[Bored chemist]

you can't find an explanation for cosmologically seemingly free energy.

If you mean the big bang, look through the site carefully and you will find the bit where I pointed out that the big bang is the one time when Noether's theorem doesn't prevent an increase in energy.
(Because the symmetry is broken; there is no "before" the BB.)

It's not that I refuse to think this stuff through.
It's that I already did and I know it's a crock.


And you still need to stop playing at numerology on a science page: it's just silly.

[Bored chemist]

realize even Leonardo Da Vinci worked with flower of life. so i'm not using it out of nowhere. its one of the oldest, and most widespread, of ancient math emblems. golden mathematics.

Lots of old ideas turned put to be wrong.

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

Cosmological constant problem


Zero-point energy + perpetual systems in atoms, mimicked in cosmological systems.

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

realize even Leonardo Da Vinci worked with flower of life. so i'm not using it out of nowhere. its one of the oldest, and most widespread, of ancient math emblems. golden mathematics.

Lots of old ideas turned put to be wrong.

so what if Noether's theorem is wrong?
could perpetuality explain:
Cosmological constant problem

[paul cotter]

Scientists test the existing theories, repeatedly, all the time. Perpetual motion or free energy are absolutely impossible and you are wasting your time and energy trying to prove they are possible. You will one day, realise this. None of this is meant to be a personal attack on you. When error is promoted, it is imperative to counter it, otherwise progress will be stunted.

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

exactly. and we are stalling. tearing apart time to figure it out. still based in things that religion and history have made hard to defeat. especially when you're a nutjob for not accepting it.
we haven't cracked dark matter. what if dark matter is only an option because of things set in motion, say 500 years ago. or even 2000. you ever notice that the unexplained roman dodecahedrons have 4 rings like the electron shell diagram? i wonder if they understood atomic and quantum. but that poses a bigger question. how?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_dodecahedron#/media/File:2018_Rheinisches_Landesmuseum_Bonn,_Dodekaeder_&_Ikosaeder.jpg
wait. notice pentagons and triangles. seems incompatible. lol.
however. change the pentagons to hexagons. compatibility rises. 
bisecting a pentagon goes from corner to middle of a line segment.

[Bored chemist]

so what if Noether's theorem is wrong?

It isn't.

That's the thing about maths; once you prove something, you know it is true.

Did you not know that?

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

bro. really. unless it's flawed further back. people act as physics didn't get affected by history and religious intervention. the church ruled and even kept science under harsh penalties for ages, all by threat of excommunication. people were banned from reading. alchemy stayed banned, for longer than science itself. why?

could it relate to what we call fission and fusion, now?

could ancient peoples have triggered antimatter reactions in air to make the church want to hide it?

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

Scientists test the existing theories, repeatedly, all the time. Perpetual motion or free energy are absolutely impossible and you are wasting your time and energy trying to prove they are possible. You will one day, realise this. None of this is meant to be a personal attack on you. When error is promoted, it is imperative to counter it, otherwise progress will be stunted.

thank you for at least having decency and treating me like a human being. Not barking orders at me. not being combative and demanding. not being arrogant.

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

the difference in 2n and 2n+1 is what we look at and how
(-2,-1,0,1,2)

2n is about comma's where 2n+1 is about the numbers.

(-2,-1,1,2)
2n is about numbers where 2n+1 is about the comma's.
it mirrors.
step taken, vs where a step lands.
the stride of said step, vs where a stop can occur with a multiplier.

[Kryptid]

pay close attention "by means of accepted truths"
thanks for proving my point!

Those "accepted truths" are like the premises in deductive reasoning: if A is true and B is true, then C must also be true. If John is a human, and humans are mortals, then John must be a mortal. The "accepted truths" in that proof are that John is a human and that humans are mortals. The conclusion of the argument, that John is a mortal, must necessarily follow if the premises are true. In order to prove the proof wrong, then you must either show that John is not a human or show that not all humans are mortal.

It works the same way with Noether's theorem. In the case of energy conservation, the accepted truth is that of time symmetry. If time symmetry holds, then conservation of energy must also hold. So in order to make conservation of energy not hold, you would have to somehow build a machine that breaks time symmetry. An arrangement of magnets isn't going to do that.

the symmetry issue does possibly apply to standard model. but not the weighted hexagon model.

It applies to any model with symmetries.

our understanding of physics evolves bro.

Proofs don't evolve. The Pythagorean theorem will be just as valid 10 million years from now as it is today.

due to wrongfully accepted, but accepted, rules that don't apply.

If your model doesn't have symmetries, then it doesn't sound like a model of our universe (which does have symmetries).

which is more concievable, that we have no idea how energy pops up in space, or that European institutions didn't want to be ex-communicated, so they allowed religious pressure to sway things.

Proofs don't count as "religious pressure".

so what if Noether's theorem is wrong?

That would only be the case if symmetries don't hold.

could ancient peoples have triggered antimatter reactions in air

Where would they have gotten the antimatter from?

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

the dangerous perpetual motion, or what the ancients called alchemy, using lodestone as magnetic force to induce movement might just create it, naturally. by the way, it helps to offset magnets by 72 and 108. I'm not sure the exact arrangement, but the angles can allow a less resistance design. less resistance is less power needed, is more speed.

it has symmetry, but not similar symmetry that is proposed by a 5 point atomic model.
5 is prime.
6 is first perfect number.
6=3*2*1=3+2+1

collatz shows 5 must grow first, before breaking down through symmetry.
if the flap of a butterflies wings can build a hurricane, it does it one plus one, at a time.

[Bored chemist]

could ancient peoples have triggered antimatter reactions in air

No.

[Bored chemist]

the dangerous perpetual motion, or what the ancients called alchemy,

What the ancients called alchemy was not to do with perpetual motion.

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

you stated it. prove it. keep in mind matter and antimatter show near complete mutual destruction.
that states a line. if in 5 point atomic model, total destruction. if in 6, near, because our electron is in force form already.

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

the dangerous perpetual motion, or what the ancients called alchemy,

What the ancients called alchemy was not to do with perpetual motion.

cite your references for that statement?

[Kryptid]

the dangerous perpetual motion, or what the ancients called alchemy, using lodestone as magnetic force to induce movement might just create it

Noether's theorem won't let it, but if you want to continue to pursue this and try to build one yourself, be my guest.

keep in mind matter and antimatter show near complete mutual destruction.

That may be true, but you'd actually need antimatter for that. Where would they have gotten it?

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

the dangerous perpetual motion, or what the ancients called alchemy, using lodestone as magnetic force to induce movement might just create it

Noether's theorem won't let it, but if you want to continue to pursue this and try to build one yourself, be my guest.

keep in mind matter and antimatter show near complete mutual destruction.

That may be true, but you'd actually need antimatter for that. Where would they have gotten it?

if the theorem has a way to be defeated, your arugement for where they got it would be defeated. I'm not gonna argue in loop with a theorem that supposedly disqualifies any chance of pereptual systems, while we still have a lot of unexplained phenomenon.
if perpetual constructs exist in nature, (which we haven't fully defined) then they may have a matter to antimatter reaction. hence where the "water people" would have went. gone, due to being ate up by constant matter to antimatter reactions within the very center of the forces present. so a 5 part particle has no chance of breaking down to form helium's stability. a 6 part does. at the same time it allows relative breakdown of gravity by atomic weight units in the quantum spectrum.

what happens when vacuum hits above what we can normally attain?
a force mechanism as described would create that kind of negative pressure, while still allowing air to be present. hence why it would be able to create it.
the line model, I would need help finalizing details and safety mechanisms. with how dangerous the 9 spheres in one version could be, I think it's best to find help before i build. wouldn't you? If wrong, egg on my face. if right, correcting science could achieve great things. like free energy and oil independence. the risk is worth the reward. if possible.

i'm gonna quit interacting though. since you don't think its possible. enjoy your day, please.

[KiltedWeirdo (OP)]

its funny that dark matter and dark energy is more believable and acceptable work then thoughts on perpetual constructs. one actually has evidence. perpetuality. atoms vibrate and emit sound.

[Kryptid]

if the theorem has a way to be defeated, your arugement for where they got it would be defeated.

I don't see how Noether's theorem is related to where ancient people would have gotten antimatter from.

if perpetual constructs exist in nature, (which we haven't fully defined) then they may have a matter to antimatter reaction.

Can you explain how?

what happens when vacuum hits above what we can normally attain?

What do you mean by that? What more is there to remove from a vacuum?

a force mechanism as described would create that kind of negative pressure, while still allowing air to be present. hence why it would be able to create it.

I, again, don't follow. If air is present, then it's not a true vacuum.

its funny that dark matter and dark energy is more believable and acceptable work then thoughts on perpetual constructs. one actually has evidence.

Dark matter and dark energy have evidence.

perpetuality. atoms vibrate and emit sound.

They may vibrate in some quantum sense even at absolute zero, but that doesn't represent the net creation of energy. That particular form of perpetual motion is therefore allowed, as it doesn't violate conservation of energy. They wouldn't always emit sound, either. They would only emit sound if they have enough energy to do so.