Zero Particle Theory

  • 148 Replies
  • 29237 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #50 on: 24/03/2013 13:50:14 »
In the previous image you can see that Gravity in my image has a higher mass than the Earth, and the Apple. The Earth has the lowest mass, and is therefore the area of least resistance. But Gravity mass is hidden by deflation which means that the particles are not connected, they scale away from each other.

Mass...

Mass is calculated by curvature. The total curvature of all surfaces combined. Gravity may be a single particle, and it resides in a hole, the total of that curvature is zero. However atoms contain many particles like an onion. The total of all of those curvatures can become a high number, but they also eventually scale down negatively, and become concave curvatures. So you add all of the convex to the concave to get the total mass. The electrons have an attractive force so they are holes, and so electrons are concave. Which means that the total mass with the electrons becomes negative mass. So Gravity at zero is higher than the Earth with a negative mass total. And the apple moves towards the Earth in a flow carried by Gravity towards the Earth.

Mass is calculated by all convex surfaces added to all concave surfaces that are connected. But you can just as easily use scale. If we look at the Universe which has a huge surface, we can say that the curved surfaces eventually straighten out... but that is a fallacy. Curved surfaces are relative to scale. If we scale ourselves up to match the Universe, the curves are relatively scaled to us, and now they are very curved again. So if you ignore the curvature, and use scale instead you get the mathematical match that you need for a fractal Universe. Now bumping is a total calculation of connected scaled sphere colliding, and some of the sphere are negatively scaled. Some sphere aren't bonded, but are touching.. that counts as a connection. Scalar particles don't always connect, the Universe should be thought of as a circuit board, and the sphere that touch pass the message of mass as scale.

So what is the Higgs Boson then?

I don't know what it is... Particles as fractals are identified by their fractal stage interacting with another local fractal stage. Because science never uses negative mass, it is very hard to even say what mass the Higgs Boson really is. The electron is Negative mass, but science gives it a positive mass, because it contains Gravity scaling into magnetism. Which bends particles towards it. If I were to guess at the Higgs Boson, I would probably guess that it is Gravity. Then it would be this false calculation of mass that science uses.
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 #51 on: 24/03/2013 15:15:06 »
Curvature, and Scale to Bump Forces

When you scale up two particles at the same time their bump forces scale up with them. To a human, the lines of space seem to become straight, but that is relative to human scale. The curvature represents the bump forces so long as the curvature is convex. If the curvature is concave it represents flow forces of attraction. You are bumped at an angle where the curvature encases your position. Scale can switch the bend from convex to concave, and back again even though the curvature is not changing in reality, it is relative to you. This means that a photon passes through a lens, and water runs off it. The curvature is reversing for the photon... just about. The photon is at the limit of a straight line, and so it just about bends a curve from convex to concave with the help sometimes of an observer.

Two Universe collide and there is a very distinct curve which to us is a straight line.
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 #52 on: 26/03/2013 03:20:41 »
Who am I to talk about a Theory Of Everything?

I like to watch videos of Richard Feynman, he is my favourite Genius type theoretical physicist. He Understood the Universe to the level that mathematics allowed him to understand the Universe. But Feynman admitted often that the mathematical proofs would all be replaced. To me, if a proof is replaced, then it was never a proof in the first place, and so a mathematical proof that will be replaced is a paradox. Therefore there are no mathematical proofs, and the mathematical proof is flawed in that it will be replaced some day.

Most people who visit science forums believe somewhat in mathematical proofs, and they believe in Genius like Newton, Einstein, and Feynman. But there is a turning point, that if you are a creative thinker, and you take all of the information available, and technology allows you to put that information into a computer... you can program the Universe to build itself in the computer. And that is what I want to do. But my PC is not up to the task. So what I do instead is test parts of it out individually. Like my snowflake generator.

The thing about my snowflake generator is that I didn't actually need to program it. I already could run the code in my head before I typed it into the computer. I just had a feeling that I would get a snowflake from some simple rules. Of course I was very excited to see that I was right, but my Theory Of Everything uses a similar set of rules. My theory is a fractal theory, and I am good at running fractals in my head. The fractals have physical qualities, like the snowflake code is based on the Bose / Einstein Condensate. I match the physics to the fractals. My PC cannot run the entire thing, but I can run most of it in my head the same that I knew that my Snowflake code would most likely produce a snowflake.

When I think I know something, and I can program it, the program has always worked. Now this is the important part of my computer program.. it self builds. The loop is small, but the loop builds the entire Universe.. everything.. including life... because I am attempting to copy the Universe as a set of rules, and not as a set of physics, and shapes. The rules are scale, and bunching patterns. Take Garrett Lisi's Theory Of Everything...

http://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html

He eventually talks of a Hexagon, and he spins it around in something like 8 dimensions. He has an image with rules. Then there is String Theory...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B0Kaf7xYMk

Again here are a set of structures, each structure creates its own physics, but the structures have to be built to match the physics, and nobody so far has solved the map that builds all of the first structures.

The answer to all of this is a fractal that creates strings, and something similar to the Garrett Lisi model that turns into physics. My model creates Knots of energy. Each knot can be open ended, or closed. The knots are Newton's Kissing Problem acting as a propagator. The propagator happens because the Universe is Infinite, and particles have to stack in a certain way.

But back to me...

Who am I to talk about a Theory Of Everything?

A person has to have a theory of themselves to test against their reality. I have always been top of any class, my IQ is about 130.. not great I suppose. But I seem to have a creative IQ which has recently been discovered by science, and my creative IQ I think is extremely high...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rbynt

This is where I fit in. I decided in 1980 that I would learn to program, and I used the Basic coding language. Then I learned C. In those days you had to learn from books, there were no colleges teaching computing. I found however that in C I had lost the ability to think of the Code in my head. Basics is like English, and it has a lot of English words, and I can use those words to think of a computer simulation without actually writing it. I just see the images creating themselves as if I pressed RUN. What I see is that 1 + -1 = 0 has a physical attribute that creates the Universe. But to Code it you have to code its rules which are hidden in the simple sum.

But back to me...

Am I deluded?...

It's unlikely that I am deluded, because my life has been a series of achievements that most people thought were impossible, or unlikely to happen. Like I worked on some top computer games, I beat a professional pool player, I passed a MENSA test.. little things really. But those little things all added up together say.. "This guy does what he says he is going to do."

I do what I say I am going to do, I don't talk for the fun of it. But here we have a problem. I want to program this fractal, but my PC can only handle 60,000 particles. It will be hard for me to see any form of proof in 60,000 particles. It will be hard for me to even see if the correct fractal is forming. I run it in my head with infinite particles, it's all a super liquid. I can't get that smooth with 60,000 particles.

So I don't feel very obligated to program something that I can't run properly. I want to see it run properly, and that is inspirational to me.. to see it. But to not see it, and to program 60,000 particles is not inspiring.

Anyway, the problem is with location. The location programming requires multi tasking per particle.. or.. a lot of memory.

Faking Infinity...

It reminds me of Facebook. Each particle needs to store all of its neighbours positions like friends on Facebook. Each friend leads to 12 more friends, and that repeats. For 60,000 particles you have this repeating data 720,000 storage locations. This routine makes a location follow a particle around so that it knows its new neighbours, because X/Y/Z doesn't work in my theory. You can update the position of friends that are next to a particle when you need to create a wave. It's faster than trying to find out which particles are next to each other after a bump occurs.. it's pre-calculated. A friend finds 12 friends, finds 12 friends, finds 12 friends...

What then is the Universe doing?

The Universe is folding inwards to do the same thing, and that is Poise-Time. Trying to add that to a PC would be crazy. It's just too fine to program, so that part is faked.

The true fractal of the Universe is partly faked to fit in a computer, but I do know how all of it works. It would be amazing to program the entire thing.

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 #53 on: 26/03/2013 13:34:46 »
A Proof That Creates Mathematics

Calculus is used to define physics. So in a way the maths creates the shapes that we see. I am attempting to do the reverse. My method is for the shapes of sphere, and Newton's Kissing Problem to create the mathematics. It's the total reverse of Calculus. My program changes the scale of the sphere, spins the sphere, and moves the sphere. The sphere create the locations for virtual particles, and virtual energy. The locations move, the virtual particles move as well, and the calculus is missing. To get the Calculus you would have to take measurements from the moving objects. That is what I call a proof. That the measurements happen from physics, and not the other way around. The physics are not even programmed, but have no choice but to occur from rules...

That Energy moves towards the area of least resistance.
That trapped energy scales out of the way.
That particles have curves that are used for calculations.
That touching particles count as accumulative forces.
That a sphere has an inside, and an outside surface.
That the surfaces can reverse from negative scale.
More rules...

These rules are the Calculus in reverse. These rules create calculus from physics. The program creates its own proof. And this is an attempt to copy the Universe using the Universe's own language. Until you get a game of life....

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

... but using the Universe as its rule book.
« Last Edit: 26/03/2013 13:38:28 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 #54 on: 26/03/2013 14:34:35 »
Sometimes I find articles that have some finds similar to my theory. Today I am posting these....

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23317-bigger-isnt-always-better-for-becoming-multicellular.html

The above is part of my fractal theory. That the snowflake is a dominant structure in the Universe, and creates the natural shapes of Earthly Creatures. The inward flow of particles is the Snowflake which changes to an outward flow which is the sphere. The above article includes both flow forces in nature.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130325111154.htm

The speed of light might not be a constant has some relevance to my theory. I have particle pairs that create spacetime grain, I just call them 1 and -1, and both together make the zero particle. Their scale determines the energy propagation of C. Which is similar to what is suggested above. However, I include pressure, and I suggest that the Galaxy is like a packet of Rice Crispies, and the pressure is negatively towards the centre. So particles towards the centre scale negatively which can look bigger, which is the bump in the middle. I add Dark Matter as a Negative scale, and I get an image like this...

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 #55 on: 26/03/2013 17:11:22 »
In my theory I use black holes as a hole, an area of least resistance. It works...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23318-gravityless-toy-black-hole-solves-cosmic-puzzles.html

...but I change Gravity into Negative mass, which is a hole. So rather than not use Gravity, I remove it at C.
« Last Edit: 26/03/2013 17:15:15 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 #56 on: 26/03/2013 17:24:40 »
The switch that I use to remove Gravity is like folding a tennis Ball inside out, I fold gravity inside out. In fact any particle can be folded inside out. Take liquid Helium...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z6UJbwxBZI

In my theory that would be an example of helium folding inside out.  It's bump forces vanish (it doesn't bubble), and it propagates in reverse.

Anti-matter is to fold a particle inside out. Science sometimes mislabels anti-matter for spin direction, and other properties. Science has physics that explode, I have physics which reverse, and cancel out. But a hole reversing into a particle will create bump forces which could be explosive as the energy has to escape somewhere.
« Last Edit: 26/03/2013 17:33:23 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 #57 on: 28/03/2013 15:40:37 »
Finally figured it out.... Location is scale

You have 4 sphere (particles as sphere)...

2 the same size (or just 1 planck unit difference)
1 smaller
1 larger

Now you take these positions from points. So they inflate from holes at points. They never have to cross paths so the membrane doesn't mean anything. Only the interaction per point means anything. So basically you have balloons inflating inside balloons.

The smaller one doesn't collide, it just fits inside.
The larger one doesn't collide it just fits outside.

The two equal ones share the exact same space, so collide.

So now you have locality as a physical set of rules that you can program into a computer, and the use of X/Y/Z which doesn't have any physics, now has scalar physics.

The Black Hole in the middle of the Galaxy scales the physics outwards in a spiral, so you basically have the physics happening there, and a rainbow using X/Y/Z instead of R/G/B now has a relationship to scale.

You reach out with your hand, your hand is red shifted, so you can connect with the particles at that position.

You can see your scalar shift happening here...
http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/amazing-tunnel-illusion/

It's all very nice. Now I am free using X/Y/Z as scalar physics with a solution. I don't like using anything with no solution.
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 #58 on: 28/03/2013 15:44:22 »
So entangled particles at a distance using scalar X/Y/Z...

The particles have been scalar frozen in time, so now they are located as matching scalar X/Y/Z. Which is a local position. In other words they have stopped red shifting, but it is unlikely that you can check them without red shifting them.
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 #59 on: 28/03/2013 16:12:51 »
The little Bee Dance...

I like to include all sections of science in my theory, including biology, so to add scalar X/Y/Z to the bee dance is a bit of fun really. I think that there are other ways to make this work but anyway...

The optical illusion of the tunnel effect could well be a scalar illusion. Because X/Y/Z is that red shift is a scalar shift, and particles that are the same scale collide.

Bees dance and vibrate against a scalar background. Scalar particles scale by being bumped. Scalar bumps create redshift and a tunnel illusion... so....

The bees could be visually seeing a tunnel illusion to a location. Which is much simpler than an X/Y/Z coordinate system.

Quote
Now.. you could create a telescope with a super fast vibration, and maybe actually see the tunnel effect in real life.

So there you go, an actual experiment. (Maybe you have to include a slight prism in the optics as well?)

« Last Edit: 28/03/2013 16:20:28 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 #60 on: 29/03/2013 14:14:18 »
Quantum Mechanics....

I like Richard Feynman, and I have just started watching the YouTube videos of him. I like his enthusiasm, and he says some things the same as I do, and asks the same questions. I still think however that his limitations were to do with using mathematics. Here he talks about Quantum Physics....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeBkMzSLA8w

Sometimes, I find that his thoughts are what I call pre-computer thoughts. The mathematics wasn't so visual as typing a program into a computer, and watching the physics for real.

This video includes water tension, and jiggling atoms...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pYRn5j7oI

And again I find that his ideas have strayed slightly away from real images. So maths isn't working to portray images all that well.

At the end of the Quantum Physics talk RF wants a real image of an atom, and he wants to know about the real image of an electron. He says that mother nature will always make us ask new questions, and simple physics will never be revealed.

Quantum Physics is very simple. We tend to surpass it with our ingenious thinking, and evolution. You have to become the person that doesn't agree with X/Y/Z location as a Relative position. Don't take anything for granted, and don't be smarter than the Universe.

The atom, and the electron are quite huge compared to time. Now most people don't imagine time as a set of physics, but it is just a scalar liquid. So physics are simpler that RF thought. The reason that electrons behave in a strange way is because they are holes...

The mysterious Electron...
 A hole in a flow of gravity is dependant on the flow to reveal the hole's nature. So imagine the electron as a hole, and Gravity as a scalar liquid. This scalar liquid turns into magnetism, and magnetism flows out of the hole, and so the hole is empty for C, and then fills with Gravity. The hole also has a whirlpool around it, and any overflow fills the nucleus. The nucleus scales down into time, and time is a storage of energy which can flow back out again to make a sun if it is compressed enough.

So I have created an image there of the atom. How many patterns can you make from these physics? Well the field is a field of points which are the outflow of magnetism scaling down to become areas of least resistance. The wave is a scalar wave, and works like a packet of Rice Crispies with small bits passing big bits. The nucleus is usually full with an outflow which you can call Poise-Time. The electron orbits are just whirlpool holes, and observation of these holes fills them up, so moves them to some other area of least resistance. And the formation of the holes, and their patterns obeys Newton's Kissing Problem.

You can go smaller than that.. there are Quantum, Quantum Physics...

Which is where I started off many years ago. I worked forwards from Quantum, Quantum physics to the atom. It made it easier. The really small physics are just points, and bubbles.
And that is where 1 + -1 = 0 begins. And that is where location, and direction, and speed, and acceleration are stored as scalar physics, inflation, and deflation.

I wish I could talk to RF, I think I have gone way smaller than the atom, and I think that it is thanks to computer programming. I wish I had the computer powerful enough to run it all at the scale of a Galaxy.
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 #61 on: 29/03/2013 20:51:53 »
Nature have posted a new video of atoms...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/29/nanoparticle-3d-imaging-atom-dislocation-video_n_2972249.html?utm_hp_ref=science

Could there be the same fractal in there that I am using?...
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 #62 on: 30/03/2013 20:20:28 »
The Gravity Tearing of Spacetime

This is a very important post for those that can follow it. It describes the creation of everything.

Spacetime is made from a scalar grain structure. All you have to do is imagine a lot of bubbles that obey particle stacking rules... they do not stick together in other words, they scale down slightly so as not to touch. Without touching they pass no message, so the planck telescope cannot see them. It tries to get an image of spacetime, but they scale out of the way. This scalar property is the main part of the creation of all things.

Get each part in your head. So make sure that the above is consciously available to you.

OK so the next stage is that the scaling away from each other is like Braille, so they scale up to touch, and then scale down to avoid. The scaling is circular like 360 degrees back to zero, which means that the energy never has to stop moving. But it is also negative...

6,5,4,3,2,1,-1,-2,-3,-4,-5,-6

Where the negative numbers are actually areas of least resistance for the positive numbers, so act as holes.

So 360 degrees works better as 180 to -180 degrees wraparound scaling.
Most of the time however the scaling is minimal.

The important image that you need in your head is to create the Galactic Black Hole from this scenario. So trap some scalar particles in an energy crossover from scaling patterns. You have all of these scalar particles doing a sort of Braille dance, and eventually some have to scale negatively, and the positive ones are bumped by scalar forces into this hole as though balloons were inflating next to them.

You should have an image of a forming Black Hole.

Make sure that you have some sort of Black Hole forming in your mind.

The next stage...

This part is the spacetime tearing to create the spiral arms.

With a hole appearing there is an inflation force towards the hole. There is a curve to this inflation direction. I can explain it in water tension. So now switch your mind temporarily to water tension, and a bulge.

Gravity on water in the Y is bent to a sphere, because a drop of water also has force in the X, and Z. It's pressure from Gravity as a push force. This is complicated, because there is air to add to the gravity pressure. All that the air is doing is adding weight to the gravity. The Earth was formed this way, and the moon without air, just a lighter force.

Get the image in your head of the water bending from forces in all directions. When you put the Earth below the Water there is a direction removed from any sort of option. Water can now tear diagonally through the structure, and pressure from above and to the sides firms up these directions. The fish evolve, and the shapes of these diagonally weak areas are part of the fishes shape. The fins diagonally through the weak areas, and the fish are flat in directions of pressure. The Octopus is the conical sort of shape, and the suckers show diagonal spherical forces. It's all there.

But now back to the Galaxy. You have a Black Hole forming, and it is the area of least resistance. The tearing that happens to water to create fish is much easier using scalar particles. They will scale themselves out of the way very quickly. The pressure is space itself towards the hole. You get these diagonal sliding scalar particles. You should have an image a bit like a snowflake forming. The particles sliding towards the Black Holes bump together in a grain fractal structure.

Get the image right. the particles are sliding towards the black Hole, the curves are like the curves created by water tension, the bumping is scaling down and tearing in lines, and the lines are twisting towards the hole like a screw from the rotation into the black hole.

The next stage of images...

Where the lines bump create weaknesses. More scaling, more holes. These new holes have new particles moving into them. This is sort of like the octopus tentacles with the suckers. The diagonal lines spin more in space so create whole sphere for suckers. The sphere filling with particles are suns. They are suns where the scalar bumping is creating light, and energy. Filling holes, scaling, bumping, and flashing.

Ok you got that?

If you have this image correct, think of this....

Diagonal tear towards Earth with bright filling light....

Lightening!

I hope some of you understood that. It's the creation of a Galaxy.. almost. The planets are the dust left behind near to the tearing.

That should give you a complete picture. But here's an image to help...
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 #63 on: 30/03/2013 21:10:19 »
That image I just gave you is fantastic if you can visualize it in your head. What you can now do is see a tree in reverse...

http://theoutdoorsnation.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/view-of-a-pollarded-hornbeam-tree-with-a-split-trunk-hatfield-forest-c2a9ntpl-paul-wakefield.jpg

Look at the tree, remember the cracks in spacetime, the areas of least resistance are the trunk. The leaves are the scalar particles feeding towards the trunk, and being squashed flat trying to get into this area of least resistance. So the areas of least resistance are in reverse, and the tree grows into these areas. So you wonder how they begin with a seed? The seed must be the reason for spacetime to tear at that point, and the reason for a tear is a hole. So a seed must contain some singularities. A bit strange in the standard Model, but very common in zero particle theory. Electrons are holes, but seeds must contain bigger holes than electrons that warp spacetime enough to crack it.

You may think that this sounds like a strange theory. However it is the standard model that is strange compared to the Universe. The Universe is the way that things happen, anything else is strange.
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 #64 on: 30/03/2013 21:50:25 »
Oh yeah, I've figured out how the seed tears spacetime to make a crack to grow in. The roots grow like a hand tearing through paper in reverse if you can imagine that. They create spin spin towards a big singularity. The big singularity is at the centre of the Earth. Thus spacetime gets a tear, and the tree can grow in the tear. So lightening hits a tree, because the tree has already started a crack for it to go into.

Ace.. I can't believe how much I am solving today.
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 #65 on: 30/03/2013 21:58:54 »
So Earth has life because Earth has a singularity, and the spinning magnetic field. It allows energy to split spacetime, and remove the gravity force for enough time to grow into. The other way is for water to shear to make gaps to grow into.
« Last Edit: 30/03/2013 22:02:10 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 #66 on: 31/03/2013 12:06:43 »
A sun is a scaled up Octopus Sucker

That might be the strangest thing you have ever heard, but it's stranger than that...

The Sun is a scaled down octopus sucker.

Scale is often seen as a negative scale. The sun has more energy because it is the area of least resistance for gravity particles, so it has less scale than an octopus sucker, it is negatively scaled.

If you take a rainbow, the red is the largest colour, but is negatively scaled, so red is negative, and blue is probably positive. I haven't quite decided if blue is positive or not. It could be just less negative. So you look at the Earth, and the sky is blue, and the sand is red, and the plants are green it's all reversed.

This is all important for the Inverse Square Law anyway. As you move outwards with scalar particles they can fill a larger area. They still use Braille to touch, and scale down, so they create the Inverse square Law. This scalar touching passes a message which can be photons, and the Michelson and Morley experiment shows this to work that light will travel to the Earth quite nicely. It means that you can use the word Aether again. Here is an example...
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 #67 on: 31/03/2013 12:10:19 »
Where is all of the Anti-Matter?

Matter sits in an anti-matter hole all of the time. That is how a seed grows roots to split spacetime to grow a plant. All that the seed is doing is moving matter away from anti-matter. Us, and the plants are located inside spacetime.

We wear spacetime like a suit.

Maybe the sun is an Octopus sucker isn't the strangest thing afterall.
« Last Edit: 31/03/2013 12:13:31 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 #68 on: 31/03/2013 12:32:19 »
Just in case you are reading the thread from the end without reading the beginning...

The sun is an octopus sucker's fractal physics. My theory is fractal based, and the fractal is not only scalar, but also alters the physics at the same time. It can be programmed into a computer to create the entire Universe. I just need a powerful enough computer to create a Galaxy, and that is the Theory Of Everything. A computer program that creates everything in the universe using a simple set of rules that repeat, and scale.

The sun is an octopus sucker shows how scale, and physics mean a lot. The sun is fractally the same, the way the sun begins uses the same physics as the octopus sucker. But water is replaced by Gravity Spacetime. Water and space use the same fractal. But water is scaler limited, and space is a scalar particle. Scalar particles create more energy than water because they have more freedom of movement. If I use capital letters to represent freedom of movement you get X/Y/Z/IN/OUT for space.. X/Z/y/in/out for water. The loss of energy in water reduces the power of the Octopus tentacles from a hot sphere, to a cold half sphere... a sucker. The tentacles are the Galaxy spirals. The energy is all reduced to the Octopus because of the atoms containing a lot of trapped particles. The trapped particles restrict the scalar ability of the atom. Like a bag full of rubbish is harder to squash down than an empty bag.

It isn't that strange in a fractal universe. Anyway I find the standard model strange with Past, Present, and Future, and Wave Particle Duality, and Action At A Distance, and Electrons with mass, and Pull Forces, and a Big Bang.

That's all very strange to me.

Look carefully... a Galaxy...

http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/field_notes/assets_c/2011/06/octopus_males_large_suckers-thumb-608x456-23825.jpg
« Last Edit: 31/03/2013 12:37:35 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 #69 on: 31/03/2013 13:51:29 »
Check the sanity of this guy!

If you just type fractal nature into Google Images....

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=fractal&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=uzI&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Fy9YUYX4F4eS0QXm_4HQBw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=939&bih=622#hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=YKy&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=fractal+nature&oq=fractal+nature&gs_l=img.3..0j0i24l6.27654.29144.0.29545.7.5.0.2.2.0.58.287.5.5.0...0.0...1c.1.7.img.R7kpD3x1NPA&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44442042,d.d2k&fp=cd39a805ea130be7&biw=939&bih=622

Of course everyone knows that there are a lot of fractals in nature. But what is a fractal in nature?

A fractal in nature is a repeating set of rules combined with scale, and physics. Which is what Zero particle Theory is as well. The zero particle represents fractal scale zero. So it represents the first fractal that creates the Universe.

When scientists knock particles out of atoms they are nearly always in 6's. That's a fractal as well. So from the zero particle we are going up in 12's actually, because there are the anti-particles. And 12's are Newton's Kissing problem fractal.

So getting the shape right, and the physics right, you have a self building set of rules. Every up-scale needs to fit around, or inside the previous scale. Atoms represent a scale, and a rainbow represents the atomic scale in colour, and position. Change the colour, and change the position in the rainbow through the Rice Crispy effect.

I have tested parts of this in a computer, so it's the Standard Model that makes people crazy enough to think that I am crazy.
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 #70 on: 31/03/2013 15:47:41 »
Turning Arrows of light....

Richard Feynman came up with some interesting mathematics for light colour, and reflection...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdZMXWmlp9g

He said that nobody understands it. It actually has a very similar principle to the physics that I am using for particle location, and Relativity Physics. Now, I am not sure if I am talking about the same thing, or not. All I know is that my physics use turning arrows, and create colours from scale during spin cycles. So it probably is the same thing. So I can explain in physics what is happening in Richard Feynman's video... I think.

Particles have directional physics, and relativity is physically embedded in spacetime. It's to do with the area of least resistance for a scalar particle that can fold inside out like half a tennis ball. And it is to do with Newton's Kissing Problem. Combined together you can figure out the physics of relativity.

The spinning arrows.
12 scalar particles can surround 1 scalar particle of the same size (Newton's Kissing Problem) there is room for a 13th ball that can never be fitted. the 13th ball can be used as the area of least resistance through newtons 3D structure. This area of least resistance is the spin of the arrows in Feynman's lecture... I think. You see, particles move towards this 13th ball as a direction memory. It's a scalar particle where the 13 ball is a guide. All of theses scalar particles have to sit in a hole in spacetime. The anti-matter is the hole that they sit in, and again you can just use half a tennis ball, and fold it inside out to create the anti-matter of matter. The colour is the scale of the tennis ball. So the rotation through for example red is larger than a rotation through blue. Pressure of a red sun is less than pressure on a blue sun, so the scalar change is a pressure change is a spin change, with a 13th ball of Newton's Kissing Problem creating all of these arrows that Feynman is using.

The arrow of direction moves towards the area of least resistance which is the scale outside of the particle. I call that the bow shock. So you have this internal arrow pointing towards the bow shock. The bow shock is the scalar collisions in spacetime between the space scalar grain. Earth has its own bow shock, and creates a scalar change in the grain structure around it. That is the area of least resistance Einstein called the bending of Spacetime. It is the scaling of spacetime in fact. So the arrow pointing towards a bow shock is where a particle travels, and if the particle moves near the Earth its own bow shock is added to the Earth's bow shock. So the Earth's gravity is added to the particles Gravity negatively. The area of least resistance therefore is towards the Earth now.

Now the rotating arrow, and the bow shock combined are like adding convex curves to concave curves. The total needs to be negative to move into the area of least resistance.

And that seems to match what Feynman was saying in the video.... I think.

So there are the physics which he asks about during his lecture.
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 #71 on: 31/03/2013 21:25:14 »
Past and Future Doesn't Exist... Time is a constant of the present.

I've found a video, that tells me why science uses the words Past and Future...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kab9dkDZJY

Which tells me something about why scientists are so confused. You use pull forces, so obviously you can easily reverse physics, and I never thought about that before because I have no pull forces in my theory. Plus science uses mass for attraction, and I use holes the opposite.

Time is a constant of the present...not mass...not pull...but holes. If you are moving into holes you get this Rice Crispy scaling effect.. the holes get smaller as you move into them, you have to be smaller to move to the next level down. Big particles are pretty much stuck at the beginning. When the particles get really small they turn negatively into holes. The movement is created by the convex curves pressing against convex curves, a sort of balloon inflation propagation towards holes. Then holes fill up with smaller particles, and they become convex again. It's a sort of weather system like steam to rain to steam. Convex to concave to convex.

So the physics are cyclic, circular, never-ending, and so the physics are a constant. Time eliminates itself to a zero state. The snowflake is In, and the Sun is Out. There is no arrow, there is In, and Out added together = 0. Zero equals the present all of the time. Just the Present, and the present has no direction in particular. But there is always this inflation propagation, and no pull forces to reverse it. Particles are pushed into a hole, the hole fills up, pushes the particles out.. push.. push..push...push..... no pull.

It's strange that people really believe in Past, and Future. I always thought that the words were for science fiction movies like Time Machine. It's only recently that I realised that people actually thought that they were real. I'm 50, so for 50 years I have never believed in past, and Future.

Mind you.. I have never done any science. I wasn't taught science at school, and never had science at college. I taught myself using my own theory from scratch. I decided that I would ignore science, it is a bit kind of crazy.

I was just watching a video on the Feynman Diagrams. I mean he had time correct in those diagrams, so he should have realised what it is. He drew a sort of spring between motions, that is correct. I mean amazing being as he believed in pull forces.

I went somewhere else where the rules are simpler...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kab9dkDZJY

« Last Edit: 31/03/2013 22:04:05 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1280
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #72 on: 31/03/2013 22:07:01 »
Past and Future Doesn't Exist... Time is a constant of the present.

I've found a video, that tells me why science uses the words Past and Future...




For once, I find myself agreeing with you Pincho. I also don't see the need for these concepts.
The Present is all that makes any sense to my way of thinking. Nevertheless, I don't quite understand
what you mean by these holes you speak of. A hole in the fabric of space sounds a lot like string theory
to me. With the added dimensions this theory brings to the table, one might be able to add the concept
of holes. But that would need a completely new understanding of space.

What is the physical nature of these holes?
Can you describe them mathematically?
If holes exist in space/time, how do we prove they existence?
Without empirical evidence, this only becomes philosophy and not science.
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Pincho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 268
  • Genius is an insult to my intelligence.
    • View Profile
Re: Zero Particle Theory
« Reply #73 on: 31/03/2013 22:31:35 »
Past and Future Doesn't Exist... Time is a constant of the present.

I've found a video, that tells me why science uses the words Past and Future...




For once, I find myself agreeing with you Pincho. I also don't see the need for these concepts.
The Present is all that makes any sense to my way of thinking. Nevertheless, I don't quite understand
what you mean by these holes you speak of. A hole in the fabric of space sounds a lot like string theory
to me. With the added dimensions this theory brings to the table, one might be able to add the concept
of holes. But that would need a completely new understanding of space.

What is the physical nature of these holes?
Can you describe them mathematically?
If holes exist in space/time, how do we prove they existence?
Without empirical evidence, this only becomes philosophy and not science.

Well I will start off with Feynman again, because he could have grasped my ideas, he was so close. Yet he would have hated my approach of not using mathematics....

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

A hole in spacetime is just a negatively scaled particle. Imagine with water, and a sponge. We put a heater in the middle of the sponge, so that any water entering the sponge is evaporated away at the same speed that the water enters the sponge. So the sponge is always empty. That is electro magnetism. Gravity goes into an electron hole field in an iron bar, it is spun around by the spinning field that was created by the coils earlier on. The Gravity is evaporated away to keep the Iron Bar constantly empty of Gravity. Now its a bar of spacetime holes.

Why don't I use mathematics?.. because it has never worked for genius like Einstein, and Newton. So what chance have I got?

I intend to write a computer program instead. It's better, because it creates the maths instead of the other way around.

EDIT: Oh yes I forgot to complete the physics for the spacetime holes in this post. Spacetime in my theory is a scalar grain structure. So it isn't a vacuum, or a void. It's almost completely full of material, so you only need to separate the matter to make a hole.
« Last Edit: 31/03/2013 22:52:00 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 #74 on: 31/03/2013 23:37:14 »
The relation of Physics and Fractals

Feynman lectured The Relation Of Mathematics, and Physics...

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SrHzSGn-I8

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IESoWfM3cyc

And in this discussion he has an idea for Gravity, and he quickly dismisses it. Mathematics he says is the answer, and the ideas don't seem to work.

Well, in fact it seems to me that he had the right idea, and blew it by turning to mathematics. He was lacking the complete idea, because he had mathematics to turn to, and the mathematics drew him away from the real answer.

So I use a fractal of physics instead. Total physics, that I can scale up, and down like an Abacus of physics.

The real answer to the gravity problem was that as the Earth moves towards the scalar particles they scale down faster, and that is the bow shock. It is scale that creates the force, so the force is scaled down by the movement towards it. The Net result is zero change. You evaporate the Gravity faster in a sense.

So I believe I am right that with such a huge theory as the Theory Of Everything, it is better to have a solution that you can work with like the Universe works with physics. The Universe doesn't know mathematics, it creates fractals, so I think in physical fractals, and then they can go into a computer.

And a picture of the Bow Shock which explains it a bit better...
« Last Edit: 31/03/2013 23:45:42 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 #75 on: 01/04/2013 08:50:13 »
So I have been talking about natural shapes being created from a fractal. The fractal is based on the fact that I use spherical particles in my theory, and sphere stack in a particular way. I use sphere because a force in every direction from a point is a sphere, and the force from every point I use is scalar energy, and that scalar energy is what you call time.

To actually see the diagonal shearing through a liquid I can show you a video, that not only includes the shearing, but also includes nature's shapes...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqAAlSba7Ns

If you watch carefully, the shapes start off with diagonal lines through the liquid. The diagonal lines are due to the particle stacking system, and the pressures on that stacking system. You can get starfish shapes in this liquid. But really all you have to do is look at the ocean for diagonal shears in creatures.

Then when you realise that liquids with forces often break diagonally, and you change space into a scaler liquid. You can recreate the physics, but now you also have heat. Because scaler particles create photons, and electrons. So the same patterns have extra energy.
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 #76 on: 01/04/2013 08:58:42 »
Earlier I showed my bow shock bubbles, Voyager actually found them some years after I posted about them....

http://www.universetoday.com/86446/voyagers-find-giant-jacuzzi-like-bubbles-at-edge-of-solar-system/

But the difference is that I use them for all particles as locating physics.
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 #77 on: 01/04/2013 13:56:13 »
Mathematics to Physics

Energy
e = mc2

Force of Gravity
f = gm1m2/r2

I often say that mathematics isn't much of a proof to physics. Well not in my theory anyway. If I describe the mathematics in my theory it uses different physics than is implied above.

If I start with e = mc2, and I describe it in my theory...

Energy equals the flow of Gravity into and around electron holes, creating spin, scaling down into a new hole at C squared, and flowing out again. That's what I say is happening.

If I was writing the Calculus it would be..

e = HoleC2

Only the description has changed. But physics is a description, and maths is a measurement. The proof is the description + the maths. I feel that if the description is wrong then the proof is wrong. Anyone can measure something, the description is the tricky part.

f = gm1m2/r2

My version... The flow force of Gravity is taken from the holes in one body compared to the holes in another body over a distance. The direction is towards the area of least resistance which is the body with the most holes. Which is...

f = GHole1Hole2/r2

Still no change to the mathematics. Just a different description. Mass is made from holes, and the important part of the description is that it removes the pull force, and changes it into a flow force.

My description is different, the maths is the same, but.. you can't have a Big Bang with my description. You change history just by changing a word. That's my point about mathematics not being a proof. The maths can work, but the words are just as important, or maybe even more important.

So I just use the words, skip the maths, and use a fractal, which copies nature. I'm a sort of Darwin of Physics. I explain nature like Darwin explained evolution. In fact I slightly change evolution into some fractals as 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 #78 on: 01/04/2013 15:51:13 »
Rubber Bands and poise time

I have no pull forces in my theory, so rubber bands need explaining to account for a stretch which moves back together again. It's quite simple really...

With Gravity playing the part of the push force towards the rubber band it plays the part of the compression. The outward flow is against gravity, and flows from holes in the nucleus, and that is poise time. Poise time is a bit like shaking a can of fizzy pop to create an outflow. The particles are inflating, and acting like a geyser from a hole. It's like removing the plug from the hole, and then Gravity can flow in faster. Rubber is squeezed out of trees, and has been through compression forces. It is the spin, and compression of material into the nucleus that creates the scalar energy of poise time. Now you may think that gravity is too weak a force for the elastic contraction, but Gravity is a flow into electron holes, and rubber must have quite a few electrons in it for a better flow force. Well rubber has static electricity so there is a sign of electrons there.

(Poise Time is time as Point scalar energy without past present, and future)
« Last Edit: 01/04/2013 16:27:32 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 #79 on: 02/04/2013 10:52:09 »
Converting My Theory Into The Standard Model

OK, I hate using words like Pull, and Polarity, and Standard Mass, but nobody seems to be able to understand the Quantum Physics that I am using. So for once, here is the theory using the standard model, and your own words....

The Zero Particle is a Positron, and an electron combined 4 times. Positrons are scalar particles that can scale negatively into an electron by folding inside out, and electrons are also scalar particles. The positron has a push force on its outside, and if you flip the positron inside out, the push force pushes inwards to become a pull force. It turns into an electron, and with the forces pushing towards an electron nucleus. The electron nucleus creates scalar pressure, and can scale particles down even further. Electromagnetism is to scale down combined positron electrons acting as Gravity into electron positrons acting as magnetism. There is a speed limit to the scaling of C, but scaling can get trapped to slow down like at the end of a magnet to get a repelling force. Space is made from positron electrons, but science is not acknowledging that Positrons are scalar particles, and is not acknowledging that they can fold inside out. Positron electrons scale away from each other so as not to touch each other. This means that they do not pass a message in space, and become invisible. If they touch, they scale down, and then they scale back up again in a rhythmic pattern until they touch. This creates the Cosmic Microwave Background energy. The flow of this rhythm creates waves as the scales start to match between particles due to entropy. These waves of positron  electron energy sweeps through space, and create scalar waves, and photons.

The pattern that positron electrons create is a particle stacking pattern based on them all scaling to the same size. It obeys Newton's Kissing laws. So the patterns that they create eventually in nature show signs of a particle stacking system. But first you have to get the positron electrons to flip inside out into electron positrons. To create electron positrons you have to trap positron electrons in a scalar wave from all directions. If you look at newton's Kissing Problem...

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

... you are trying to trap a positron electron in the middle of 12 other positron electrons with a force that will knock it into an electron positron. The electron positron will then attract more positron electrons, and they will become trapped, and scale into electron positrons. Electron positrons combined with positron electrons, and trapped together create singularities that can stay open. So if you get enough of them you have a black hole. The spin from the positron electrons entering the pull forces of the electron positrons creates energy, and the electron positrons are trapped in the middle of the spin.

Now to keep this simple from now on an electron Positron will be called an electron again, and a positron electron will be called a positron again. You just have to remember that they can flip inside out to change polarity.

Electrons are also scalar particles, they scale negatively, so become bigger pull forces. The electrons on Earth are not trapped, so are not behaving as scalar particles. Scalar particles only scale slightly until trapped. When you see the sun sending out solar flares, they are scaled up electrons behaving as holes for even more particles. A hole is a pull force that positrons fall into by scalar bumping each other into the hole. When a positron sits in an electron hole of exactly the same size the forces are neutralised, and you cannot see either the positron, or the electron ( Going back to positron electrons the zero particle is 4 times positive negative, neutral, negative positive remember?), so you get the Zero particle... space.

Just to remind you again... The Zero Particle is Positive, negative, neutral, negative Positive. It eliminates all of its forces to become...

1 + -1 + 0, + -1 + 1

The zero is a gap in spacetime. The gap in spacetime is sitting in a much larger particle the size of the Universe. We can't communicate with this huge particle, so the gap acts as a straight line through a curve. You can imagine changing the numbers...

Convex, Concave, flat, concave, convex.

Which is an apple shape with an apple core, and a stem. Nature is taken from all of these forces.

So that is part of my theory explained using the standard model. I feel strange using words like pull etc, because they are incorrect. I can't really use the word Positron, electron, neutral, electron positron. So I call it the zero particle. It is like a bubble with layers. But scales out of trouble, and so cannot be destroyed in any way.

The electrons in electromagnetism scale down positrons into electrons, and then scales down electrons into larger negative numbers. Large negative numbers actually grow in size. The reverse of what you might imagine. So you get large hollow sphere which act negatively as holes. But if you can trap the expanding sphere even more, the negative sphere growing larger will flip back into positrons.

If you now understand the physics, you have no need for Dark Matter, or Quantum Physics. This solves all of the problems in science. But I don't like explaining it in this strange way.

Oh yeah.. time.

Time is the scaler effect of the electron nucleus which forces scalar particles to get stuck in the middle. These particles build up energy when the electron has nowhere to scale to get away from the forces. If a particle becomes scalar locked like this it has a nucleus that we call time. Energy trapped to escape as scalar energy is time. I call it Poise Time.. Point Scalar Energy Time.

The electron therefore creates the atom with a nucleus, and scalar energy as time. Combined electron, positron forces create everything in the Universe, and I know how to write the computer program to do it in a computer.
« Last Edit: 02/04/2013 11:43:39 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 #80 on: 02/04/2013 12:10:40 »
Still using the standard model....

So let's take a look at some nature. The tree...

The zero particle using polarities...

1 + -1 + 0 + -1 + 1

and converted to...

Convex, concave, flat, concave, convex

That's an apple shape. The interesting part is the zero where the apple stem sits. To eliminate gravity forces the (electron electron) have been forced together by using the tree roots as pull forces. This creates the neutral zone. The tree then grows into the neutral zone, because the forces are zero against it. Oddly this means that the tree sits in an area made from the Universe itself. A huge particle that encases us. It seems that life bulges out from this neutral zone. We sit inside a hole in the Universe made from a huge particle.

very odd...

My theory is very odd. But that's what it is. It's the maths that creates this oddity...

1 + -1 = 0

To get zero you have to combine opposite forces. But to get a Universe you have to sit particles in those opposite forces. The particles can't sit in themselves so they sit in a bigger particle. This infinite regression means that you end up sitting in the Universe itself as a huge particle.

To be more precise we sit in a huge Positron Electron. We are in the electron centre which is full of positrons. It's a bit of a tongue twister.
« Last Edit: 02/04/2013 12:28:19 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 #81 on: 02/04/2013 12:52:15 »
Still Using the Standard Model...

The photon is the positron to Positron message as they touch and fold inwards to electron electron. So....

Convex folds to concave, and back to convex.. the message is passed through the folding curve as a cloud of positron electron at a smaller scale. It reminds me of a bubble of soapy liquid in which  a thin layer of water is sandwiched between two layers of soap molecules. The photon is like passing the soapy water through the air as the bubbles touch.

So you can imagine that infinite regression builds the surfaces of the positrons as they touch. The smaller positrons pass along. the larger positrons scale down because they lose the smaller positrons that build their surface. The photons move into the electron space as a small positron cloud, and scale up the next positron. This creates a scaler message. The photon.
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 #82 on: 02/04/2013 12:56:57 »
You have to remember though that to me talking in the standard model I am sometimes talking backwards. And talking backwards like this leaves you with Dark Matter, and Quantum Physics. So to get rid of them you need to understand my real theory without pull forces.
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 #83 on: 02/04/2013 13:27:12 »
Try the standard Model The creation of a galaxy

The Positron forced to bump together due to an energy wave created in the CMB scale down. The scalar size becomes negative until the positrons are electrons. The electrons scale down negatively as large holes with pull forces. The pull forces pull in more electrons to make a cloud of positrons that are trapped. The positrons bump together even more, and start to spin to escape the forces. They spin very fast until they start to escape the huge electron area. The positrons moving into the electron area, are hit by the positrons spinning through the electron area. High speed positron positron collisions create photons, and also scale into more huge electron holes with pull forces. Suns are huge electrons containing trapped positrons. Positrons scale into electrons as holes, and so the sun has sun spots. Electrons shoot off the sun as magnetic bubbles, capturing some more positrons. All of these scalar forces acting together trap particles inside particles. Eventually you get atoms. Atoms are electron positron arrangements layered like onions. These layers break the scaling mechanics, and so atoms have a scale.

Humans live in the atomic scale not knowing that they are made from fundamental scalar particles in fact. We think that scale is fixed. For scale to be fixed there would need to be a creator who chose that scale of particle. No... we are scaler broken, and we don't know that scale is not supposed to be a fixed size.

The galaxy therefore creates all of the particles from Positrons, and electrons. Actually mainly positrons, because in our Universe positrons create electrons. Cause, and effect starts with the positron in other words.


« Last Edit: 02/04/2013 13:34:24 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 #84 on: 02/04/2013 17:09:27 »
I just noticed that my positron description works in Wikipedia. And instead of time moving backwards I have time scaling into the nucleus of the electron. So great. I should have looked up the positron before. Pity I never did any science...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron
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 #85 on: 02/04/2013 18:56:24 »
Today's science, matches somewhat with my spiral arm description earlier in this thread....

From the link....
Quote
According to Vogelsberger and Hernquist, the new simulations can be used to reinterpret observational data, looking at both the high-density molecular clouds as well as gravitationally induced "holes" in space as the mechanisms that drive the formation of the characteristic arms of spiral galaxies.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130402124821.htm

My version...
Quote
Where the lines bump create weaknesses. More scaling, more holes. These new holes have new particles moving into them. This is sort of like the octopus tentacles with the suckers. The diagonal lines spin more in space so create whole sphere for suckers. The sphere filling with particles are suns. They are suns where the scalar bumping is creating light, and energy. Filling holes, scaling, bumping, and flashing.

My version sounds strange, but my descriptions actually represent more hidden physics than the computer 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 #86 on: 02/04/2013 19:31:48 »
The atom...

This is how I re-write the Wikipedia text....

The atom is a basic unit of matter that consists of a dense central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons. The atomic nucleus contains a mix of positively charged protons (scaled down positrons) and electrically neutral neutrons (The point of change from positron to Electron) 

Wikipedia...
Quote
The electrons of an atom are bound to the nucleus by the electromagnetic force.

I change the above to...

The nucleus of the atom is held together by a large electron hole. Inside this electron is a cloud of Positron particles which are cancelled out as Dark matter. The positrons scale down towards the centre of the atom, and this is the force which holds the nucleus together. As the positron scale down they eventually become electrons to create a neutral force.

OK, so electrons do no annihilate positrons as anti-matter. They merge together, and the merge creates a cloud of photons which just looks explosive as the positrons vanish into Dark Matter. You end up with everything existing in one sphere which is the electron membrane. The membrane however is Dark Matter, and hidden from observation as the positrons pass over it.


« Last Edit: 02/04/2013 19:34:12 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 #87 on: 02/04/2013 23:51:20 »
I'm just looking up Quantum spin now. And there is a strange relationship between my Concave curve apple core, Newton's Kissing Problem and a 1/2 spin for an electron...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern%E2%80%93Gerlach_experiment

I believe that spin may actually be the curvature that I am using. So 1/2 spin could be convex curve. Well anyway its shown like an apple core... it may be a coincidence. And Newtons Kissing Problem creates the Concave curve because the shape has 3 particles at the top, and 3 particles at the bottom, and 6 particles around the middle. The 6 around the middle fill with positrons so fade away as though the middle was concave, but is actually hidden as Dark matter. So it's an apple shape, but the core is more dominant than the membrane area. You see the top, bottom spin, and the middle is cancelled out.

This works with my tennis ball example as well. If you invert the tennis ball you get the apple core shape.

The seeds of an apple are part of the same fractal. It suggests that an electron also has these seeds. If the stem of an apple is neutral, then the seeds resemble the same material as the stem, so neutral zones in the electron would match the seeds. This is one of the good things about fractals, you get to see something that is impossible to actually see in real life.

Anyway, it makes Quantum Physics... physics again. Convex, and concave are physics, and a tennis ball is physics, and an apple is physics, and I worked it all out using physics.
« Last Edit: 02/04/2013 23:57:27 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 #88 on: 03/04/2013 00:18:06 »
This is all easy to program so far. Imagine being able to program the Universe with all of the physics working, and self building like Conway's Game Of Life.

I just need a super computer. I have contacted Oxford, and Cambridge. I doubt that they will help me.

 
« Last Edit: 03/04/2013 00:37:21 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 #89 on: 03/04/2013 10:13:32 »
Today's science link is this...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/21966304

My match up is that I have been explaining..

Positron Electron = PE
Electron Positron = EP

Their difference is in the forces. PE has a convex force. EP has a concave force. In sexuality the man is PE, and the Woman is EP. The convex penis, and the concave Vagina. In other words the woman is more electron, and the man is more positron.

And I have explained elasticity of the Rubber band using more electrons.

The extra stretch of the octopus is therefore more electron.
« Last Edit: 03/04/2013 10:30:56 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 #90 on: 03/04/2013 12:11:50 »
Proposal for the physics of Cancer

PLEASE READ THIS  POST WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS A BEST GUESS BY SOMEONE WHO MAKES GOOD GUESSES. THAT'S ALL IT IS.

This isn't meant to be a hope, or a cure scenario. I merely mention cancer because of the physics that PE, and EP create.

PE = Positron Electron
EP = Electron Positron

According to me (It's a weird theory that you teach yourself things), the PE is a convex force, and the EP is a concave force. The human body is made from a mixture of electrons, and positrons. These particles work together just fine so long as none of them get stuck. But the particles have scalar properties if they do get stuck. The scalar properties of electrons, and positrons are not good for our health should they occur in our body. They will either scale up into lumps, or scale down into holes. Fixing this scalar problem is the solution, and unblocking the particles. Radiotherapy can shake them free, and then entropy will gradually restore their scale. But hopefully with my explanation there are other ideas that can come along.
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 #91 on: 03/04/2013 12:43:43 »
The physics of Relativity

Relativity is treated as an observational science. It's not observational, it is physical. So I will go through the physics...

We have a Universe made mostly from Positrons that can invert into Electrons, and Vice versa. The flip happens like folding half a tennis ball inside out. The Positron is convex, and the electron is concave. Concave acts as a pull force, and convex acts as a bump force. The overlay of the two particles creates...

1 + -1 = 0 which is Dark Matter

The inside of a positron is negative, and the inside of an electron is positive. The physics inside are a reverse of their outside forces. The shape inside of a sphere is the reverse of the outside if you were looking from each location.

Relative Motion

If you take a cloud of positrons as the exterior form of a sphere, and that cloud is held together by the concave forces of the electrons then the positrons will strike other positrons convex to convex. Which is a bump force, and a scalar force. The particles in front of the moving body are therefore scaling down. Positrons scale down into electrons, and the curve reverses from convex to concave. I call this the Bow shock. The moving body now has a scalar bow shock which is the area of least resistance due to the bump forces changing to pull forces.

If this were a train, and you stood on this train, you now have a matching bow shock to the train, because these scalar particles are infinitely stacked like virtual sand. Space is made from these scalar particles.

Time

Time builds up in the concave body of the electron, because the concave flow into the electron sends particles to an electron nucleus as a scaler change. This nucleus with a motion is restricted from incoming flow forces. Because time is made from a scalar flow I call it Poise Time (Point Scalar Time). The relative motion of a train therefore creates a Poise Time flow for the passengers, and a matching bow shock.

I will post more on Relativity later. But it's just physics.
« Last Edit: 03/04/2013 12:45:51 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 #92 on: 04/04/2013 12:07:24 »
The AMS Results using my theory...

The AMS result in my theory shows that my push gravity system has Positrons confirmed as a push propagator. It shows that pull forces are exactly as I said, not pull forces but electrons being used as holes for scaled down positrons. The positrons collide, push us to the Earth then invert into electrons as the push scales them down. Electrons act as holes, or containers if you like with a spin force of hidden particles trapped in a concave apple core shape.

Using my theory there is no need to look for Dark Matter. There is a need to reverse the mathematics of the Standard Model so that Dark Matter is eliminated. To account for changing Gravity in far away systems all you do is trap more positrons to create more pressure towards a mass of holes.

Mass = Holes
Energy moves towards lower energy.
Positrons = Positive Energy
Electrons = Negative Energy

Energy moves towards lower energy. Isaac Newton used the word pull, and science is still running around in circles looking for Dark Matter. What Positrons, and Electrons create is Neutral Matter.. which is Dark. It's not a new Dark Matter substance, it's the substance that would have been there all along if Newton had said Push instead of Pull.

What the AMS doesn't find is the Neutral Particles, because they vanish. There will be a high number of Positrons that cannot be found because of this. Searching for Neutral particles may be impossible, because you can only change them into something else... virtual particles...

Neutral particles are just combined forces of Electrons, and Positrons, but the forces can still be undone. There are still two particles there, they just cancel each other out. 1 + -1 = 0.

The collisions create relativity as I mentioned in my last post. So AMS also shows that my relativity idea has the physics in the right places for it to work.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2013 12:26:40 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 #93 on: 04/04/2013 12:47:45 »
Time and Distance not the same thing...

I just want to talk about time, and distance, because I just saw this...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130403141446.htm

The Universe is a fractal, there is no time, and distance formula that is easy to use. The changing shape of the Universe can happen almost anywhere. In fact I am looking at some nearby Nebula to see if they are creating Galaxies. But that's not the physics that I wish to discuss.

The physics for locality are scale. I use the rainbow as an example, and I use a packet of Rice Crispies as a comparison. Particles move into the area of least resistance. So a packet of Rice Crispies scales down, and a rainbow scales down negatively from Red (Negative) to Blue (Which I call Positive). The Universe does that as well. So when you look back in time using the Standard Model what you are actually looking at is the positioning of scale through a grain structure. So our Milky Way for example will move into a physical area that resembles itself over time. This area will then look like a natural progression of evolution in states of the Universe over time, but it isn't... it's the Rice Crispy effect. If two Galaxy Collide to become bigger, then they will move through space to this bigger position.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2013 13:04:28 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 #94 on: 04/04/2013 13:20:33 »
To Add To The Above...

Earth Moves towards the Sun because the sun is a bigger hole. Electrons are holes, and scale is location. So mass is a hole. We move towards the Earth because the Earth is a bigger hole than us. We have less electrons than the Earth. The Rice Crispy effect is Gravity. Hot air rises, it scales up, cold rain water, it scales down.. etc. Time is scale, not distance. Poise Time (Point Scalar Energy Time)

When you work out scale, you must add the electrons negatively to that scale. So an Elephant looks bigger than us, but when you add the electrons it has more, so it has less scale than us. We exist in a negative environment, so scale works backwards. But to understand it properly you must say that we are smaller than the Earth negatively.

This all leads to subduction of course.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2013 13:46:45 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 #95 on: 04/04/2013 14:06:26 »
The really easy way to imagine scale in reverse is to think of a bathroom sponge.

The holes in the sponge are the electrons. So the holes are very insignificant. The elephant is a big sponge, and the human is a small sponge. The positrons are the water, and Gravity. So now the more holes you have creates the most weight.

But this is the point where Quantum Physics gets strange...

The holes have no walls. So the elephant is just holes. The Human is just holes. The walls are the spinning Positrons. So really the holes act as points for the positrons to move into. The positrons are something that we carry along with us, but are not us. We are the points.

That is hard to visualize. Just say that a membrane is not the material inside the membrane, the membrane is a container for the material. A balloon can hold water. We are the water, we are not the balloon. We are not our skin, we are connected to our skin.

You might struggle with that. But that's how quantum scale works. Our scale is the negative of our mass.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2013 14:08:29 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 #96 on: 04/04/2013 14:23:41 »
Another way to explain it....

If it were a sphere the entire Universe would look absolutely huge. But Quantum Scale makes it the smallest. So that would put it right in the middle of the entire structure. Now that sounds strange until you take a position from it..

It's X/Y/Z would be 0,0,0. And if you create a sphere in a computer, and make it huge, and use it as a container like a balloon full of water, then the Universe would have an origin at 0,0,0.

Do you see what I mean?

Points are the location of the object. Points are taken from holes, and work negatively to mass. Negative mass.

Electrons therefore have negative mass, and negative energy. An elephant is bigger than us negatively. But don't confuse that with a pull force. Its a flow force from outside of the electron holes.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2013 14:45:50 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 #97 on: 04/04/2013 14:49:33 »
The Bar Magnet and Iron Filings

If you take scale as location, then the bar magnet is a scalar magnet, and iron filings are the scalar equivalent in location to the bar magnet. Just like the Milky Way moves into an area to match its scale, the iron filings are moving into an area to match their internal scale. The iron is dragged along by an internal scalar change.

The spinning magnetic force is a scalar force which transfers to the iron filings. Therefore the filings, and the iron bar match scalar forces. This means that they share the same location... just like I said earlier.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2013 14:51:46 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 #98 on: 04/04/2013 14:55:56 »
A change in location is propagated by Positrons...

Positrons are the messengers that touch to pass a signal. Like a circuit board they do not always touch. They pass a message to move to the area of least resistance. You go there. The iron filings go there immediately because the positrons are touching them. They receive this message in a strong way because the scalar forces of the magnet are so fast. The positrons cannot scale out of the way as fast as the spin inside the magnet. You get this magnetic push force from the positrons unable to scale out of the way fast enough.
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 #99 on: 04/04/2013 15:23:04 »
Scaler Subduction and Relativity...

Ok so we are taking scale negatively from an elephant to a Human even though the entire volume looks bigger. The volume is mostly holes. The Rice Crispies at the top are mostly holes. Subduction behaves like the Rice Crispy effect. The plates follow the rice crispy effect because they have a shape where the holes have a low surface area at the front of the plates. Scale is taken in 3D X scale Y scale Z scale. If a direction is scaled smaller, you can go in that direction. Relativity is to scale down a bow shock in the direction that you are travelling. Relativity is like scalar subduction of a moving object through scaler Positrons.
« Last Edit: 04/04/2013 15:26:55 by Pincho »
It's your fault if you don't understand me.