that is changing is that the hole is first filled on the inside, and then the hole is filled on the outside of a curvature.

The matter anti-matter change is dependant on whether you are a hole or a filler. Energy can escape by switching from a filler to a hole, or back to a filler. The Gravity system is like a weather system. A chaotic algorithm of scalar change.

Gravity into a hole, scales to magnetism and escapes. Magnetism is pushed by holes, if it becomes trapped by holes it scales to Gravity. Magnetism is scaled down Gravity, A galaxy weather system. Dark Matter.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2013 14:35:38 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #11 on: 06/03/2013 15:09:08 »
So to remind you...

Movement is a choice of 12 points, and a central hole where movement begins.. Newton's Kissing Problem as points. A central hole contains a scalar energy which is time. All of the dimensions are local, and X / Y / Z is an average extrapolation  of fixed points. Not all X / Y / Z locations are available at the quantum level, but smooth out to our scale. Time is inside that X / Y /Z analysis, it's at the centre of an atom in the Nucleus. Time is a scalar particle.

So for every frame of any movement all physics are stored as data for the current frame, and point to the next frame in the frame itself. You can visually see the next frame in the current frame. For example as a bow shock, a spin spin, or as part of the entanglement of particles, or scaler factors.

All extensions from the 1st frame into the 2nd frame are local to the points of Newton's Kissing Problem. There is no action at a distance, and all energy is propagated.

We can use a very simple example of a photo of a speed boat using atoms rather than scalar physics. The image of the boat includes some data. The rear wake of the boat, the bow wave, the motion blur, the wind in the hair, the height of the boat off the water.

In quantum physics the frame is required to determine the next frame for energy propagation. The clues have a physical reality to the next move in a game of Quantum Chess. A series of snowflake pictures are all a bit different, but can be turned into an animation of snowflake propagation. I've done this before. The smaller you get, the more the frame starts to become the next reality.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #12 on: 06/03/2013 16:14:04 »
So what happens to time when you walk from point A to Point B?

If we just use atoms as our scale then all of the temperature changes are variations in the time flow. So we are never moving from A to B through time in a linear manner. If it gets too cold, time moves backwards, and we die. But we don't know how to examine real time like that, so we use something that we can call a time relationship. It's a bit like finding Pluto with a change in the orbit of another planet. Our time relationship is very weak.. we wear a watch. Imagine all of the cogs in a watch trying to represent scalar physics. One cog scales to another cog, to another cog. A tiny amount of scale from energy, and you are miles away from realistic time. Your watch has turned an atom into a Galaxy scale version of an atom. Now when you walk from A to B the changes in time don't happen according to reality, they happen at a much larger scale where a tiny change is ignored.

Moving 1 metre includes billions of time changes that no clock can identify. The speed of time is faster than C, so even if you had a watch that worked at C, it would still skip time. Time is faster than C to propagate C, and the central point of the atom is ignored by X / Y / Z. If you examine X/ Y / Z they are lines from a point. The point is time, and are skipped by X /Y /Z. Think of atoms.. who measures X / Y /Z from inside an atom? Who measures the central point of an atom?

The central point of an atom is 'In' and 'Out'. It's scalar. You are missing X/ Y / Z / IN / OUT.

Time can exist in the X / Y /Z if you include IN OUT as scalar points.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #13 on: 06/03/2013 16:53:43 »
If a frame includes the following frame reference, with direction, speed, and time, then what is acceleration in that frame?

The acceleration is part of the bow shock distance from the particle. So an asteroid moves forwards, it has a bow shock against scalar particles. The scalar particles have a bow shock against the next row of scalar particles, and the next row of scalar particles have a bow shock against a further row of scalar particles...

Now you look at a sun with a huge plough of a bow shock.

Now time is the scalar particle in a hole with a Russian Doll effect. It is easier to think of time as a Geyser, or Hose Pipe for this example. The time Geyser with acceleration is forced back into the hole. So there is a physical relationship to time in acceleration.

The bow shock folds scalar particles into points. Atoms move into points. The greater the distance the points can be moved ahead of the previous point then the next frame includes information for acceleration.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2013 17:11:02 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #14 on: 06/03/2013 18:43:18 »
I don't usually use Calculations but I suppose that I can present a calculation from a frame for acceleration. I take this off the internet...

Quote
a = F/m, where F is the net force applied to a mass, m.

For example, if an object's velocity changes from 10 meters per second to 20 meters per second in five seconds, its acceleration is (20-10)/5 = 2 meters per second per second, or 2 meters per second squared (m/s2).

Now I want to convert it into the frame physics of my previous examples.

a = F/m

needs to be changed to something like..

a = Bow shock point 1 - Bow Shock point 2 / Time scalar length from contraction (like a geyser in a hole contracted to recoil).

So the geyser of time is shrunk to fit between to bow shock points A and B, and its energy is like a spring that rebounds from a scale factor that reverses..

5, 4, 3 ,2 ,1, -1 ,-2 ,-3 ,-4 ,-5

If you squeeze time the recoil divides into the distance between two points ahead of time. C is the speed at which you split the data into segments (being as time is faster than C).

It's something like that. It requires a real mathematician to describe what I am trying to say. But the maths is definitely in there somewhere.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2013 18:57:34 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #15 on: 07/03/2013 12:30:00 »
So fundamental energy is kinetic, and taken from time as a scalar bounce. A nice neat quantum bounce with no deceleration due to a flip from convex to concave filled by gravity then magnetism. It is the lack of deceleration that allows the bounce to repeat forever. The lack of zero in the system. 1 + -1 = 0 is reality. It takes two states to make a zero state, and if you can switch between the two states without stopping then you will never reach a zero state for energy.

1/ Newton's Kissing Problem.. the 13th ball.

After Newton discovered that you could get 12 balls around a same sized ball, he then puzzled over the gaps. He worked out that there was room for a 13th ball. The 13th ball could never be fitted. This is the chaos that leaves an area of least resistance forever in a scalar field that equals out to same sized particles.

2/ The time bounce.

Create a vector sphere scale 5, and a vector sphere scale -5. They look the same, the physics are inverted. Take a tennis ball, cut it in half, fold the other half inside out. Two halves, with physics that can flip, both the same size more or less. Time uses kinetic energy based on a system that doesn't need to reverse direction to actually reverse direction. It is a trampoline that always bounces, because its zero state doesn't exist. 1 switches to -1, and back to 1 because the geodesic quality of time never flattens out. And as a ball of gravity switching to a ball of magnetism all that is happening is a scalar change. The two ends of a bar magnet are examples of a scalar change bounce. The ends that push apart are pushing against scaled convex curves. The ends that 'APPEAR' to pull are scaled concave spin forces. The forces are polarised together, and only make changes to other particles with the matching poles, and scales.

If you were to use a black Box example of the propagation of all things, you need to include the bow shock of the Black Box in the example. The bow shock is made from the points as holes which are areas for kinetic energy to move into. If you stand in the black box your bow shock matches the black box bow shock. Your bow shock points are spaced relatively to the Black Box. You are both sending the same message. Your second frames match up, and kinetic energy is traversing its way along a fractal towards the bow shock holes.


It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #16 on: 07/03/2013 12:43:39 »
Space isn't a vacuum or even close...

The fundamental zero particles fill space time head to tail. They then scale down minutely enough as to not make contact. Like a circuit board they are now hidden. The Earth however has no scalar ability, so it makes contact, it makes a circuit board. The electrons are holes in the zero particle field, and so a solid, or mass is actually more like a sponge....

The Earth is a sponge in a surrounding particle field of zero particles. The Earth as a mass uses less matter than space of the same size. The illusion is that we see a negative of reality.

A frictionless spacetime is actually a conveyor spacetime. The Earth as a sponge, or an asteroid, or anything that we call a mass is full of holes that fill with spacetime. If you move towards the zero particles with an atomic structure you are moving as a bubble towards a super liquid. The flow of the liquid through the structure conveys the structure with no net change, and therefore frictionless. The scalar particles which scale down to avoid making contact create a gap that Einstein called the bending of spacetime. It is actually the scaling of space time. The scalar particles then scale back up behind the atomic structure. A scalar bend.

We as humans are human bubbles in a super liquid.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #17 on: 07/03/2013 13:44:41 »
So we have the atoms sliding over a scalar field. What about the photons?

Each zero particle is made from a convex curve, which touches things like atoms, and a concave curve which acts as a hole, and holes usually don't get touched by atoms. But photons can hit the convex side with such force that it becomes a concave side. In fact the propagation of the wave is due to collisions with zero particles which cannot scale out of the way fast enough.

So as the photon is hitting the convex side you need to change that side into a spin in your mind. Now imagine a bent waterfall.

1/ If the bend is towards you when you put your hand under it..... the water gushes out towards you.

2/ If the water is bent concave then the water takes your hand with it into the waterfall.

As the photon bends the convex it experiences slow down, but as it changes the convex to concave it experiences speed up. The incoming gush of water pops the concave back to convex again behind it. Then the photon leaves through concave.

(The photon may actually just be the flip, and the particle may be the gush. So in other words a photon may just be a virtual particle built there, and destroyed in the same location, but recreated by the next pop.)

In a lens this is much more fractal. The centre of a convex lens is the easier choice. In a prism the colours are separated by areas of least resistance.

Red shift is likely to be a scalar shift of the zero particles.
« Last Edit: 07/03/2013 14:03:00 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #18 on: 07/03/2013 14:20:15 »
So far, the theory is based on a repeating fractal. The fractal exists, you can see it. You can see it in nature. You can see the relationship between a whirlpool, and a Galaxy spin. You can test pull forces, are they pull forces? Look closely at a chain, it is made up of all push forces. Pull open a door, and you look closely, you are pushing open the door.

If another theory comes along that is similar, will it find the relationship with the fractal? The relationship with Newtons Kissing Problem?

Lets try to break the relationship with the fractal..

The millipede...

It doesn't have 12 points per leg, or 6 points, it has two legs on either side of a body section. So how is it a Newton's Kissing Fractal?

Each body section is closed off at the ends. newton's kissing Problem for 1D is 2 balls either side of 1 ball. If there is a tiny bit more space you can add two legs per side so long as they are squashed in scale.

You could try salt, it's a cube...

Salt is probably the hardest to fit into the fractal. It has become a motionless version of the fractal. The electrons are trapped, time seems to be stuck.

The Octopus...

8 legs, no Kissing Problem Fractal has 8 in it. But water exhibits some changes to Newton's Kissing Problem. Water has a pressure from the sides. The side pressure is combined with the Y pressure of Gravity. So lets use X / Y pressure. The forces then cause a diagonal fracture in Newton's Kissing Problem. The diagonal fracture squeezes points together. So an Octopus is actually a 12 legged creature squeezed in the middle to become an 8 legged creature with an enlarged head where the pressure squeezes into. The squeeze  also pushes the Octopus testicles into its head.

So Fish are often squeezed in the middle to become flat, and our hands become flat fins.

All of these changes are stored in DNA, and so the physics don't actually need to apply anymore. A baby's feet are flat from gravity before it has walked, so the changes of Newton's Kissing Problem are sometimes evolved into a body with no forces acting on it at all.

If that isn't enough for you let's go up in scale to something really big. You will find a hexagonal fractal in Images like this one. Just overlay a hexagonal grid over it, and bend the grid concavely...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/universe/questions_and_ideas/dark_matter/
A new theory is not going to be as complete as this theory. Although you can add to this theory.
« Last Edit: 07/03/2013 17:56:23 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #19 on: 07/03/2013 18:41:40 »
Time, and Time again...

Time is central to all points, and is like a Scalar Geyser that propagates kinetic energy into physics. The snowflake is an example of Time In. The Sun is an example of Time Out. The difference between a hot sphere, and a cold hexagon is time.

The chaos of time is the 13th ball that can never be fitted into Newton's Kissing Problem.

More chaos is created by energy cells blocking other energy cells. Look at lightening, it forks when an energy cell is blocked. The same thing with a tree. Limited angles of 60 degree are still apparent at this scale, but are dwindling through the smoothing out of the fractal.

So if this is all a fractal what about free will?

I have a Theory right here that 7 Billion people didn't think of. Plus all of the people that ever lived. I don't follow cause, and effect, I don't use 'PULL' just because all of the causes said 'USE PULL'. I don't have to follow a leader. I appear to have Free Will, and I'm not just being random. I can play the piano, and my songs are original, I can paint, I write computer games, and I can invent new things.

I figured out the theory years ago, about 2003. Nobody bothered to follow up on it. Even if I try to implant a cause into others, nobody is taking the bait of the real TOE.

This is the real Theory Of Everything, and yet the free will to accept it seems to be a bit dormant for my liking. People seem to want to follow the Standard Model even if I prove that pull doesn't exist, and the standard model is based on pull. Newton Invented science as a mathematical proof. So from the very first use of science as mathematics there was a fault in it.. 'Pull'. Which created an error in the Force formula that uses mass. Which made Einstein use a pull force in the Big Bang.

But I ignored all of it.

Does Free Will exist?

It does in me.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #20 on: 07/03/2013 19:28:06 »
So, did anyone put a concave hexagon grid over the NASA picture of Dark Matter?

This is what you would see...

Too good to be true?

Probably yes. I don't expect the fractal to be quite that obvious. There was another picture posted a few years later, and NASA said that the new picture definitely did not contain a fractal unlike the first. But when I inspected the new picture it had the same fractal, but you had to apply a bit more of a concave curve to the grid.

Here is a link, read it for yourself.. it has the same fractal...
http://www.space.com/17234-universe-fractal-large-scale-theory.html
« Last Edit: 07/03/2013 19:51:04 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #21 on: 08/03/2013 11:49:04 »
So, according to the evidence so far, a quantum set of 12 particles around 1 particle, maintains its shape all the way up to infinity. The particle stacking system uses Newton's Kissing problem, which averages out to a hexagon shape from any direction in 3D.

The structure of spacetime then looks a bit like this...

And Spin Spin is that shape rotating.
« Last Edit: 08/03/2013 11:51:40 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #22 on: 08/03/2013 12:04:13 »
And when the particles touch the energy is passed along like a circuit board. And the message can be a photon. The fractal can be determined how each set of physics works. I said that a photon is a message passed by a sort of curved waterfall. An outward curve holds together until it is touched, and then it releases energy like a spray outwards. An inward curve blasts energy inwards. The fractal can be seen in some space anomalies...

(I edited this image to make the bubbles clearer to the human eye.)
« Last Edit: 08/03/2013 12:06:50 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #23 on: 08/03/2013 14:39:07 »
So if that's the in flow what does the out flow look like...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23248-giant-milky-way-bubbles-blown-by-black-hole-merger.html

The galaxy could be the out flow from the touching forces. It's something I am testing out at the moment, as seen in this test.... zoom in to the middle...
« Last Edit: 08/03/2013 14:42:57 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #24 on: 08/03/2013 15:29:22 »
Here's a question? If the Universe is a fractal, what is the difference between Dark Matter, and Grey Matter?

Well if you look at the picture I posted earlier of Dark Energy placement in the Universe, and now look this article. there is not much difference...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130307124754.htm


... and in my mind there is a planet called Earth

... and on this Earth I sit

... and I sit and I think of Dark Energy

... and in this Dark Energy there is a planet called Earth

... and on that Earth I sit, and think

... and in my mind there is a planet called Earth

Just a poetic interlude.  :)

« Last Edit: 08/03/2013 15:34:21 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #25 on: 08/03/2013 17:41:11 »
What is the constant C?

When you use a Newtons Cradle the balls have a similar size, and a set radius, and all propagate through a force, and the energy escapes. The speed drops because the energy escapes. That would be the Convex waterfall effect escaping.

The physics of C are similar to a Newton's Cradle, but the energy doesn't escape. A set distance is propagated through. Time acts as a piston in the middle. The piston value...

5,4,3,2,1,-1,-2,-3,-4,-5 adds up to zero. So zero is lost.

So in a normal Newtons Cradle energy is lost in the X/Y/Z

Inverted physics forces the energy into a hole, and back into the system again. The hole is where X / Y /Z all meet up at a single point... Time.

Time which has a bounce with no loss of speed. The propagator of all things.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #26 on: 09/03/2013 02:34:38 »
Relativity stored in a fractal framework.

You stand on a train.

The train has a bow shock which is the scaling of space time.

Newton's Kissing problem is 12 balls around 1 ball.

The train scales down the centre ball of 12 to make points in space time, because the middle ball has nowhere to escape to.

The other scalar particles can escape if they are fast enough relative to the train speed. Otherwise bunching occurs.

Bunching traps more scalar particles, they cannot escape.

There are more points created by bunching, more scaling down, less resistance from forward motion due to a fragmented space time. Bunching is due to acceleration, once the speed becomes regular the bunching rolls through its own newly created holes in the bow shock areas.

Time as a geyser spring is under pressure. Time dilation occurs due to the restriction of forward flow from a hole. The loss of forward flow also takes pressure off the atoms. Contraction throughout the train is due to loss of internal time pressure. Time shrinks, time is a propagator of atoms.

The electrons as holes have a flow of incoming gravity from the train movement. This spins around the electrons, and expands the holes. Magnetism flows forwards as a push force. G force flows backwards as a push force. Magnetism is another aspect of the scaling of space time down.

Colour shifts are related to scale shifts. A wave is a scalar wave, so a red shift is a scale up, and a blue shift is a scale down. At the front of the train there is a scale down. At the back of the train there is a scale up.  A rainbow is therefore a scalar rainbow. The size to wave relationship is through individual particle pockets which are aligned to become waves. A rainbow looks like a curved packet of Rice Crispies at the quantum scale. The small crispies  shrunk to fall to the bottom of the big Crispies in the bag looks similar to photon pockets.

A person standing on this train experiences similar bow shock forces.
A person standing outside of the train has none of this Data.

So the frames are now frozen.

If the train is accelerating the zero particles change from convex to concave and forming the holes as an area of least resistance ahead of the train. Concave zero particles have an inward flow of time particles, and this flow acts as a bond (The waterfall is concave, you put your hand in it and your hand moves into the waterfall. It looks like a pull force, but is a quantum push force.) The zero particles can't escape under acceleration pressure. Time as a spring is under pressure. Magnetic bubbles are forming from electron spin speeds coming from increased G force. Zero particles are scaling down gravity into magnetism.

Train reaches a constant speed. The convex particles now bump away as less become concave. The convex geyser effect of time has regained momentum.

The thing is to think of the physics acting out Relativity as a Quantum flow. Two people do not share the entire flow of physics. The single frame is flowing towards the next frame.

Do not confuse time with Past, Present, and Future however. That's a big mistake. Time is always present time. The time dilation of a clock is a restriction of time energy. Time energy is a force limited to a small atomic sphere. It cannot escape it's own sphere, it's trapped. There is no arrow, there is a scalar sphere reducing to a snowflake, then into a point. If you test out the time physics on ageing then you get a result from limiting the energy loss of the test subject. That's not a time result in the sense of Past, Present or Future.

Time in most cases does not exist. It is just a force the happens inside a point where it propagates the X /Y /Z forces. A scaler vortex of Russian Dolls. A geyser where the water can fold inside out on itself... a super liquid, condom, geyser flow force.

It is quite complicated. And it is easy to make a mistake in this mixture of physics. So I may have missed something, or got something backwards. It's easy to get something backwards when a particle can take on the opposite physics by folding inside out...

Water scales up into ice, and ice scales down. The physics reverse. Water can be crushed into magnetism as well.

 




« Last Edit: 09/03/2013 02:50:57 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #27 on: 09/03/2013 10:20:18 »
The image above of a photon stream, spin, and scalar change is not totally at the Quantum Scale. I mean that there are smaller physics happening that aren't in the picture, quite important details actually...

Spin Spin...
Newtons Kissing Problem has a hidden 13th ball that can never be fitted. Zero particles perform scalar changes which are like mini waterfalls. The exchange of energy between scalar particles creates scale equalization. So Newton's Kissing Problem in this case uses same sized particles, and the waterfall flow is Time which is smaller, and builds the same sized particles. The 13th ball that can never be fitted allows all particles to spin around the central particle. That spin is......... Spin Spin.

You have a hollow propagator, so it's spin directs the flow invisibly. So what we see has another invisible spin which points energy towards the area of least resistance. In the prism above the spin spin would point towards the largest mass area of the prism, because mass is holes, and holes are electrons. So the spin spin points towards the electrons first, and this is the passageway to the area of least resistance for gravity.

Now the spin spin is a very useful physical device. It directs flow, and it creates bonding. The bonding is created by the fact that the spin spin has open ends, but a more closed middle area. It looks like a Gyroscope inverted to be hollow made from Newton's Kissing Problem. The 6 balls surrounding the middle area are the Gyroscope wheel. The other balls 3 at the top, and 3 at the bottom create the Gyroscope arms. You see the bonding in snowflakes, and the locking can rotate very rarely...

http://i.livescience.com/images/i/000/009/281/i02/ig35_snowflakes_10_02.jpg

Above you see a snowflake which normally bonds in lines has a 90 degree rotation through the bonding. Similar things happen in other areas of nature, like trees, and DNA double helix.

One of the other important states of this bonding process is in creating the wave.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #28 on: 09/03/2013 10:34:59 »
What is a wave?

A wave is particle bonding through a spin spin. It looks like a line of hollow Gyroscope end to end which propagate energy through touch bonding. Newton's Kissing Problem applies to all of the touch bonding locations. So the touch bonding is often limited to 60 degree angles, or various cases of Newton's Kissing Problem angles. Touch bonding is created by concave effects with concave flow walls which act 'similar' to a pull force. So all waves are created by particles.

The two slit experiment with an observer helps the bonding to take place. So you get spin spin towards the detector. Without an observer the contact of the zero particles is lesser without any bow shocks from the observer to create the concave holes required for bonding. The system can rock without better bonding, so it is like the gyroscopes slowing down on a table, and rocking in this lesser energy state.

The rocking motion creates the waves in the sea. The bonding is weak, it swings around like little bridges that open to let the boats through. Little fishing floats with magnets on the ends is a real model that you could build. If you centrally balance the floats, and use a weak magnet you can get the little waves to happen, and open up. If you can arrange a 60 degree rotation with a hoop, and make sure that you have opposite poles then you can get an even better model.

So that is how a particle converts into a wave, and a line.

Particle Wave Duality.
« Last Edit: 09/03/2013 11:33:39 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #29 on: 09/03/2013 10:55:56 »
I first started this theory in about 2003. I look in the science news each day to see what new, undiscovered physics matches my theory. About 100 times I have found a new match. Today this is my match...

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/348865/description/News_in_Brief_Particle_caught_flip-flopping
« Last Edit: 09/03/2013 11:00:54 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #30 on: 09/03/2013 13:42:13 »
So Quantum Physics of the spin spin directs the energy flows, and it has limited turning ability because the energy has to propagate through Newton's Kissing Problem, and the propagation creates areas of least resistance at 60 degrees, and perhaps 30 degrees in places.

So why doesn't the Universe look more angular?

Well the rotations are tiny, but of course we do see a lot of angles like trees, and limbs, and snowflakes. However a circle is a large fractal of a hexagon anyway, so you can see that the angles become fainter, and fainter the larger you get. But here's a nice example...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn%27s_hexagon

The Universe isn't smooth however. The fractal survives large scales.

Think about this fractal...

Newton's Kissing Problem with a time geyser in the middle, and a hole down through the two triangles at each end (There is a Kissing Problem around a sphere with two triangles in it). Well let's just apply this fractal to a human for a bit of fun...

A hole in the top.. the mouth.
A hole in the bottom... the bottom.
A geyser in the middle... The Urinary Tract
6 energy locations around a hexagon form... two arms, two legs, a head, and a tail.

Now I figure that comparing a human to a particle is too much for most of you. However not only are the shapes in about the right places, but the physics play similar roles...

A hole in the top propagates matter... the mouth.

A hole in the bottom releases the used matter... the bottom.

A hole in the middle releases a geyser as an energy flow... urination.

The 6 points act as propagators of information.. hands touch, feet touch, the head incorporates a complete new fractal of 6 new points from scratch. Two ears, two eyes, a tongue, and a nose. More information centres.

And the whole lot is propagated internally through a skin, which is about right.

So the fractal is in nature quite strongly.

Some Scientists probably dropped out way before this post, you need to be open minded to go with a particle fractal into a human form.
« Last Edit: 09/03/2013 13:44:28 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #31 on: 09/03/2013 16:00:28 »
This is a fractal where zero is made from a combination of forces. 1 + -1 = 0.

0 doesn't exist.

1 + -1 = 0 does exist.

The human language once more creates an illusion...

"I pulled the weed out of the ground to create a hole!"

The real Quantum version is...

"I pushed a weed out of a whole!"

The hole exists even with the weed in it. 1 + -1 = 0

And the hole which we call 0 for hole

should be changed to the whole. zero is the whole.

1 + -1 = THE WHOLE

and my theory becomes...

The Whole Particle Theory

which itself becomes...

The Theory Of Everything
« Last Edit: 09/03/2013 16:09:50 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #32 on: 10/03/2013 13:55:26 »
Using the above example changes the start point of the Universe. The Whole universe is flat energy. You can pull everything out of the flat energy like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. So the Universe can start off infinite, and then you can move the energy around to make it change shape. In fact the Universe has to start off infinite, and you cannot add one more, because 0 doesn't exist on its own.

The Universe is sculptured from flat energy like building an igloo from the ice. You build the Igloo, and you have a same sized hole. The igloo becomes something observable in a flat plane. The hole become the lesser observable negative. So the Universe doesn't need the Big Bang now, as it already contains all of the material on location. The Universe now needs the little ripples that push up out of the flat energy. Newtons Kissing Problem creates all of the little ripples, because the flat energy states are granular, and stack up, but also scale down. So the flat energy state means that a granular structure is not passing along information, and is therefore scaling down not to touch a local particle.
« Last Edit: 10/03/2013 14:36:08 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #33 on: 10/03/2013 14:23:00 »
This scalar structure can create outside bumps, and inner bumps. Using spherical particles you can create an outside bump through an outward flow force. The inner bump, the inner flow force.

There is a neat little trick to the inner flow force that helps energy to escape from an area of high resistance. The sphere can escape if they are away from particle walls. So to scale down moves them away from the inner walls of a sphere. If a particle scales down it must not bump into a particle inside itself, and if a particle scales up it must not bump into a particle outside itself. The final trick is to turn inside out, and put your outer wall inside your inner hole. The hole is able to create force by creating spin like a whirlpool uses a hole to create spin forces. Atoms however contain too many particles to scale up or down very much. Atoms are scalar restricted by inner particles. We see a world where scalar events rarely happen. But Gravity is not scalar restricted, and neither is magnetism...

When you use a bar magnet, and view the iron filings you can see shapes in those iron filings. The shapes represent the scaling pressures of gravity to magnetism. Gravity scales to magnetism to escape high resistance. The scale of magnetism determines if it touches any other particles in the scalar chain. Magnetism touches iron in the scalar chain of inner sphere sizes. So Iron experiences an inner bump force  of a particle that has scaled down to a negative scale. Magnetism is therefore a push force. All forces are push forces. Inner or outer, and it is important to remember that for Quantum Physics. Quantum Physics become spooky because of pull forces not existing. The trick of the mind. Treat physics as Quantum Physics, and the two things are the same.
« Last Edit: 10/03/2013 14:31:40 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #34 on: 10/03/2013 16:47:48 »
Proving the Theory of a Fractal Universe...

This whole thing is a fractal that can be created in a computer. So somebody, some day will easily recreate life in a computer.

...and people often say to me prove it with Calculus...

... Mathematics is the scientific method, however mathematics has been wrong since day 1, and Newton was in no position to choose another form of proof, as he did not know of computer models.


Quote
I am changing the rules of science. I am changing the rules of the proof.

So from now on, I am changing the rules of the proof. Proof of the Universe as a fractal is to recreate the fractal in a computer. The person that uses the least rules, and the least logic gates has the new leading model. Any output by the model does not count as part of the logic so long as the computer never uses the output as further input. This means that you can put numbers on the screen as results as often as you want, and if this lengthens the program it does not count as more logic gates. All scientist are allowed to judge the new model to say that it is truly smaller than the previous model. All scientists are allowed to judge that the output matches the actual Universe that we live in. I think that a scoring system is probably best...

Best match for actual Universe score
Smallest number of logic gates score

This is the new proof. The proof is allowed to be rewritten by the majority. But the majority must not have an alternative motive to change the proof back to mathematics. Mathematics is not proof.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #35 on: 11/03/2013 12:37:08 »
Why don't I trust maths?

With mathematics you can make a formula based on a falling object, and it's speed, and acceleration, and then you need to say what is happening. The words that you use like 'pull' can be reversed to 'push' just by changing the formula around to give the same end result. But the physics in the formula can be completely different with the same end result. I think of mathematics as the Mario World formula. You can make a measurement, and recreate the measurement Mario style. I don't want a creativity to be allowed in the formulas that describe the Universe. I want to give the formulas their own creativity.

The fractal formulas.
Take a look again at Conway's 'Game Of Life'..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life

It is creating fractals and movement, and the fractals have rules to obey. You can take this to the next level. You can change the rules to copy the Universe rules that I have been talking about in this thread. The scalar rules, and energy propagation rules. You can change the grid to a particle stacking system shaped grid. You can add the Quantum Physics as rules.

The result (if you get everything right) will be The Universe. A complete copy, self building, with the same physics. It is easier than you think. The Universe has no intelligence in its creativity, so simple bump forces are all that you need. If you want to make it look realistic you need to take into account the human sensory system. So to add colours you need to identify those colours as whatever physics make sense in the program to become colours. You might find a wave, you might find a spin, or you might find a scalar change. You might find a scalar change that changes a spin, and becomes a wave. You could create an artificial eye in the program to just read the incoming fractals.

I am saying that the fractal includes fractal physics, and is self building. The proof of the system is that the output should match the Universe without human creativity as part of the process. So the computer model is better than mathematics. It is repeating the same creativity as fractal rules, and there is no point where human intervention takes place. Nobody shouts 'pull' and shoots a skeet.

The other important thing  is that there is no Freefall, and no Vacuum, and no Pull forces. Everything is propagated by the grid. If you think of the grid as a scalar energy field then the energy is constantly flowing through the system. Moving an object from A to B has to be complete with physics. That's another thing that Mathematics fails at. Mathematics allows you to use X/Y/Z as Action At A Distance. A fractal shouldn't be allowed to do that. If you move something, you have to propagate it, and therefore you have to always be in physical mode.

I know how to do it, I have been programming since 1980. I think of myself as an original programmer of the modern age. I think in programming language, and can run the programs in my head. I did a poll, and asked if programmers could run programs in their head before they write the programs, the majority was 'Yes'.

So I am writing on these pages the close approximation of the physics of the computer program that I can see in the fractal. They are all Cause, and Effect physics. One type of physics leads to the next. Water crashes against a rock, chips it away, creates sand, the sand stacks according to its shape, the smaller bits drop through the bigger bits through vibrations.. a fractal is forming. The zero particle is like that. But the zero particle creates all of the physics from beginning to end. So the zero particle created the water that started it all off, and the zero particle created the Earth, and the zero particle created the electron, and the zero particle created space, and time.

The zero particle is the grid, and the energy, and the fractal, and the location, and the path of Cause, and effect. It just bumps.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2013 12:48:01 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #36 on: 11/03/2013 15:51:24 »
I've talked about about the Standard Model which to me has many Paradox "What's outside the Big Bang?" Which is a Paradox before you even bother talking about the Big Bang.

What about String Theory?

I think that string theory is most likely based on the fractal flows that Zero Particle Theory creates. So Zero Particle Theory is probably Quantum String Theory. In other words I don't use the strings, I build the paths that look like the strings. A string therefore is a necklace of Zero Particles. If the people using string theory were as strict as I am, they wouldn't allow the creation of mechanics to happen as a cause of the effects. The string theorists would have to sit down and create the strings before they have a theory at all.

And the chances are that the strings are Newtons kissing Problem. That's my analysis of String Theory. It requires the fractal that creates the strings. Then the Dimensions are simply paths through the fractal. Which takes away all of the strangeness of dimensions.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #37 on: 11/03/2013 19:36:32 »
What is hot, and what is cold?

Now, once you have the general physics sorted out, they just repeat a lot. So working out what everything is at the quantum scale is just a matter of picking from a selection of those physics.

Hot, is for particles to touch on the inside of your particles so that they scale up a bit. The up-scale now shows why hot air rises. Again the hot air rising is the Rice Crispy effect, and it is the small particles moving through the gaps between the hot particles that moves them up. Hot also smooths out crinkles by the inflation and stretching of an area.

Therefore the opposite is cold. Cold is to touch particles on the outside so that the particles scale down. Particles have a flow towards their nucleus through a hexagonal snowflake structure. This structure is therefore not smooth but jagged. The old person has a flow like this, and the jaggedness creates the wrinkles in their skin.

Now we have the rice crispy effect rising into the air, and a rainbow is a scalar rainbow.

Do you see how I re-used all of the physics? It's a fractal, the physics repeat.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #38 on: 11/03/2013 22:49:36 »
The Rising, and falling of scalar particles is part of the Granular Convection phenomenon...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granular_convection

So Red shift could also be the same phenomenon in space. And that would be my first choice. I think that the Universe is using scalar particles in space, and that they create pressures around planets, and suns. The pressures scale down into the electrons, and come back out as magnetism. The magnetism is a negative scale which can be larger than a positive scale when it is inverted. -5 is larger than 4 because magnetism fills a larger negative hole. The negative particles then leave the planets, and suns as part of a bow shock, and just to escape the incoming Gravity. The negative particles then head out to create a red shift from the spin of the photons that fill them up. And spin, and scale are colours that create waves that match those colours. That's 3 ways to collect colours using different methods. The prism, and the rainbow then display that scaling by splitting apart the colours through scaler spins.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #39 on: 13/03/2013 00:49:42 »
The larger picture of the Dark Energy in the Universe also has the fractal that I am discussing. Like I said earlier the most likely way to have hexagons all facing in one direction is that particle stacking rules are obeying Newton's Kissing Problem. And Newton's Kissing Problem averages out as a hexagon.

This image was stated not to have a fractal in it, but it has a hexagonal fractal in it if I bend the grid over the image...
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #40 on: 14/03/2013 02:47:16 »
Just in case you can't see the strange number of hits that the hexagonal grid gets, I have exaggerated the colours to make the distribution of matter clash against the grid. Now it sort of looks like the matter is growing on the grid like a climber plant. That's because the grid, and the matter match up so well.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #41 on: 17/03/2013 13:40:17 »
Ok so maybe you see the fractal, maybe you don't. I see a 100% fractal, which is a bit strange to me. I imagine some sort of computer glitch, or telescope glitch.

However, before I came across that fractal I was already working on a spacetime fractal using Newton's Kissing Problem. I was working on Snowflakes, and how they match a lot of animals, and fruits. For example if you cut a tomato in half you see a very similar fractal to a snowflake. It's in a lot of fruits.

So I programmed the 2D version of Newton's kissing Problem, which would be 2D because Gravity uses the Y, which only leaves the Hexagon. I had also read about the Bose / Einstein Condensate, and how the atoms merged together. I figured that a merging of Newton's Kissing Problem would create the Snowflake fractal.

So imagine that a snowflake is cause by first the formation of Hexagons from Newton's Kissing Problem with Gravity in the Y.

Second the atoms start to move together using points created by Newton's Kissing Problem.

Third the Inverse Square Law changes the strength at which the atoms approach one another.

So I wrote the computer simulation, and I got a perfect snowflake. (I stop the program before an even better snowflake is created, but I saw enough not to finish the program)

Download, and press the space bar...

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxton/Snowflake.rar

And to see how matter propagates to be included with the Luminiferous Aether just hold down the space bar, and move the mouse around.

What you see is the bending of spacetime as a propagator of matter. To be combined with a propagator of light, and therefore to eliminate the failing in the Michelson and Morley experiment.

And the bending is the In/Out flow of time. In for backwards in time, and snowflakes. Out for spherical time, and Suns.
« Last Edit: 17/03/2013 13:46:46 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #42 on: 17/03/2013 16:37:22 »
One of the great things about my theory is how simple it makes the Universe. It turns complexity into a repeating fractal. Take for example my snowflake code above. It just takes a bunch of points, and moves them towards each other. If however you have ever looked into the maths of snowflake code, the mathematicians do not think like an artist...

This link makes everything sound very complicated...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-do-snowflakes-form

Behind all of complexity is a simple idea just hidden from view. All the guys above had to do was move points together, but they couldn't see it. The periodic table is the same. It's a set of repeating rules, and throughout the atom is a set of repeating 6 particles.

The theory does away with mathematics, and changes the approach to recreating what you see in a loop of repeating rules. A Fractal.

I see all of these complicated rules as mistakes. Calculus is no match for a Universe with no mind. A fractal is a good match for a Universe with no mind. It is getting the match between the way that you work things out, and the actual Universe right.

I think like the Universe. I have taught myself how to think like the Universe. I change pull into push, I change time into geyser, I change waves into particles, I change maths into a fractal, I change Galaxy into Universe, I change inflation into scale, I change Past, present, and future into just present...

You walk from A to B.. you leave in the present, you arrive in the present. Time is reset.

Speed is the amount of separation between points.

Acceleration is the changing distance between the separation between points, and the dilation of a Geyser between those points.

Mass is created by holes full of Gravity...

Gravity is scalar particles that I call Zero Particles.

Gravity scales down negatively to Magnetism with spin forces.

A negative scale can be bigger than a positive scale, because the holes of the negative scale fill up with other particles.

Spacetime is not a Vacuum it is a grain structure of scalar particles.

Red shift does not necessarily represent time. It represents scale up. Scale up just means that points lead to scale down, and all of spacetime is a fractal of points. The further away you look out from a point the more the particles scale up...

The holes scale down space time, because spacetime spins around the holes like a whirlpool, and a whirlpool has a funnel. The spacetime funnel is a scale down funnel, a bit different to a water funnel. The galaxy has a bar across it, that is a scalar funnel. Level with mass, but scaled down to travel through mass.

Thinking like the Universe is to make yourself think in Quantum Physics even when you are looking at large objects like a Galaxy. Change a Galaxy into Quantum Physics and you will know everything.

It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #43 on: 18/03/2013 12:58:05 »
Why scalar funnels?

The idea of the scalar particles was to create movement from a push from a standing start like inflation. The idea was that scale has no real logic to it in an empty Universe, because scale is relative. The first particles having a scale would be a decision made before the particles existed. The way I imagine the Universe is that no decisions are made pre-existence. So no scale exists for particles. Particles end up with a scale because of infinite stacking rules. Atoms are scale locked because of the Russian Doll effect, they can't scale down, or up. And C is the scalar rebound of hitting negative scale which reverses to scale up when filled with other particles.

Scale allows energy to escape from being trapped in the middle of a whirlpool of scalar particles. We see whirlpool type structures in space.. Galaxies, and the other thing we see are rings.

Saturn has rings.

If you listen to the radio noise translated into sound for Saturn it sounds a lot like a toilet flushing. The rings look like a flattened rebound action. The two ends of Saturn exhibit whirlpool effects, and holes. So you can deduce two inward flowing funnels (like two toilets end to end) The collision in the middle turns out to be a scalar collision. The particles are scaled negatively into a flat disc. The disc escapes the pressure through negative scale coming out of Saturn's middle. So now you have these invisible negative particles. The negative particles act as the area of least resistance, and so act as holes. Bigger particles gather in the holes to form rings. Now you have the positive mass in the negative mass.

Every so often through the rings the funnel winds around to create streaks similar to the Galaxy Bars.

The Galaxy Bars are the funnel swinging around through a similar structure as Saturn's rings.

Outside Pressure on scalar particles scales them down.

Particles trapped in the middle escape when they reach a negative scale.

Negative scale fills with positive mass.

So Negative particles can appear bigger than positive particles.

Negative flow requires propagation from negative particles, and so act like a funnel, because the negative particles are pushing against the negative particles.

But because the funnel is also scaling down its particles it is escaping sideways. Unlike water which has very little scalar ability so escapes the pressure downwards, and across.

This becomes a series of scribbles like Newton's famous scribbles. The ideas are all related to each other. A set of repeating rules. But the bar across the Galaxy, and Saturn's rings can also be created by the positive particles captured in the negative rings. And so in this case it would be hard to establish if the bar is being created from the middle to the outside (negative to positive) or from the outside to the middle (positive to negative).

The moons around Saturn create bars as they move towards Saturn, and Gravity is positive, so that flow force is positive.

Here we have an example of how you can get two similar physics from two different causes. But at the end of the day, you have to create the rings, and to lock the rings in place you need an area of least resistance. The area of least resistance is in the middle of Saturn.

To me, using negative particles around Saturn has a high probability.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #44 on: 20/03/2013 13:44:23 »
I was thinking about this image...

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=47070.0;attach=17582;image

It includes a very clear fractal. When you try to map a flat image to a sphere it never fits. The best way to do that is to use a Geosphere poly primitive. Look at the one on the far right...

http://www.creativecrash.com/maya/downloads/scripts-plugins/modeling/poly-tools/c/geospheres--2

So the telescope is up there, and it most likely rotates on the spot. It maybe makes a panoramic image with a curve. Then somebody maps it, and the hexagons maybe appear.

So far that makes sense. But what if it is our human eyes which require the flattening out to be created for our own purposes? So that the hexagon is the reality, and we have eyes built to remove the hexagon fractal?

For example.. map some woods in the same way that the telescope was used to map the matter in the Universe...

http://ivorphotography.co.uk/2013/01/19/more-ice/iced-branches-olympus-e-5-iso-200-35mm-f63-160/

Do we get the fractal back again?

Look at Neanderthal man...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/neanderthals-large-eyes-led-to-their-downfall-says-study-8532539.html

Bigger eyes. So maybe we are removing a fractal from nature because our eyes aren't made to see it. Our lenses are the wrong curvature, and our mapping of reality is slightly out.

If we just play along with that idea like a toy, then we can suggest that bees, and birds, and butterflies see the fractal. Then we can suggest that these creatures can navigate using the fractal. The bee does a dance.. "6 hexagons, 8 hexagons, 20 hexagons" It does the dance to suggest how many hexagons to pass through to get to a destination.

So if the fractal is really there, then it is very large out there in space. It probably scales down in our Galaxy. Most people imagine particles to start off small, and get bigger. What if particles start off huge, and get smaller? Then the fractal gets smoother in our Galaxy. Trees become less fractal.

The image of the trees perhaps cannot be mapped with the same glitch as the image of the Universe.

But these are things to think about. If the glitch is reality, then the Universe is a fractal. If the glitch is a mapping anomaly then it should work on an arrangement of trees. But either way, as humans the anomaly could be the reality, because humans depend on false information. Colours, heat... etc. ... all false, so the fractal could be real even if we do find the glitch.

And whilst you are thinking about that.. take a quick look at my video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3fTYS99ZeE&feature=plcp
« Last Edit: 20/03/2013 13:59:47 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #45 on: 21/03/2013 14:25:10 »
Fractals, and scales...

Let's go with the Universe being a fractal. Let's treat it as a fact. I will therefore skip words like presume, perhaps, what if? I do live my life using my own physics, and I don't use the Standard Model, so since 2003 I am used to treating my theory as a fact.

So the simple sum.. 1 + -1 = 0 suggests that you can create a Universe from nothing, because nothing is a literary misunderstanding in the English language. Nothing is 'The Whole Of Two Parts' and the two parts come from Newton's 3rd Law 'Every Action Has An Equal, and Opposite Reaction'

When used together the Universe is created from two equal parts that look like space.

But to complete Newton's 3rd Law you cannot have any unequal parts hidden in nothing. Nothing has to be exactly equal in every point. To hide information completely you have to rule out certain shapes. Let's just go to the shape that works best. Newton's kissing Problem.

Firstly the sphere is equal in every direction from a central point, that's what makes it a sphere in the first place. But it needs a position in space. Once you give a sphere a position it breaks equality unless that space is an exact opposite hole. That's what you want for a zero particle. A sphere on its own has no bonding force. It has a bunching set of rules, and the Bunching rules create fractals. To get a bonding force the sphere uses the hole.

The assemble of the fractal obeys Newton's 3rd law in that space hides itself in equality. The zero particles follow a stacking system that also obeys equality, and then the stacking system scales down so that no connections pass any messages along the chain which would break equality. The photon breaks equality as a message along the chain. Humans evolved to examine changes in equality.

Now we get to a Universe which is infinite, and infinity is actually a structure that obeys rules of equality, and hides itself away. But the rules didn't develop before the creation took place. The rules were part of the fractal that happened naturally. This means that the scale of all things is part of the natural fractal. Particles can be huge, and also negatively small. But entropy tries to hide all inequalities, so a large particle next to a small particle breaks equality. The large particle can be touched on every side by billions of tiny particles. This sharing of energy reduces the large particle down to a small particle. All particles in an area have little change, but a wave of change permeates through the Universe. However the Atom is a particle touched on the inside, and the outside. The change in scale is in both directions resulting in the atom being scaler limited... slowed down.

The scale of particles is due to entropy, but entropy is local. C is a propagation through a distance between particles, but the distance changes through entropy. Red shift is a scale shift, and pressure around particles scales them down. Everything is obeying Newton's 3rd law, but there is a delay which is a wave. It seems that everything must be scaling down around us as the wave tries to create a zero state. The wave will never create a complete zero state however because the fractal is never going to be perfect. Sphere can never surround sphere in a perfect zero state. There is an inequality that spins around a single sphere as other sphere try to occupy all spaces. This inequality creates chaos, and spin energy, and the spin energy is the butterfly effect with inequality as the cause. The 13th ball of Newton's Kissing Problem, the ball that never fits. That creates nature from the fractal.

So the scales of the sphere are a wave of entropy that large particles can be touched by many small particles, and so large particles can be said to be chipped away by many particles until all particles reach a state of equality... which will never happen (the 13th ball).

And C propagates over different distances...

Is C then a constant?

If you live in an area of larger particles, your fractal is larger. A human is larger, and so to that human scale everything is still equal to our scale. C is still C in that area, but from our area it is faster.
« Last Edit: 21/03/2013 14:58:05 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #46 on: 21/03/2013 18:05:09 »
Should Time be renamed?

I think that time should be renamed, because the current use of the word 'TIME' is very inaccurate. There is no Past, Present, and Future. There is a series of physical events due to cause, and Effect, and because we are always local to events that affect our physical interactions we are always in the Present.

Walk from A to B.. start in the present, end in the present, start local, end local.. change of physics very likely.

I actually struggle to understand how humans are using time. It's like voodoo to me... humans use voodoo, and magic, and I feel like I am stuck 2000 years in the past. Humans believe in time travel, and a 4th dimension, and its voodoo, and child-like. Plus Bell's Inequality Theory, that everything that can happen does happen.

All mistakes because of the word 'time' being inaccurate.

It should be renamed to...

Point Scalar Energy... or Poise Time.. like a spring coiled and ready to act... per point.

It has a physical location. When you see X/Y/Z axes marker....

http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/311500/why-do-we-draw-the-xyz-coordinate-system-like-this

It is the point where they all touch in the middle, and should be considered as the stationary location, scalar energy, and from that point X/Y/Z can go outwards using that scalar energy as a propagator.

POISE TIME



 
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #47 on: 22/03/2013 09:41:54 »
Scribblings Of Location...

Above I said that Time is in the middle of XYZ, where the points meet up. That was an example, but XYZ is much more complicated when you try to program it into a computer. It's like braille, you have to feel your way around the Universe. Each point has its own scalar energy, and each time that energy scales it renews the XYZ properties. Plus the Energy creates spin, and XYZ spins around per point. This is a nightmare. I said that I can think through my program, and run it in my head, but location requires you to think of several things at the same time, and so I can't totally get a clear image of location.

Here's an example... In this video I am tracking the rotation of energy propagation. Energy can only propagate through interaction, and interaction in a fractal is fractalized of course, so the transmission of location rotates, scales, and moves...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd8RAQLTb7Q

I try to keep the numbers steady by having a corresponding link to each location. 12 points that can pass a message, each can scale, spin, and move.. a nightmare to track.

The Universe has the advantage of infinity, and trying to replicate infinity in a computer creates complications like the above. The braille type contact of energy is created by the scalar feedback of POISE TIME. The overlap of scalar information that converts distance, and speed to C. It's hard to replicate... well I'm not a mathematician, it's hard for me to replicate.

It's holding up my program.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #48 on: 22/03/2013 12:02:13 »
So to clear up what I said above.. I use 13 dimensions instead of XYZ, and they move around, and are not always the same size. Because the Universe is constantly changing, a position has locality, but the location moves, but action is always propagated locally. If you build the fractal, and try to search for a particular particle bumping into another particle, you have to go through a link. The Universe just multi tasks poise-time, location, and scale. XYZ is not smooth, it is lumpy.

Dimensions in my theory are always local, I don't use any overlapping dimensions. Physics at my Quantum Scale obey the rules of regular sized physics, but scaling is much easier (inflation and deflation).

Deflation...

Deflation has an advantage over inflation. It is easier for particles to bump on the outside, than it is for them to bump on the inside. So in my theory deflation is happening rather than inflation. The red shift however is the same because I deflate to infinite points, which is the opposite than inflate to infinite membranes. I have switched the direction, and part of that is to do with removing pull forces. It makes a lot of sense though, because if you use a singularity as an example, then the Galaxy is doing what I am saying...

The galaxy perhaps has a singularity with a flow force towards it, that scales down matter.

Which agrees with my theory as a fractal of my physics. I doesn't agree with Einstein...

"A singularity has flow away from it, and inflates to move matter apart."

I don't see why matter would move away from a singularity, and I don't see how matter would have a starting location in a void, and I don't see how a void would begin, and how does time relocate through the matter? I see many problems, and quite a few paradox.

I have a CMB because I have propagated light through a grainy fractal. I have red shift because I scale down to a point, and I have no Aether wind because I propagate matter with light, and Gravity all in synchronization to local poise-time.

There is inflation as well, but infinite particles squeezing together is the hardest direction to go. Room only for one small child.
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #49 on: 22/03/2013 23:06:03 »
Gravity

Gravity is a positive scalar particle moving towards atomic holes as the area of least resistance. The atomic holes become quantum whirlpools, and generate energy. Therefore the atomic holes are electrons. To escape the whirlpool the gravity scales down to become electro magnetism, and becomes the next hole in the cycle. The holes then propagate out of the atomic structure to become a magnetic field.

This is a sort of reverse of Newton's Gravity. The mass is now a hole, and the pull force is now a flow force. The Inverse Square Law is a flow into holes through a grain structure from space. The mass is therefore reversed, and the mass is now in space, and is a scalar mass.

So the negative looks like this image...
It's your fault if you don't understand me.