[Kryptid]

I am not sure, I am not sure there is anyone or any experiment to show I am incorrect, just experiments to show I am correct.

Then it isn't scientific.

[guest39538]

I am not sure, I am not sure there is anyone or any experiment to show I am incorrect, just experiments to show I am correct.

Then it isn't scientific.

Isn't it scientific to prove something works? 

I have two basic tests, if both tests fail then I would have to conclude that not only I am incorrect, but so is everyone else and we would be lost.

I am confident the tests will work if my parameters are ok, it is better than ligo , more hands on approach.

not expensive either , existing things, well I think the main thing I need exists. 

[Kryptid]

Isn't it scientific to prove something works? 

Falsifiability is what separates science from pseudoscience. Consider the existence of Bigfoot, fairies or anything like that. You could potentially prove that any of those entities exist if you captured one and submitted it for study, but you can't prove that they don't exist. That's why they are not consider scientific subjects.

[guest39538]

Isn't it scientific to prove something works? 

Falsifiability is what separates science from pseudoscience. Consider the existence of Bigfoot, fairies or anything like that. You could potentially prove that any of those entities exist if you captured one and submitted it for study, but you can't prove that they don't exist. That's why they are not consider scientific subjects.

I have two tests, one will show N is attracted to N and one will show space-time manipulation , in simple terms I am going to curve space time and measure it.

How can you prove something to be false that as not been proven to be true? 

If the experiments fail then it is less likely to be a true theory . However if my parameters could be met, I think it proves or disproves it, Is this what you mean?

[guest39538]

Took me about two minutes to think up this once I started thinking free energy, here is a free device that will be perpetual if science can do the mechanics right



ac.jpg (290.99 kB . 4540x2628 - viewed 3202 times)

Use the upside down pendulum if u want more power and speed

Disclaimer , free, no copyright or patent granted, free to all.

You have to name this the pendamo after the dynamo. I hated pedalling a bike back in the day with a dynamo to get light, self efficient  is best. Sorry I get a bi typo delusionalk wen tired lol,

[Kryptid]

How can you prove something to be false that as not been proven to be true?

By making observations that would be inconsistent with the existence of the proposed phenomenon. Find out what unique predictions your model makes about the world and design an experiment that could potentially show that such predictions are wrong. If the N-field exists, then what unique phenomena would necessarily result from it that would not result from other models? Figure out the circumstances needed to produce that predicted phenomenon and see if it pops up when those circumstances are in place. If it doesn't, then you've falsified it.

If the experiments fail then it is less likely to be a true theory . However if my parameters could be met, I think it proves or disproves it, Is this what you mean?

If it really can disprove it, then yes, that's what I mean.

[guest39538]

How can you prove something to be false that as not been proven to be true?

By making observations that would be inconsistent with the existence of the proposed phenomenon. Find out what unique predictions your model makes about the world and design an experiment that could potentially show that such predictions are wrong. If the N-field exists, then what unique phenomena would necessarily result from it that would not result from other models? Figure out the circumstances needed to produce that predicted phenomenon and see if it pops up when those circumstances are in place. If it doesn't, then you've falsified it.

If the experiments fail then it is less likely to be a true theory . However if my parameters could be met, I think it proves or disproves it, Is this what you mean?

If it really can disprove it, then yes, that's what I mean.

I am confident they will pass but I am not sure if my parameters can be met.  I know all the things exist to do the experiments but there is just one piece of uncertainty that I do not know without asking whether we can achieve it.  I will pm one of the mods later and ask them .

[guest39538]

Ok, I have had my questions answers elsewhere.   Anyone want to manipulate space-time?


Looking good

[guest39538]

Started my equations

→
E =    (- ∇Φ)  + ( + ∇Φ) = 0 ∇Φ

Δ 0 ∇Φ   =  + 1 ∇Φ ZpE

[Bored chemist]

I am ''programmed'' to give you answers.

That would explain why you sometimes seem like a chat bot.

However, you don't give meaningful answers.

Cut to the chase: what is an N field?

An n-field is a neutral field that the origin has three possibilities.

1) An intelligent design from external sources

2) A field emanating from bodies

3) Both

This field over time has been defined by different names such as:

Higg's field

Space-time

negative energy

Do you have a version that makes sense.
One that can be parsed in English would be a start.

[guest39538]

I am ''programmed'' to give you answers.

That would explain why you sometimes seem like a chat bot.

However, you don't give meaningful answers.

Cut to the chase: what is an N field?

An n-field is a neutral field that the origin has three possibilities.

1) An intelligent design from external sources

2) A field emanating from bodies

3) Both

This field over time has been defined by different names such as:

Higg's field

Space-time

negative energy

Do you have a version that makes sense.
One that can be parsed in English would be a start.

I have lots of versions that explain the same thing. 

How about I explain the n-field and N-field as any given point is a  standalone wave point.

[Bored chemist]

standalone wave point.

Unfortunately, that's meaningless word salad.

[guest39538]

standalone wave point.

Unfortunately, that's meaningless word salad.

all waves pass through a positional point yea?

[guest39538]

→
E =    (- ∇Φ)  + ( + ∇Φ) = 0 ∇Φ   

Where  the n-field  Electric field is representative by E + vector arrow   and - ∇Φ = -0.5 negative energy elctrical potential  and + ∇Φ = 0.5 positive energy electrical potential  the null result 0 being the binary summation.

Δ 0 ∇Φ   =  Δ 0.5 ∇Φ   (ZpE) 

= 0.5 ∇Φ  + 0.5 ∇Φ = 1

+1e = Δ  0,0,0,  to  1,1,1

Because let us say 0 = 0,0,0 and 0 = 1,1,1

Now if we relocate 0.5 ∇Φ positioned 0,0,0  to +1,+1+1  where 0.5 ∇Φ also occupies

0.5 ∇Φ + 0.5 ∇Φ = +1

[Bored chemist]

Unfortunately, that's meaningless word salad.

[guest39538]

Unfortunately, that's meaningless word salad.

Yeah oyu ar eprobaly right

[The Spoon]

Unfortunately, that's meaningless word salad.

Yeah oyu ar eprobaly right

So still trolling instead of doing anything meaningful to make money? Probably lying about your internet being cut off too.

[guest39538]

So still trolling instead of doing anything meaningful to make money? Probably lying about your internet being cut off too.

Dear Sir,

I am a live in carer for somebody whom is disabled who has had their benefits stopped by lies on a form by a so called medical assessor. I have got to have the internet turned off, I will struggle to pay the bill.   Not that this is your business, but I have honour sir and do not abandon a sinking ship . I wish I had the liberty of being able to go out painting , abandoning my position as a carer.  However , I can't help my virtue . 

Sincerely

Steve

[guest39538]

An experiment to show my n-field. 

You call it the Casimir Effect, which shows my n-field not negative energy . 

The plates used in the Casimir Effect are   -e + 1e = q0  or A + B

So there you go , I got there eventually. 


A/k and B/k can be explained by the Dirac sea and particles popping into and out of existence.




+



+




BANG!

That's a wrap.

0.5 + 0.5 /t = 1

1 + 0.5 + 0.5 = 2

2+0.5+0.5 = 3

etc etc....

[Bored chemist]

That's still word salad.