It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Something from Nothing

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by wx4caster
 


Hmmm. Hot water. Then what about tornado's? Are they similar just on a smaller scale. or are they completely different.




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by wx4caster
 


Nice answer.


I have known for a while, but it just hit me how uneducated i am.....lol.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by Conclusion]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by wx4caster
 


Hmmm. Hot water. Then what about tornado's? Are they similar just on a smaller scale. or are they completely different.


much much different. but the overall storm spawning the twister is similar.... similar, not exactly alike. lol i guess i could go into a lesson about baroclinicity. ummm

there is no frontal boundary with a hurricane, and most thunderstorms are frontal. there are airmass thunderstorms but usually they are more short lived and less nasty... make sense?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by wx4caster
 


Yeah...sort of. There is so much energy in our atmosphere that it kills me to think that with everything people know we can not use it for our benefit. You sound like you might be able to help in that department.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Conclusion
 


there is enough energy in a paperclip to power ny city for a day... we simply do not understand the true nature of energy. that is what CERN is trying to do with the LHC



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by wx4caster
 


Sweet. I have read a little about the LHC, you know the god particle and such. It seems that ol Tesla wasn't crazy after all, ya know?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by wx4caster
 


Hey your a weather forcaster. You have access to radars right? Ever see anything strange or unexplainable on the screens...just a question if you don't want to answer its ok.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Negative energy is something out of nothing. It pops out of nowhere and lasts for a few millionths of a second. This happens when you create a vacuum between two metal plates. They defy [almost] all laws of physics but they are real and are something out of nothing which begs the question, "is nothing even possible?". I'd give you an online article if I could find one about it but you'll have to read Michio Kaku's Physics of the Impossible. It's extremely intriguing.

This is a literal point of view.

[edit on 7/15/09 by MoothyKnight]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Conclusion
 



The radars i work with probably arent what you are thinking of, i have seen strange things, but not in the UFO sense. I was working in Fallon Nevada for a bit tho, and i did see some strange lights in the sky, but that is pretty common out there near NSAWC



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by MoothyKnight
Negative energy is something out of nothing. It pops out of nowhere and lasts for a few millionths of a second. This happens when you create a vacuum between two metal plates. They defy [almost] all laws of physics but they are real and are something out of nothing which begs the question, "is nothing even possible?". I'd give you an online article if I could find one about it but you'll have to read Michio Kaku's Physics of the Impossible. It's extremely intriguing.

This is a literal point of view.

[edit on 7/15/09 by MoothyKnight]



This is virtual particles. This is not from nothing persay, just odd intantaneous instances of mass in a vacuum. But not from absolutely nothin



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   
You can never get something for nothing...

...but you can get A MASSIVE AMOUNT for _very little_.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by wx4caster
 


So newtonian laws go out the window at a certain reference point. after that do we automatically switch to the law of relativity?


Newtonian physics simply discards the relativistic parts of the equations of motion - you can do that because the values are so low, they may as well be zero for everyday events.

Relativistic equations include a comparison to light speed, so normal motion in our world is such a small fraction of light speed we can discard that part of the equation.

There was some discussion regarding how can you get something for nothing, or where did the big bang come from.

Here is a simple mathematical way that you could justify it;

0
0=0
1-1=0

1+(-1)=0

Now disperse the 1 and the -1 unevenly, and allow changes in function or characteristics to arise due to the differences in sign designation - and you have the universe.

This model is purely for argument - I am not implying this was the origin of the energy required to form the universe.

The discussion of the formation of hurricanes I find interesting - because I think that the formation of galaxies and solar systems arises in precisely the same way.

This is of course in contradiction of all the nice physics they teach in most universities - where the vacuum is empty except for quantum vibration and pair generation.

As far as I can tell, the universe is comprised of only two things - geometry and charge - magnetic charge arising as a component of electric charge. The vacuum pressure arises from physical forces - not an underlying force itself, this leads to gravity and inertia - gravity itself not being a separate force at all, but a product of pressure and electric charge.

The theory requires that the vacuum is in fact a fluid - a polar superfluid, acting within the magnetic field of the universe. The fluid is composed of polar particles of the Plank length (very small) which are comprised of a positron and electron - and a very specific geometry which I am not yet able to discern - I believe it is a 6 fold geometry - but must exist in more than 4 dimensions, 5 would do - but I am looking at 7. As the fluid suffers changes in density, then currents form - and the polar particles turn in the electro-magnetic field - creating celestial bodies.

At the center of each is the lowest pressure and fastest spinning - this produces black holes - which is simply a lack of any fluid.

The super fluid is responsible for the forces of gravity and inertia.

I completely discount there being a strong nuclear force - according to this theory the currently accepted atomic model is wrong.

The nucleus of an atom is simply an area of high energy which prohibits the entry of the vacuum fluid - this once again produces a black hole - so what we can detect of an atom is the low energy edges or fringe of the waves that comprise the atom itself. At the center lies a black hole with zero diameter - what we measure as protons and neutrons are simply high energy waves created by the interaction of electrons and positrons from which I theorize all matter is constructed.

The groupings of the lower particles, such as quarks are wave fragments - not actual particles.

Waves are usually portrayed as going up and down, but this is a misconception - waves 'orbit' or move in a spiral - so electro magnetic waves appear to move through the electric and magnetic fields at once - they are self propagating, but they do move through the vacuum fluid medium.

Anyways - the theory is fairly long, thats probably the heart of it though.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   
ARTWORK!
Art is taking nothing and turning it into something
I know you mean literally but my explanations more beautiful



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 


Just a question... are you referring to einstein's "aether"?

and also, please further support your statement about EM Waves not performing in a particle funtion, for the laymen lackies like me



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Even nothing has to be something even If you think about a possibility of having a absolute vacuum.

If you think of dimensions you can have it both ways: infinite big and infinite small.
But not one without the other!! You cant have a infinite big dimension with out having infinite small dimensions within it. Or the other way around. There is always a dimension out side the infinite small dimension as well.

We say that energy can never disappear. But we cant prove that in any way!
But we say that it can't and that is accepted by every one as a law. And since that is the law that we work by. We cant imagine a creation or a creator.
We say that energy has always been there. But we know that all energy has a source of some kind. So if we did have the observation tools to track energy back in time some how. We would fine a source.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by spy66


Even nothing has to be something even If you think about a possibility of having a absolute vacuum.

If you think of dimensions you can have it both ways: infinite big and infinite small.
But not one without the other!! You cant have a infinite big dimension with out having infinite small dimensions within it. Or the other way around. There is always a dimension out side the infinite small dimension as well.

We say that energy can never disappear. But we cant prove that in any way!
But we say that it can't and that is accepted by every one as a law. And since that is the law that we work by. We cant imagine a creation or a creator.
We say that energy has always been there. But we know that all energy has a source of some kind. So if we did have the observation tools to track energy back in time some how. We would fine a source.





your assumptions are incorrect. if we allow for energy/matter to dissapear then we would have to hold true a FINITE system and all would dissapear and motion would stop due to entropy. we on the other hand are seeing the universe expand at an accelerating speed which is impossible if you allow for the dissolvement of energy/matter.




posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 


I just have a comment to your equation.

0+0=0

Where did you get your + from ?

+ means that you dont have a empty space of energy. + is a positive energy or pressure. That means there is matter or energy present in time space.


You have to remember every symbel has a power.

You know!!! thats also why people get this equation wrong as well.

How many changes do you need to change -4 to become +4.

I bet every one would say 8 changes. But thats not true at all.

Is it 9 or 10 ?

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by wx4caster
 


To be honest you dont know what is expanding. If i told you that it ain't space that is expanding but rather energy and matter changing dimension what would you say?

If space is infinite big it cant expand.

If space is infinite full of energy it cant expand or multiply. Because it cant become bigger then it already is. Nothing can expand beyond the infinite?
It can only change dimension within the infinite dimension of space time.

If you think about pressure. You will never get more pressure then what is applied by force or power.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


well the availability of vacuum is infinite, or rather the idea is. a finite number of marbles can expand infinitely without hinderence in an infinite vacuum.

you would have to describe your proposed boundaries, and reasoning for your limitations of the universe and availablity of vacuum space.

(now this is getting good!)



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by wx4caster
reply to post by spy66
 


well the availability of vacuum is infinite, or rather the idea is. a finite number of marbles can expand infinitely without hinderence in an infinite vacuum.

you would have to describe your proposed boundaries, and reasoning for your limitations of the universe and availablity of vacuum space.

(now this is getting good!)



I got a question. If you have a infinite vacuum where did you get your finite marbles from.
A absolute vacuum has no matter. No energy. No temperature and No pressure.

If the infinite vacuum exists where did the finite marbles come from?

You can only have one infinte there is no room for two.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join