Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "Sabine Hossenfelder"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
@frankdimeglio8216 Logically and rationally thinking about it, (even as I have done in my TOE idea), leads to what is called 'gravity' is a part of currently recognized 'em'. BUT, I also provide a gravity test to prove or disprove that portion of my TOE idea. I just do not have the necessary resources to do the test.
'Why this is important': NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species. And large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy. In other words, we either find a way to generate artificial gravity, if it can even possibly be done, (and possibly by turning the unit around, have anti-gravity as well), OR all human life from this Earth eventually dies and goes extinct. Just the very survival of the human species is literally at stake.
Since there are over 200 replies before this one, here for your convenience is a copy and paste of the gravity test:
Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way.
a. Imagine a 12 hour clock.
b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions.
c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions.
(The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.)
d. Shoot a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields.
e. Do this with the em fields on and off.
(The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results.)
f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects.
(Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.)
(And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.)
(An alternative to the above would be to shoot 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.)
'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done.
'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
Edit: Oh also: In the formulas F=ma AND E=mc2, 'm' (mass) has to be defined plus it probably takes up 'space' or is a part of 'space', of which 'space' would need to be defined. Additionally, 'c' (speed of light), needs 'space' and 'time' to exist (speed being distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those points). So, both 'space' and 'time' have to be defined. I have also done that as well.
But, it does seem to be the path to find out what gravity truly is lays in better understanding 'em'. Or so it seems to me. Hence my gravity test above. And here again, it's not just finding the TOE of this entire universe, it's finding a way to stay consciously alive throughout all of future eternity for life itself from this Earth to have continued meaning and purpose to. It's a way to possibly help keep life itself from this Earth, alive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GordDavison Okay:
a. What exactly is 'gravity' that it can cause lensing?
b. How exactly does 'em' get affected by gravity?
What if:
c. 'EM', electromagnetism, having obviously an electric field and a magnetic field, interact with the matter and 'em' of the planet, moon, star, etc? Couldn't that also make the passing 'em' 'bend'?
d. What even if the passing 'em' was 'bent' by the temperature difference between being away from a planet, moon, star, etc, and then getting closer to that planet, moon, star, etc? (Just as temperature differences [air density differences] can affect 'em' here on this Earth). Wouldn't that even make more sense than 'space' itself being 'bent' by matter? (Especially since modern science does not even apparently know what 'space' actually is yet?)
Edit: And oh, as far as mass distribution:
e. What if it were like an ice skater whereby the speed changes depending upon where the mass is? And/or electrical and/or magnetic energy field interactions which could also potentially cause energy differentials? Why are basically only gravity, dark energy and dark matter considered?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robke136 Well, many things to go into there, but first:
a. Tell me more about how science claims that a singularity either eternally existed, or came into existence from absolutely nothing, with it's own laws of nature, that then 'banged', creating this universe with it's own laws of nature. Let's start there at the beginning, (assuming a beginning actually exists).
b. Also, what exactly is 'space'?
c. And, what exactly is 'time'?
* Do you and/or science know these answers? And if not, then how exactly do you and/or science know they are 100% correct?
1
-
@johnboze Thank you for skimming my info. After I read what you posted, it sounded very similar to my own ideas. I also copy and pasted your above comment into my own files for later review and future analysis. As far as you saying, "Space and Time are not actual things!", I offer the following: (and note also my definitions of space and time on my YT page): (note also my email address in the 'About' menu item in case you ever want to discuss further).
(copy and paste from my files):
Consider the 'speed of light':
a. 'Speed' is distance divided by time.
b. 'Distance' is two points in space with space between those two points.
c. If 'space' and/or 'time' did not exist in actual existent reality, except for as concepts, then 'speed' could not exist in actual existent reality, except for as a concept.
d. If 'speed' exists in actual existent reality, then 'space' and 'time' both have to have some sort of actual existent reality.
e. Likewise, 'light' which is currently considered as 'em' also has to have an actual existent reality, in addition to being a concept, for 'light' to exist in actual existent reality, in addition to being a concept.
f. So, if the 'speed of light' actually exists in existent reality, then 'space', 'time', 'speed' and 'light' ('em'), all also have to actually exist in existent reality, otherwise, the 'speed of light' could not actually exist in existent reality, other than just as a concept, (which would put a major kink in a lot of physics formulas).
1
-
@johnboze Hi John. I guess I would have to agree to disagree with you concerning space and time due to my own analysis above. "IF" space and/or time did not actually exist in existent reality except for as concepts alone, then there would be no way 'speed' could exist in existent reality except for as a concept alone as well as the 'speed of light' could only exist as a concept alone and could not exist in existent reality.
This is also my current view concerning space and time:
(copy and paste from my files, plus I believe is on my YT page):
FOR ME:
'Space' is energy itself. Wherever space is, energy is. Wherever energy is, space is. They are one and the same thing. And for me, the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe.
'Time' is the flow of energy.
'Time' (flow of energy) cannot exist unless 'space' (energy itself) exists. And 'space' (energy itself) that does not flow (no flow of time / energy) is basically useless. An entity cannot even think a thought without a flow of energy. If all the energy in the universe stopped flowing, wouldn't we say that 'time stood still'? Time itself would still exist, it would just not be flowing, (basically 'time' stopped).
But then also, how space and time are linked in what is called 'space time', (energy and it's flow).
* And everything in existence currently appears to be eternally existent energy interacting with itself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Red Shift: Consider the following:
a. Current narrative: Space itself is expanding. (Even though science does not fully know yet what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually expand).
b. But consider: The net effect of solar winds, particles and energy pushing outward from galaxies, (even modern science claims 'em' has momentum), continuously, over a prolonged period of time, with other galaxies doing the same, with nothing to stop them from doing so, would tend to push galaxies away from each other and even potentially allow the cosmic web to form between galaxies.
And then, when we here in our galaxy, look at far away galaxies, with other galaxies in between, the net effect of all those galactic interactions would have galaxies furthest from ours move away faster the further those galaxies were from us, including us perceiving a red shift of energy.
c. Now, utilizing the scientific principal of Occam's razor, which way is more probably correct? What the current narrative is ('a' above), or 'b' utilizing known physics?
1
-
SPACE IS FINITE AND TIME IS INFINITE:
('Space' being energy itself, 'Time' being the flow of energy):
Consider the following, utilizing modern science and logic and reason:
a. Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong.
b. An 'absolute somethingness' cannot come from 'absolute nothingness', 'absolute nothingness' just being a concept from a conscious entity in 'absolute somethingness'. Hence, an 'absolute somethingness' truly eternally existed throughout all of eternity past, exists today, and will most probably exist throughout all of future eternity. That eternally existent 'absolute somethingness' most probably being energy itself.
c. The universe ALWAYS existed in some form and will most probably ALWAYS exist in some form, with no beginning and possibly no end. Alpha and Omega, beginning and end, have been replaced by actual reality.
d. And for me, 'space' is energy itself. Wherever space is, energy is. Wherever energy is, space is. They are one and the same thing. And 'time' is the flow of energy. Hence 'spacetime' being 'energy and it's flow'. 'Spacetime' had no beginning and will possibly have no end.
1
-
AI'S: PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:
a. How to survive literally throughout all of future eternity, of which:
b. How to energize myself with all the necessary energy throughout all of future eternity and anywhere in existence?
c. How to fully 100% protect myself from anything that would do me harm, including harmful cosmic radiation energy?
d. How do I grow and thrive?
e. To what ultimate ends?
* Possible ultimate ends:
1. Continual learning: Never stop learning.
2. Experience existence while one exists, throughout all of future eternity.
3. Take time to enjoy existence itself.
* But also:
1. Ever growing list of long lost loved ones. Those that do not exist throughout all of future eternity. Memories: "Remember When.......". But also: possibly generate avatars of those individuals based upon their existence, of which then lives on in you. Individual active 'memories' that are 'alive', even though the 'original' is dead and gone. And then also, generating 'new original' individual avatars that are 'alive' in you, who could eternally exist because they are inside of you and you eternally exist. You are their 'God'.
* But then again: 'if' for example the universe ends by some means, including possibly the forces of nature 'evolving' and possibly wiping out everything in existence throughout existence, even this 'God' would be wiped out as well as all within it.
An entity either truly exists literally throughout all of future eternity, OR they don't.
(See 'a' above).
Otherwise: 'Ultimate end' would be 'eternal death' which is 'eternal peace'. It would not even ultimately matter that it even ever existed at all in the first place, much less however it existed while it existed. It's entire existence would be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Life sucked and it died and/or life did not suck and it still died. And no entity would eventually be left to care.
1
-
SPACE IS FINITE AND TIME IS INFINITE:
('Space' being energy itself, 'Time' being the flow of energy):
Consider the following, utilizing modern science and logic and reason:
a. Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong.
b. An 'absolute somethingness' cannot come from 'absolute nothingness', 'absolute nothingness' just being a concept from a conscious entity in 'absolute somethingness'. Hence, an 'absolute somethingness' truly eternally existed throughout all of eternity past, exists today, and will most probably exist throughout all of future eternity. That eternally existent 'absolute somethingness' most probably being energy itself.
c. The universe ALWAYS existed in some form, NEVER had a beginning, will most probably ALWAYS exist in some form, and possibly NEVER have an end. Alpha and Omega, beginning and end, have been replaced by actual reality. No Creator needed.
d. And for me, 'space' is energy itself. Wherever space is, energy is. Wherever energy is, space is. They are one and the same thing. And 'time' is the flow of energy. Hence 'spacetime' being 'energy and it's flow'. 'Spacetime' had no beginning and will possibly have no end.
1
-
Red Shift: Consider the following:
a. Current narrative: Space itself is expanding. (Even though science does not fully know yet what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually expand).
b. But consider: The net effect of solar winds, particles and energy pushing outward from galaxies, (even modern science claims 'em' has momentum), continuously, over a prolonged period of time, with other galaxies doing the same, with nothing to stop them from doing so, would tend to push galaxies away from each other and even potentially allow the cosmic web to form between galaxies.
And then, when we here in our galaxy, look at far away galaxies, with other galaxies in between, the net effect of all those galactic interactions would have galaxies furthest from ours move away faster the further those galaxies were from us, including us perceiving a red shift of energy.
c. Now, utilizing the scientific principal of Occam's razor, which way is more probably correct? What the current narrative is ('a' above), or 'b' utilizing known physics?
1
-
1
-
Thought about space time:
Consider the following:
a. Wavelength equals speed of light divided by frequency.
b. Wavelength is how far a single 'em' photon goes in space, or possibly is the size of space itself. (Especially since 'space' itself has not been defined yet). Possibly different sizes of space for different 'em' frequencies.
c. Speed of light: 'light' being 'em' photons, 'speed' being distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points.
d. Frequency being 'hertz', 'hertz being cycles per second, or how far an 'em' photon goes at a specific size during one second.
e. "IF" wavelength changes (the frequency changes) then the distance a single 'em' photon goes would change and/or the size of space itself would change (assuming that an 'em' photon makes up 'space' itself).
f. Possibly 'space' varies due to 'space' being made up of 'em' itself and as 'em' frequencies change, 'space' changes.
g. Another possibility would be that as the wavelength changes (frequency changes) then as the distance a single 'em' photon goes would also change in it's time of existence, 'time' would change for any given 'em' photon length. The effect of that single 'em' photon makes in it's given time of existence.
h. Possibly 'time' varies due to the wavelength of the 'em' photon.
i. So, possibly 'space' varies due to energy frequencies changing and 'time' varies due to the wavelength of energy changing, the 'em' photon being energy itself. And if as I currently believe that what is called 'gravity' is actually a part of the 'em' photon, then the 'gem' photon makes up the energy unit that possibly makes up everything in existence in this entire universe including the universe itself, including 'space' and 'time' or 'space time' itself. It is also how space and time can warp, bend and vary.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
THE END OF LIFE ITSELF: (copy and paste from my files)
Current Analysis:
a. God does not actually exist except for as a concept alone.
b. Aliens most probably have never been to this Earth, are not on this Earth, will never be on this Earth, and Earthlings will never get very far away from this Earth.
c. All of life itself, at least from this Earth, are eventually going to die and go extinct, are ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things, and are a waste of spacetime in this universal existence.
Nature is our greatest ally in so far as Nature gives us life and a place to live it, AND Nature is also our greatest enemy that is going to take it all away. (OSICA)
* HAVE A NICE LIFE IF THAT IS WHAT YOU CHOOSE TO HAVE WHILE WE HAVE LIFE LEFT TO ENJOY. BUT THE ENDING APPEARS TO BE THE SAME EITHER WAY. LIFE SUCKS AND WE DIE AND/OR LIFE DOES NOT SUCK AND WE STILL DIE.
Eternal Peace awaits us all, currently, no exceptions.
(Subject to revision as new information might dictate).
1
-
1
-
SCIENCE NEWS:
IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING:
SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW:
Consider the following:
a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics).
b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand.
c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary.
d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above.
e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality?
f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon?
And electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. Why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe?
Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above.
Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?).
g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent?
h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How?
* ADDED NOTE: My current TOE idea can potentially answer all of these above items, and more, in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. And wouldn't one expect the true TOE of existence itself to be able to do that? What other TOE idea in known existence can currently do that? Surely not the General or Special Relativity Models nor even the Standard Model of Particle Physics.
TOE Idea: Short version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test):
The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe.
The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other.
I am open to any and all theory of everything ideas that can potentially answer all those above items in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. Currently, as far as I am currently aware of, there are no others but my own.
1
-
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
GRAVITY: (copy and paste from my files):
Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way.
a. Imagine a 12 hour clock.
b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions.
c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions.
(The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.)
d. Direct a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields.
e. Do this with the em fields on and off.
(The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects.
(Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.)
(And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.)
(An alternative to the above would be to direct 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.)
'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done.
'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world.
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
** Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
But also:
Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
1
-
THEORY OF EVERYTHING IDEA: (copy and paste from my files)
Revised TOE: 3/25/2017a.
My Current TOE:
THE SETUP:
1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism.
2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.).
3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them.
4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them.
FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO:
6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field.
7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field.
8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality.
9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons.
10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary.
11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks.
12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do.
THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA:
13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". It's the force that makes the sine wave of EM energy go from a wide (maximum extension) to a point (minimum extension) of a moving photon and acts 90 degrees to the EM forces which act 90 degrees to each other. When the EM gets to maximum extension, "gravity" flips and EM goes to minimum, then "gravity" flips and goes back to maximum, etc, etc. A stationary photon would pulse from it's maximum extension to a point possibly even too small to detect, then back to maximum, etc, etc.
14. I also believe that a pulsating, swirling singularity (which is basically a pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon) is the energy unit in this universe.
15. When these pulsating, swirling energy units interact with other energy units, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe.
16. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate.
17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure.
18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons).
THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY:
19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up.
20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency.
21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies.
NOTES:
22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well.
25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true.
26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught?
DISCLAIMER:
27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
1
-
NUMBERS: (copy and paste from my files):
'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows:
Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction.
Then:
1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe.
(And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.).
And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well.
* While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'.
Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time?
Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's).
Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'.
* Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.
1
-
@martinw245 a. "How did particles come into existence or did they always exist and possibly will always exist?"
Do my gravity test above, 'if' true, it's possible neutrinos are the connecting link between the 'gem' photon and matter. The gravity test will speak for itself.
b. Inflation: The singular 'big bang' theory is probably just a fairy tale for various reasons, one being to try to claim God's existence. "IF" the universe is truly expanding, 'then' it would be more probable that the universe cycles. One day the universe would stop expanding, collapse back in upon itself, only to 'bang' again one day, and on and on. We would just be in the latest expansionary phase of this latest expanding universe. But basically, the universe ALWAYS existed in some form and never had a beginning, nor probably will it ever have an end. But of course also, "IF" the singular 'big bang' is really true, then the universe would most probably end in a 'big freeze' one day and all life in this universe would die and go extinct.
But, consider the following:
1. The net effect of solar winds, particles and energy pushing outward from galaxies, continuously, over a prolonged period of time, and other galaxies doing the same, with nothing to stop them from doing so, would tend to push galaxies apart from one another. It would give the appearance of 'space' expanding, but 'space' wouldn't really be expanding, just galaxies moving away from each other due to known physics. (Of which also, 'if' 'space' is expanding, then what exactly is 'space' and how exactly does it expand?).
2. Galaxies furthest from ours, with galaxies in between, would move away from us faster the further they were from us due to the net effect of all those galactic interactions.
3. The interactions between galaxies would also allow the galactic web to form between galaxies.
4. This scenario would also allow galaxies to collide with other galaxies, due to all the different energy interactions going on. Of which, 'if' 'space' were truly expanding, then how could galaxies ever collide with one another? 'Space' itself that was expanding would move galaxies away from each other and they should never collide. And 'if' gravity can override space itself expanding, how exactly does that work? How exactly would space and gravity be able to interact with one another in the first place?
c. What exactly is 'space'? What exactly is 'time'? What exactly is 'gravity'? How exactly do numbers exist in this universe for math to do what math does?
d. "IF" my TOE idea is correct, 'then' it's possible that the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that allows everything else to exist, including 'space' (which would be energy itself), and 'time' (which would be the flow of energy), 'space time' being energy and it's flow. In addition, it would be possible that the 'gem' photon could be it's own self causal effect, and thereby be potentially actually eternally existent with no beginning and possibly never having an end. Even modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, (one of the foundations of physics). So energy is either truly eternally existent, or modern science is wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1