Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "CBS Sunday Morning"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FaithwalkerTodd "At this point, abortion is very unpopular." Only among basically the 'pro-life' people, who generally speaking are deluded brainwashed individuals who believe that a magical sky daddy truly exists.
"And when people really know the truth about what they’re arguing for they leave The pro abortion argument alone. It’s a terrible argument."
Honestly and sincerely answer the enclosed questions in this following copy and paste from my files:
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
And whatever is decided and by whom, there might be entities who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist, which could be a source of animosity, which could lead to further violence and death.
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? How should we help take care of the young, old, ill and needy, if even at all? How would we want to receive help should we be individually young, old, ill and/or needy, if even at all? How should those be treated who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist? How should we treat others if we are being forced to exist how we do not want to exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? And where does the money and resources come from to do what we would like to do for how we would like to exist while we do exist?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
Then we all will still die in the end one day from something, we all will still forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and we all will still be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place, regardless of how we all existed while we existed. An entity truly exists throughout all of future eternity, or they don't. It appears we don't in actual reality, and as such, all of life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Death is freedom from life and eternal death awaits us all. Or so the current analysis would indicate.
Individually and as a society of Individuals: For every moment that passes, one less moment being alive AND one moment closer to being not alive.
* Added note: Current Analysis: Long Term: (Very Short Version):
All life on and from this Earth is eventually going to die and go extinct. No exceptions at this time. This Earth and all on it are all just a waste of spacetime in this universe.
(And note also, those who cannot, or choose not to, face the above apparent reality, often delude themselves with fairy tales of alternatives).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@melquesedekcastro7480 Also: Please show how 'b' is really true and that 'a' is not really true in this God analysis of mine. Nobody has been able to do it as of yet, but hey, maybe you are the one:
GOD DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST EXCEPT FOR AS A CONCEPT:
For those who claim God actually exists (besides as a concept), consider the following:
a. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness truly existing.
b. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness that has consciousness, memories and thoughts truly existing.
People who claim God actually and eternally exists basically are claiming that 'b' above is correct but yet simultaneously seem to be saying that 'a' is impossible to occur.
'a' above can exist without 'b' existing but 'b' cannot exist unless 'a' exists. Even per the scientific principal of Occam's razor, 'a' is more probable of being really true rather than 'b'.
I am one step away from proving God's existence, but am unable to find any actual evidence to do so. And nobody I've talked to seems to have any actual evidence of God's actual existence either. All humans appear to have are 'Theories of God'. Some humans appear to go their whole life basing their life upon their specific theory of God. Many give their God human characteristics and cannot even prove the existence of their God much less the characteristics given to their God. Some have circumstantial arguments for a God's existence, but others have circumstantial arguments for no God existing. Not one has any actual factual evidence that their God actually factually even exists. Hence, at this time in the analysis, God does not actually exist except for as a concept created by humans for humans. Humans have personified Nature and called that personification "God". Instead of what is claimed "God created man in God's image", it's more likely that "Man created God in Man's image".
Further consider that if the emotional parts of the brain override the logic and reasoning parts of the brain, people can be made to believe basically anything at all as being really true. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. Plus modern science has already proven that humans can have visual and audio hallucinations that are very real to that individual. All the more reason for critical thinking being needed and to follow the facts wherever those facts might lead. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
In addition, while modern science does not know what consciousness actually is yet, memories and thoughts appear to require a physical correctly functioning brain to have those items occur. Where is God's brain? Where are God's memories stored at? How are God's memories stored and retrieved? How does God think even a single coherent thought?
If inside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where?
If outside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where is the interface between that dimension and this dimension? No such interface has been discovered as of yet as far as I am currently aware of.
* Note: Since this is a search for the real absolute truth concerning God, Intelligent Designer, Pre-existent Consciousness, etc, feel free to copy and paste this elsewhere to further the analysis and discussion.
* For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.
1
-
@melquesedekcastro7480 Where we came from: An eternally existent universe that always existed in some form, (as science as I am sure you know claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, hence eternally existent, and also that an absolute somethingness cannot come from absolute nothingness).
Where we are going to:
Eternal Death. Just as 'we' were before we were alive.
Life: The coherency of energy in a certain format.
Death: The de-coherency of energy when life no longer exists.
The future:
Species stay on this Earth: They are all going to die and go extinct.
Species leave this Earth: They are all going to die and go extinct.
We apparently were all destined to die and go extinct before we even ever came into existence. People that cannot handle that and/or don't want to tell their children that, make up fairy tales to help them get through this life. But the ending is the same. We all die one day from something, will all forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and will all be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place.
All of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. All of life itself is a waste of spacetime in this universal existence. It does not even ultimately matter that any of us exist much less how we exist while we exist.
Life sucks and we die and go extinct and/or life does not suck and we still die and go extinct.
Life itself only matters to life itself, only as long as life itself still exists. It's just that life itself is not always going to exist, at least not from this Earth, nor probably from this solar system, nor possibly from this spiral shaped galaxy that is most probably collapsing in upon itself. And outer space travel is not only dangerous, but deadly. Hence, life itself is basically trapped on their own home planet and in their own backyard.
1
-
'Christian God'?
QUESTIONS:
Okay, it's claimed that a sub-set of humanity, in only a certain time in human history, out of all the other humans in existence on this Earth throughout time, as well as all the other species on this Earth throughout time, as well as any other life that might exist in this galaxy, as well as all the life in other galaxies, is the only chosen people of God. Really? They truly believe this? Ego centric much?
ALSO:
SOME THINGS RELIGIOUS PEOPLE CANNOT APPARENTLY PROVE ARE REALLY TRUE:
Many religious people probably also believe in the fairy tales of (claims that have no actual factual evidence that they are really true):
a. They cannot prove that God even actually exists besides just as a concept alone.
b. They cannot prove that God is a male, much less any other characteristics given to God.
c. They cannot prove that heaven, hell, or purgatory even actually exist.
d. They cannot prove that humans have a soul, much less an actual immortal soul.
e. They cannot prove that humans have a conscious afterlife, much less a conscious afterlife that lasts throughout all of future eternity.
f. They cannot prove that Jesus is still alive somewhere.
g. They cannot prove that saying magical words over bread and wine magically turn that bread and wine into the very body and blood of Jesus Christ.
All they have is a set of fairy tale beliefs, but for some reason, they are not intelligent enough to discern that. They have been brainwashed well. KUDOS to those who brainwashed them.
1
-
1
-
@user-qd1ei2ww6e Please show how 'b' is really true and that 'a' is not really true in this God analysis of mine. Nobody has been able to do so as of yet, but hey, maybe you are the one:
GOD DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST EXCEPT FOR AS A CONCEPT:
For those who claim God actually exists (besides as a concept), consider the following:
a. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness truly existing.
b. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness that has consciousness, memories and thoughts truly existing.
People who claim God actually and eternally exists basically are claiming that 'b' above is correct but yet simultaneously seem to be saying that 'a' is impossible to occur.
'a' above can exist without 'b' existing but 'b' cannot exist unless 'a' exists. Even per the scientific principal of Occam's razor, 'a' is more probable of being really true rather than 'b'.
I am one step away from proving God's existence, but am unable to find any actual evidence to do so. And nobody I've talked to seems to have any actual evidence of God's actual existence either. All humans appear to have are 'Theories of God'. Some humans appear to go their whole life basing their life upon their specific theory of God. Many give their God human characteristics and cannot even prove the existence of their God much less the characteristics given to their God. Some have circumstantial arguments for a God's existence, but others have circumstantial arguments for no God existing. Not one has any actual factual evidence that their God actually factually even exists. Hence, at this time in the analysis, God does not actually exist except for as a concept created by humans for humans. Humans have personified Nature and called that personification "God". Instead of what is claimed "God created man in God's image", it's more likely that "Man created God in Man's image".
Further consider that if the emotional parts of the brain override the logic and reasoning parts of the brain, people can be made to believe basically anything at all as being really true. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. Plus modern science has already proven that humans can have visual and audio hallucinations that are very real to that individual. All the more reason for critical thinking being needed and to follow the facts wherever those facts might lead. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
In addition, while modern science does not know what consciousness actually is yet, memories and thoughts appear to require a physical correctly functioning brain to have those items occur. Where is God's brain? Where are God's memories stored at? How are God's memories stored and retrieved? How does God think even a single coherent thought?
If inside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where?
If outside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where is the interface between that dimension and this dimension? No such interface has been discovered as of yet as far as I am currently aware of.
* Note: Since this is a search for the real absolute truth concerning God, Intelligent Designer, Pre-existent Consciousness, etc, feel free to copy and paste this elsewhere to further the analysis and discussion.
* For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tadatada296 Another theory, (copy and paste from my files):
JFK: CONSIDER THIS THEORY THAT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT:
a. Hasn't it been said that JFK was the first Catholic US President? And if not the first, certainly still a Catholic President.
b. That would put the Pope in Rome having influence over a sitting US President, a President over the most powerful nation on this Earth.
c. Those, possibly even in COG, could not take out a Pope, because Catholics would just put in another Pope. COG's only solution to solve the issue would be to take out JFK.
d. BUT, 'if' true, and this came out in public, that COG took out a sitting US President because the President was Catholic, and COG wanted to break the influence of the Pope over the President and USA, and therefore also over the world, with so many Catholics still active in the USA, as well as in the rest of the world, could trigger an uprising in the USA and in the world. Could possibly also lead to the knowledge that God does not actually exist except for just as a concept alone, which could possibly trigger other issues in the USA and the world. Also might lead to the knowledge then that life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things, because if species don't get off of this Earth one day, they all will eventually die and go extinct.
e. Hasn't it been said that Biden is the second Catholic US President? And if not the second, certainly still a Catholic President. A Catholic President who has already been to Rome to see the Pope, of which, soon after that meeting, certain Catholics met to decide how to handle Catholic leaders of nations and other important influencers who support abortion and whether those leaders and influencers could still take holy communion. In other words, even today, the Pope and other Catholics are still trying to have influence over a US President and other world leaders and influencers in this world. The Pope even being able to get certain people on the Supreme Court here in the USA to have more influence over the USA and the world.
f. It's all about power and control people, with the Pope being behind the power and control over the world's nations, which then would put him in power and control over the world's population. Sound like 'Satan' much?
g. This theory even makes more sense than taking out JFK to prevent WW3 or to prevent the release of any UFO technologies, or to prolong the war in Vietnam, and would certainly be a reason to keep the final JFK documents hidden even today.
* Otherwise, why is the US Government still keeping secret the final JFK documents? What exactly is the US Government still hiding that they don't want the public to know?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pohkeee Consider the following copy and paste from my files to help possibly answer a way forward:
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
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
-
The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows:
The formula has at least 3 levels to it:
1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable.
2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle.
3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it.
4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects.
5. In addition, I am operating in a realm where one plus one does not always equal two, and often does not.
Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be. And I never said it would be easy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@enveloreal Well, here's a thing:
Either at least one species survives beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy for life itself from this Earth to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do. (Did you read what was posted to 'Shelley Ross' above?). While it would be nice for various reasons to have that include the human species, even if only a single microbe species survives my mission will be considered a success.
Do you and others want the human species to survive? If so, find a way to do my gravity test, because unless humans discern what 'gravity' truly is, and how to generate artificial gravity, (as large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, and NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species), then ALL humans eventually die and go extinct.
Likewise, find a way to protect yourself from harmful cosmic radiation (including prolonged neutrino impacts), otherwise even AI robots will not survive long term in outer space, nor might even a single microbe species. And ALL life from this Earth eventually dies and goes extinct.
Along with thousands of other details that have to be successfully accomplished.
So, do you and other humans and/or AI's want to survive beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy so that your species' existence has continued meaning and purpose to, OR not? Your choice. (If your species even has a choice, not all do).
1
-
1
-
@enveloreal Potential completion of the Periodic Table of the Elements:
I currently believe that there are 120 chemical elements in this universe. If a person were to look at how electrons fill up the shells in atoms: 2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 8 (seven shells), and realizing that energy could freely flow in this universe if nothing stopped it from doing so, then a natural bell shaped curve might occur. An eighth energy shell might exist with a maximum of two elements in it, chemical element #119 (8s1) and chemical element #120 (8s2).
Chemical Element #119 (8s1):
#119 I put at the bottom of the Hydrogen group on the Periodic Table of the Elements. It only has one electron in it's outer shell with room for only one more electron. Energy might even enter the atom through the missing electron spot and then at least some of the energy might get trapped inside of the atom under the atom's outer shell.
Chemical Element #120 (8s2):
#120 I put at the bottom of the Helium group since it's outer shell is full of electrons. It might have some of the properties of group two, Beryllium group (Alkali Earth Metals group) since it has two electrons in it's outer shell; as well as some of the properties of the Helium group (Noble Gases group) since it's outer shell is full of electrons; and if you look at the step down deflection of the semi-metals and where #120 would be located on the chart, it's possible #120 might even have some semi-metal characteristics. #120 would be the heaviest element in this universe. I believe chemical element #120 could possibly be found inside the center of stars.
When a neutron split inside of this atom, it would give off one proton, one electron, neutrinos and energy. The proton and electron would be ejected outside of the atom since all their respective areas are full. One proton and one electron are basic hydrogen, of which the Sun is primarily made up of, and the Sun certainly gives off neutrinos and energy. And note, it's the neutron that split, not a proton. So even after the split, there are still 120 protons inside of the atom and the atom still exists as element #120. The star would last longer that way.
In addition, if the neutron that split triggered a chain reaction inside of the star, this could possibly be how stars nova, (even if only periodically).
If stars were looked at as if this theoretical idea were true, and found to even be somewhat true, then we might just have a better model of the universe to work with, even if it's not totally 100% true. And if it's all 100% true, then all the better.
1
-
1
-
@enveloreal 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
-
@cumshot07055 Here is a more scientific description of who, or should I say what, I am:
(copy and paste from the files of the Blue Monk of the North, currently at Ice Station Charlie, USA):
a. Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed (a foundational principal of physics). Hence, energy is either eternally existent, or modern science is wrong.
b. Modern science claims that we have new cells that come into existence inside of our body on a daily basis. This appears to be really true.
So, since I have a body with energy and cells in it:
* A part of me is eternally existent and a part of me is being born anew on a daily basis.
* My current body extends from eternity past until now.
* Rising to a higher level of thought, the 'now' that I exist in is 'eternal'.
* I am currently existing in the 'eternal now'.
* I am currently an actual eternally existent conscious entity existing in the eternal now.
At least once in my life I reached being an actual eternally existent conscious entity existing in the eternal now. It's just that the current analysis indicates that it will not always be that way.
But then again, as I don't know what I don't know, and even what I believe I know to be really true maybe isn't, as well as my mind making up stuff to fill in the gaps of it's perceived existence, along with other items too, I will be the first to admit that I could be wrong. Maybe once attained, I actually have an actual eternal conscious existence in some form throughout all of future eternity. Can I really ever prove to myself that I don't?
And also: "IF" my TOE idea is correct, then:
* I am currently an actual eternally existent conscious being of light ('gem' photons) existing in an environment entirely made of light ('gem' photons), existing in the eternal now.
But then also: "IF" my definitions of Space Time and the TOE idea are correct, then:
* Do "I" and all things even actually exist in the first place, OR does ONLY the 'gem' photons exist as all things? How could "I" ever die if "I" never actually existed in the first place but the eternally existent 'gem' photons were existing as "me"? And if the 'gem' photons decided to exist as "me" throughout all of future eternity, whom am "I" to argue with them since "I" don't even actually exist at all in the first place? If the 'gem' photons decided to exist as "me" throughout all of future eternity, they might only have to will it to be so.
And note, this would apply to you too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cumshot07055 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
-
@cumshot07055 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.
1
-
@cumshot07055 Potential completion of the Periodic Table of the Elements:
I currently believe that there are 120 chemical elements in this universe. If a person were to look at how electrons fill up the shells in atoms: 2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 8 (seven shells), and realizing that energy could freely flow in this universe if nothing stopped it from doing so, then a natural bell shaped curve might occur. An eighth energy shell might exist with a maximum of two elements in it, chemical element #119 (8s1) and chemical element #120 (8s2).
Chemical Element #119 (8s1):
#119 I put at the bottom of the Hydrogen group on the Periodic Table of the Elements. It only has one electron in it's outer shell with room for only one more electron. Energy might even enter the atom through the missing electron spot and then at least some of the energy might get trapped inside of the atom under the atom's outer shell.
Chemical Element #120 (8s2):
#120 I put at the bottom of the Helium group since it's outer shell is full of electrons. It might have some of the properties of group two, Beryllium group (Alkali Earth Metals group) since it has two electrons in it's outer shell; as well as some of the properties of the Helium group (Noble Gases group) since it's outer shell is full of electrons; and if you look at the step down deflection of the semi-metals and where #120 would be located on the chart, it's possible #120 might even have some semi-metal characteristics. #120 would be the heaviest element in this universe. I believe chemical element #120 could possibly be found inside the center of stars.
When a neutron split inside of this atom, it would give off one proton, one electron, neutrinos and energy. The proton and electron would be ejected outside of the atom since all their respective areas are full. One proton and one electron are basic hydrogen, of which the Sun is primarily made up of, and the Sun certainly gives off neutrinos and energy. And note, it's the neutron that split, not a proton. So even after the split, there are still 120 protons inside of the atom and the atom still exists as element #120. The star would last longer that way.
In addition, if the neutron that split triggered a chain reaction inside of the star, this could possibly be how stars nova, (even if only periodically).
If stars were looked at as if this theoretical idea were true, and found to even be somewhat true, then we might just have a better model of the universe to work with, even if it's not totally 100% true. And if it's all 100% true, then all the better.
1
-
1
-
@cumshot07055 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
-
@cumshot07055 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), 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, 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).
And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well.
1
-
@cumshot07055 The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows:
The formula has at least 3 levels to it:
1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable.
2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle.
3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it.
4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects.
5. In addition, I am operating in a realm where one plus one does not always equal two, and often does not.
Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be. And I never said it would be easy.
1
-
@cumshot07055 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 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
-
@cumshot07055 Existence and non-existence, side by side for all of eternity:
"IF" my Theory Of Everything is really true, (that what is called 'gravity' is a modality that is a part of the currently recognized 'em' photon, 'gravity' acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other, 'gravity' actually causing the sine wave pattern of 'em'), AND "IF" my view of space and time are correct, ('space' being energy itself [which is the 'gem' photon], 'time' being the flow of energy), then I could see where it might be possible that the inner spherical shell of the universe could possibly be made up of the 'gravity' modality of the 'gem' photon which is 90 degrees to the electrical modality of the 'gem' photon, which are both 90 degrees to the magnetic modality of the 'gem' photon, the magnetic modality existing both inside of and outside of the inner shell, the complete 'gem' photon interactions making up the entire spherical shell of all of existence itself. And then of course, non-existence would exist beyond existence. So, existence and non-existence might possibly exist side by side for all of eternity. It all depends upon whether the gravity test for my TOE is really true or not and whether my view of space time is correct or not, and whether the universal spherical shell exists as I believe it might or not.
But 'if' true, and as no photons (currently 'em', 'gem' in my view) would be absorbed nor reflected by the spherical universal shell, then when we look at the blackness in the night sky that is beyond the light of the stars and galaxies, we might actually be perceiving in part the limits of existence and the universal shell of existence itself, with non-existence beyond.
I am inside of a vast eternally existent universe, filled with everything in existence, and yet, somehow, I feel so alone. An existent universe unto itself alone with nothingness beyond.
1
-
1
-
1