Exposing the Myths of Settled Science

This is all poppycock about information wars and ahem.... Lol information is energy

Angelic Resurrection
This is all poppycock about information wars and ahem.... Lol information is energy

Might want to learn about quantum information and how it pertains to systems. Especially if your trying to prove a new theory like time controls gravity.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Arbitrageur


You didnt respond to the main query of mine, which is why and how can physicsts claim that there is a particle component of EM radiation? In what way is EM radiation a particle, like a ball is a particle?

Here are analogies which I thought of when thinking about this topic.

First, Imagine you and I are holding a jump rope not completely taught but some bit of slack in it, and you move you arm up with jump rope in hand and then bring it down to an equilibrium briskly. If you are familiar with this kind of event, you will know it would create a single arc in the rope which would travel from you to me. Is this the kind of particle light is envisioned to be? Is this an excitation in the jump rope field?

Well now to make it more complex and true to perceived reality, we know that when light is created from an electrons movement, it doesnt just create one singular line/jump rope of energy, so to make the analogy more accurate would we imagine you having 9999 or infinite number of arms in the diameter of your body (you representing the electron) all holding jump ropes that span the entire universe and are connected to every other electron as well? I tried to bring up this question before and am still unsure, but when light is created form an electron is it a 2-d plane of light or 3-d (meaning a sphere of light increasing its area from the particle of creation), 2-d plane being like if the rings of saturn started on its surface and then increasingly traveled away from the surface? If light comes into existence 2d like the later, in the example of you having many arms around your diameter attached to many ropes/lines of force, arent there also many ropes attached all over your body, is there a certain space between the lines? Or is there no space where there are not lines, and if that is true, why does light not expand 3-d sphere like (im not saying it doesnt, just not sure if i have heard which yet)?

Another analogy is; you know those shower heads that have like 50 holes in them. Imagine water being passed through the shower head at full blast constantly, and the shower head itself represents a material , the holes represent the electrons of the material. This analogy fails when you consider the water quickly falling out of order due to gravity, but maybe if we imagine the shower head moving very quickly we can get a longer image in our minds of the water that will be trailing behind it. So the shower head is vibrated, and the collective water creates a wave pattern. If we could see the smallest increments of time and space we would see the electron (hole in shower head) begin to be accelerated relative to its prior momentum and velocity, and so at that point the water or em field that was prior at equilibrium is seen relatively and actually increase in energy, this water that momentarily spurts out of the hole, the smallest increment of which, that exists for the time it does, is the particle nature? Classically as a fluid the water is waving, but also fluid in the air sometimes clumps together, and that can be seen as particles like rain drops, but those raindrops consist of molecules, are molecules particles? Molecules consist of atoms, atoms are considered particles, though they are composed of electron clouds, and sometimes electrons are considered particles..though they are fundamental clouds... and the particles that make up the nucleus are nothing but standing waves right, made of quark interactions, are quarks particles or waves? Are they excitations in fields or matter, what is an excitation in a field, what is a field? Is the EM field matter or energy? What must energy appear like to be considered a particle, how is EM excitation a particle? Is the field made of infinite or near infinite particles tied together? What is tieing them together particles?

I know I dont understand this stuff well or at all, I am not proud of my knowledge but only ashamed of my ignorance, not my ignorance of sciences theory, but ignorance of truth, I do not believe science currently beholds truth in their minds, they are so proud, but not ashamed. I plead to any self titled smart physicist to clear my confusion on the matter of the nature of fundamental particles and waves and fields, in my last few replies all the questions you need to work from are there, if you have read what I have been writing and have a knack for understanding, you will know what I am seeking.

reply to post by dragonridr


Your understanding of information is quite whacky, and not because its over my head and you are right and it will need some time for me to get used to your superior and well acclaimed intellectual concept, its because your understanding of the concept is skewed. It is meaningless to say information is fundamental. Information is a word created and used to point to the existence of quantity and quality of energy. Energy is information, because it is quantity and quality. Energy isnt information because its information. Like the universe isnt words and numbers. Unless you are arguing that the universe is an illusion and not physical, but if it is physical and real, then yes the universe is information in that we can distinguish an apple as a different thing from your head, and the apple has an extensive history that led to is creation, and has molecules that make it up, and all those energetic events are like words and numbers that were added together which is time, that resulted in the product of an apple, but the way you are talking about information makes it seem as if physical things dont really exist, only immaterial and non energetic words or numbers exist, like 0 and 1, and combinations of these exist, and there is no reason for infinite 0s and 1s to exist but they do, and when they interact with one another they equal non physical representations of the things we classically see and experience and are.

My point is, stuff is primary, and stuff is information by definition, and information is not a thing unto itself, it itself is not a thing, it is a word used to describe the thingness of things. Mass reacts to gravity because of circumstance and law, the mass that creates the gravity is information in and of itself, the gravity field is information in and of itself, and the mass heading towards that gravity field is information in and of itself, and the mass then interacting in real time with the gravity field is information in and of itself, but all of that is not really information in and of itself, it is energy/matter. pft, I know I made some mistakes with this argument and am potentially wrong and silly, but im trying to say, information does not exist outside of stuff, information is stuff, energy/matter, so it just irks me to to hear it said information is most primal and fundamental essence, because it makes it seem like you are implying there is some immaterial essence that exists beyond stuff, energy/matter.

ImaFungi
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Your understanding of information is quite whacky, and not because its over my head and you are right and it will need some time for me to get used to your superior and well acclaimed intellectual concept, its because your understanding of the concept is skewed. It is meaningless to say information is fundamental. Information is a word created and used to point to the existence of quantity and quality of energy. Energy is information, because it is quantity and quality. Energy isnt information because its information. Like the universe isnt words and numbers. Unless you are arguing that the universe is an illusion and not physical, but if it is physical and real, then yes the universe is information in that we can distinguish an apple as a different thing from your head, and the apple has an extensive history that led to is creation, and has molecules that make it up, and all those energetic events are like words and numbers that were added together which is time, that resulted in the product of an apple, but the way you are talking about information makes it seem as if physical things dont really exist, only immaterial and non energetic words or numbers exist, like 0 and 1, and combinations of these exist, and there is no reason for infinite 0s and 1s to exist but they do, and when they interact with one another they equal non physical representations of the things we classically see and experience and are.

My point is, stuff is primary, and stuff is information by definition, and information is not a thing unto itself, it itself is not a thing, it is a word used to describe the thingness of things. Mass reacts to gravity because of circumstance and law, the mass that creates the gravity is information in and of itself, the gravity field is information in and of itself, and the mass heading towards that gravity field is information in and of itself, and the mass then interacting in real time with the gravity field is information in and of itself, but all of that is not really information in and of itself, it is energy/matter. pft, I know I made some mistakes with this argument and am potentially wrong and silly, but im trying to say, information does not exist outside of stuff, information is stuff, energy/matter, so it just irks me to to hear it said information is most primal and fundamental essence, because it makes it seem like you are implying there is some immaterial essence that exists beyond stuff, energy/matter.

In the most fundamental aspect everything is transfer of information. This is where quantum physics leads you by the way isnt my theory i more tend towards Einstein and interactions but particle physicists on the other hand see everything in the light of information transfer. This is how they explain particle duality it isnt the particle acts one way or another simply that it holds the information of both. Sometimes this information manifests as a particle other times as a wave. In Quantum mechanics its believed you can break down every system to its most basic. In quantum physics they see space as Hilbert space at its most basic a set of points. These points transfer information from one to the next. This is the main component of string theory as well.

So as information is transferred from one point to the next this causes interactions we see as the fundamental forces. The quantum world is a very strange place now had you asked me 10 years ago if i believed this to be true id have said no. But currently with the advances being made in quantum computing and other areas it does look like the universe indeed just transfers information from one point to the next. Does that mean the universe is a hologram well no.In quantum mechanics the principle that complete information about a physical system at one point in time should determine its state at any other time. And further that this information is encoded in its wave function up until it collapses. And this interaction is controlled by a unitary operator (no this isnt god ) which is really just Hilbert space with the points i mentioned earlier.See people misunderstand when physicists discuss wave packets or particles or even gluons for example think of it as information that tells things how to interact im not sure if if your getting this if not ill try to find some videos to help.

dragonridr

So as information is transferred from one point to the next this causes interactions we see as the fundamental forces.

Can you give me an example of information that exists that is not energy or matter? Also give me an example of information you are referring to that is transferred from one point to the next? What do you mean by the word information? If by the word information you mean; electron that has physical characteristics such as location, velocity, angular momentum, spin, intrinsic energy, interaction with local fields, then there is no need for the word information, it is not that "information exists", its that the electron exists, other energy and matter exists, and according to its intrinsic physical nature and circumstances, events and actions take place. Besides the electron existing and the totality of its characteristics, in what way does "information exist", where and how does it exist and what is it?


All I am trying to express is that information cannot exist without energy/matter/stuff existing, so by default of energy/matter/stuff existing information exists, because information is the quality and quantity of that stuff. "information" is not forcing things to happen, the intrinsic nature, quality, of the quantity of things that exist forces things to happen, things that happen, is logic, cause and affect, information.

If a baseball can be referred to as a particle and something occurs as to where I throw a baseball and it travels for 100 feet in an oscillating up and down motion, (idk maybe this could be possible with some type of set up of magnets, a long ceiling of S pole facing down, long floor of N pole facing up, and the ball is some type of magnet...I dont know exactly how this scenario would work but imagine it could...maybe if the ceiling is N and S pole repeating and they are all very small facing downward...idk), You can say that this baseball or particle is traveling like a wave, it is traveling in a wave motion, but the baseball or particle itself is not a wave, its fundamental essence and nature is not a wave. It is a singular object that when referred to as behaving wave like is not in and of itself oscillating as a body, like its fabric and innards are not alternatively traveling up and down, it as a whole particle entity is traveling in a pattern of a wave.

So now, if a photon are like little baseballs, that are single objects, that when created move up and down in a wave like motion, it is (in my grand opinion) false to say that a photon is a wave. If however when photons are created in reality, they are not like baseballs or particles, but more like a rippling of a medium, then a photon or em radiation is a wave, it is not a specific and singular object that is moving up and down in relation to all else, it is an object that is intimately connected to other objects, or potentially a massive object, if thats what a field is, and a specific area of this massive object, has the inherent ability to be rippled, or waved.

Follow up query, is there a maximum energy photon? If we exponentially innovated a machine over time that could increasingly 'shake' electrons at higher and higher velocities (and perhaps this occurred in a super vacuum sealed room, to try and see if the em field could be maxed out, or what would happen with an overload of EM energy in one area...I think I know that photons are not subject to pauli exclusion principle, so does that mean if light could be confined to a single area, the theoretical maximum limit of EM radiation that can exist in that area is theoretical total of electrons of the universe that could be shaken with the maximum amount of frequency... and even then it wouldnt react with itself? we wouldnt be able to see it, because it being contained would insinuate its light not entering out eyes ) what would happen eventually? Is this pretty much the idea of stars and maybe supernovae (like they are shaking electrons more violently then any hypothetical machine could?)?

reply to post by ImaFungi


Ok i think i have a way to explain this to you. Lets talk about Left and right handed quarks.So a quarks combined charges give the proton its charge.
now if we were to add up the masses of the quarks you do not get the mass of the proton. Instead, the mass of the proton is dependent on how the quarks swing. The oscillations of the quarks are also central for a variety of physical phenomena. So its not the quark thats important but the information it has or in this case its spin. All spin is bottom line information stored in the quark. Simply buy changing its information we change its properties. When we truly hit the point of building particles just like in star trek replicators it will be nothing more then altering the information they contain. Does that make more sense?

dragonridr
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Ok i think i have a way to explain this to you. Lets talk about Left and right handed quarks.So a quarks combined charges give the proton its charge.
now if we were to add up the masses of the quarks you do not get the mass of the proton. Instead, the mass of the proton is dependent on how the quarks swing. The oscillations of the quarks are also central for a variety of physical phenomena. So its not the quark thats important but the information it has or in this case its spin. All spin is bottom line information stored in the quark. Simply buy changing its information we change its properties. When we truly hit the point of building particles just like in star trek replicators it will be nothing more then altering the information they contain. Does that make more sense?

I know what you mean and are saying, but I think you are mistaken by your use and ideal of the term information. I asked a lot of questions in my last reply to you that you didnt answer, did you read what I said at all, about information not being something that exists, things that are certain ways and that move exist. The details of their nature, the ways they move and what they are can be called information. So yes because there is a flat surface that extends for some distance and then reaches an angle and downward slope, thats all information, and me rolling a bowling ball on the flat surface towards to slope also contains a bevy of information, the entire process from me picking up the bowling ball, and sending signals to make my arm move, and it can be called information the exact amount of energy I expend in tossing the ball, and the mass of the ball, and the smoothness of its surface area, and the smoothness of the ground, the resistance between the two, and the level of gravity, and the distance from the slope, and the amount of speed increased as the ball passes over the edge and down the slope, and the amount of less energy it would have required to make the ball stop before the slope...this is all "information", but really, this is all energy/matter interacting with energy/matter. Information is only a word to describe the nature of energy and matter, it is not a thing or entity or essence unto itself. Spin or velocity or angular momentum or radiation does not exist without energy and matter. Just like letters and numbers cannot exist without energy or matter, by proxy of stuff existing, that stuff is automatically information, but information is just a word used to describe all the qualities of all the quantities of stuff, the stuff is what exists and is real, their interactions and spins and energy is real and existing, the eternal cause and affect of energy and itself is real and existing.

Ok let me just try to see what you mean...

You are saying an electron traveling through space is information, the information of this existence = electron traveling through space, at a velocity, with angular momentum maybe and spin. And this electron is heading directly towards an atom and so this electron is finally about to collide with this atom, this is a transfer of information, in real time the universe computes the speed of the electron, and whether or not the atom can use an electron in its orbital or if the electron is going to fast for it, this is all information, that only exists exactly as these objects. so then the electron exists as part of this atom,and this is information because the word information means, that which exists and that which is occurring to that which exists, and why that which occurs to that which exists occurs. Ugh this is so annoying, its meaningless semantics. The term information has no special context, it is equal to 'energy/matter', try to explain a difference between energy/matter and information?

I understand that the universe is physical information, but the originally created word used to describe the information that exists is energy/matter. Say there is a rock in space spinning, what direction is it rotating? Its entirely relative to the perspective you view it. I know that the universe is physical information because it can be quantized and named. A man has many different body parts, a man can eat an apple, and then mate with a women, and 9 months later they can have a baby. I used those words to describe an quantitative and qualitative energetic event that can occur in reality, the words I used represent objects of varying complexity and abstract nature when delving into things like time and tense. The stuff and what it is forced to do comes before the naming of the stuff or knowing of the stuff (unless god did it) the stuff and its nature is primal, its existence is tautological. There is no need to refer to information, or add causes that arent there; you say a rock spinning alone in space is information of a specific type existing, I say it is exactly what it is a rock spinning. When a ball heading toward this rock gets close enough to be hit by the rock and the spinning of the rock causes the ball to deflect a specific direction, one in which the ball would not have traveled if the rock was not spinning, you say information caused this event, I say the rock spinning caused the event. We are saying the same things and we agree, you and physics have just taken the word information and said; this word means all the stuff, and all the stuff the stuff does, so whenever you look at stuff, you are looking at information.

ImaFungi
If a baseball can be referred to as a particle and something occurs as to where I throw a baseball and it travels for 100 feet in an oscillating up and down motion, (idk maybe this could be possible with some type of set up of magnets, a long ceiling of S pole facing down, long floor of N pole facing up, and the ball is some type of magnet...I dont know exactly how this scenario would work but imagine it could...maybe if the ceiling is N and S pole repeating and they are all very small facing downward...idk), You can say that this baseball or particle is traveling like a wave, it is traveling in a wave motion, but the baseball or particle itself is not a wave, its fundamental essence and nature is not a wave. It is a singular object that when referred to as behaving wave like is not in and of itself oscillating as a body, like its fabric and innards are not alternatively traveling up and down, it as a whole particle entity is traveling in a pattern of a wave.

So now, if a photon are like little baseballs, that are single objects, that when created move up and down in a wave like motion, it is (in my grand opinion) false to say that a photon is a wave. If however when photons are created in reality, they are not like baseballs or particles, but more like a rippling of a medium, then a photon or em radiation is a wave, it is not a specific and singular object that is moving up and down in relation to all else, it is an object that is intimately connected to other objects, or potentially a massive object, if thats what a field is, and a specific area of this massive object, has the inherent ability to be rippled, or waved.

Follow up query, is there a maximum energy photon? If we exponentially innovated a machine over time that could increasingly 's hake' electrons at higher and higher velocities (and perhaps this occurred in a super vacuum sealed room, to try and see if the em field could be maxed out, or what would happen with an overload of EM energy in one area...I think I know that photons are not subject to pauli exclusion principle, so does that mean if light could be confined to a single area, the theoretical maximum limit of EM radiation that can exist in that area is theoretical total of electrons of the universe that could be shaken with the maximum amount of frequency... and even then it wouldnt react with itself? we wouldnt be able to see it, because it being contained would insinuate its light not entering out eyes ) what would happen eventually? Is this pretty much the idea of stars and maybe supernovae (like they are shaking electrons more violently then any hypothetical machine could?)?

Ok lets discuss a photon first lets define it because it can mean multiple things. So ill pick one particle physics sees it as naturally a particle with zero mass,no electric charge and an indefinite life time. This is the base unit that forms electromagnetic waves. As it moves its interactions are or lack of them depending are from the properties it has (information). We can alter these properties to get them to do other things like polarization for example. A photon in and of itself isnt a wave it will vibrate at a frequency and when we add these together they form waves. As far as an EM field being maxed out well yeah it could never really thought of it like this. But yes if you increase energy to a particle it will jump up to a higher energy state when it does that i guess you could say it reached its limit.

Now the last part im not sure what you mean maybe its late or just not rapping my head around it but supernovas arent shaking off electrons there actually a by product of the strong and weak nuclear force.The theory is something like this he core collapse also triggers a shockwave that propagates outward, blowing away the outer layers of the star.After several hours for the shockwave covers the distance to the outermost layers of the star in the process parts of the star are blown in to space. But this wave never quite makes it to the surface because gravity pulls it back and just like a hammer smashes the core again making it even denser. This again can cause another collapse and the process starts over. This can form a black hole or neutron star depending on mass.

dragonridr



Ok lets discuss a photon first lets define it because it can mean multiple things. So ill pick one particle physics sees it as naturally a particle with zero mass,no electric charge and an indefinite life time. This is the base unit that forms electromagnetic waves. As it moves its interactions are or lack of them depending are from the properties it has (information). We can alter these properties to get them to do other things like polarization for example. A photon in and of itself isnt a wave it will vibrate at a frequency and when we add these together they form waves.

So how do you imagine the EM field? Infinite photon balls? How are they connected? how are they existing before EM waves are created locally in the field?

You say a photon in and of itself isnt a wave, but I thought the whole conundrum with the double slit experiment is that when 1 photon is fired at the slits there is an interference pattern on the sheet...or something. I thought there is a scenario where 1 photon behaves like a wave, and thats why photons and other fundamental particles like an electron are said to be particle life and wave like.

Now the last part im not sure what you mean maybe its late or just not rapping my head around it but supernovas arent shaking off electrons there actually a by product of the strong and weak nuclear force.The theory is something like this he core collapse also triggers a shockwave that propagates outward, blowing away the outer layers of the star.After several hours for the shockwave covers the distance to the outermost layers of the star in the process parts of the star are blown in to space. But this wave never quite makes it to the surface because gravity pulls it back and just like a hammer smashes the core again making it even denser. This again can cause another collapse and the process starts over. This can form a black hole or neutron star depending on mass.

Well I was thinking about if there was a limit as to how much EM radiation could exist in a single smallish area (if there were hypothetical indestructible walls or for some imaginary reason the em radiation stayed in one area where it was being directed to exist), I was thinking if there is not some weird things that would occur as the energy levels go higher, it the only limiting factor the device hypothetically build able that would use all the energy in the universe to as violently as possible to the highest possible frequency and beyond (is there a limit, or a beyond that, and beyond that), and then I though maybe an example of this is super novae, extremely energetic radiation events, because I mentioned electrons because I thought radiation comes into existence due to charged particles...so in nuclear force events like super novae that cause massive frequencies of radiation, is this still due to charged particles coupled to the EM field being accelerated vigorously?

ImaFungi

dragonridr



Ok lets discuss a photon first lets define it because it can mean multiple things. So ill pick one particle physics sees it as naturally a particle with zero mass,no electric charge and an indefinite life time. This is the base unit that forms electromagnetic waves. As it moves its interactions are or lack of them depending are from the properties it has (information). We can alter these properties to get them to do other things like polarization for example. A photon in and of itself isnt a wave it will vibrate at a frequency and when we add these together they form waves.

So how do you imagine the EM field? Infinite photon balls? How are they connected? how are they existing before EM waves are created locally in the field?

You say a photon in and of itself isnt a wave, but I thought the whole conundrum with the double slit experiment is that when 1 photon is fired at the slits there is an interference pattern on the sheet...or something. I thought there is a scenario where 1 photon behaves like a wave, and thats why photons and other fundamental particles like an electron are said to be particle life and wave like.

Now the last part im not sure what you mean maybe its late or just not rapping my head around it but supernovas arent shaking off electrons there actually a by product of the strong and weak nuclear force.The theory is something like this he core collapse also triggers a shockwave that propagates outward, blowing away the outer layers of the star.After several hours for the shockwave covers the distance to the outermost layers of the star in the process parts of the star are blown in to space. But this wave never quite makes it to the surface because gravity pulls it back and just like a hammer smashes the core again making it even denser. This again can cause another collapse and the process starts over. This can form a black hole or neutron star depending on mass.

Well I was thinking about if there was a limit as to how much EM radiation could exist in a single smallish area (if there were hypothetical indestructible walls or for some imaginary reason the em radiation stayed in one area where it was being directed to exist), I was thinking if there is not some weird things that would occur as the energy levels go higher, it the only limiting factor the device hypothetically build able that would use all the energy in the universe to as violently as possible to the highest possible frequency and beyond (is there a limit, or a beyond that, and beyond that), and then I though maybe an example of this is super novae, extremely energetic radiation events, because I mentioned electrons because I thought radiation comes into existence due to charged particles...so in nuclear force events like super novae that cause massive frequencies of radiation, is this still due to charged particles coupled to the EM field being accelerated vigorously?

Ok first em fields are caused literally by space.An electromagnetic field is the motion of an electromagnetic charge moving through space .It forms from two things if the electric charge stands still we get an electric field.If the electric charge moves through space we get a magnetic field. Remember how i was telling you about points in space transferring information.How space responds depends on the information it gets.Now we combine these two together you get the electromagnetic field.Which is considered as having its own existence in space apart from the charges or currents (a stream of moving charges) with which it may be related.This is essentially a electromagnetic wave as these charges move through space from one point to another.So in a way though not all ways an electromagnetic field can be described as a wave transporting electromagnetic energy.

Now your misunderstanding the double slit experiment a bit it didnt prove a particle is a wave. In physics a particle is just a cloud of energy. how to explain this with out confusing you ok you know in school they showed you those neat charts with the atom and its Protons Neutrons and Electrons well its wrong. In truth atoms work on probabilities. In the atom Electrons, protons, neutrons are popping in and out of existence constantly. Scientists don't know why, they don't know where they go. They just know they do. This is where theories like string theory comes in. The double slit experiment proved that these particles are poping in and out and only when measured do they behave like a particle. But when we arent looking they can be anywhere.Meaning simply until we observe the particle it is in multiple places and we Refer to this as a wave function. Simply put you can look at this as the particle being in all its possible energy states. The double slit experiment isnt a wave like you were thinking its an analogy used to help people understand interference patterns.And in physics analogies can do as much damage as good if you dont understand the principle.

As far as the last point you cant get an electromagnetic charge to stand still if you do its no longer an EM charge its an electric charge so no theirs no limit to the amount an area of space can have. I better get to bed but i hope your at least getting some of what im trying to say physics is hard to teaach or learn just through text. Because you lack the ability to brain storm and just shoot off questions until you can piece it together in your head.

Mary Rose
I'm not really a proponent of the electric universe. I think the aether is more fundamental.

Maybe they're the same thing.

Tesla researcher Gerry Vassilatos says this in "The Broadcast Power of Nikola Tesla, (Part 2)":

Aether, in Tesla’s lexicon, was space flowing electricity: a gas of superlative and transcendent qualities.

reply to post by Mary Rose


Tesla may be the greatest engineer we've ever seen but a scientist he was not. Many things he is currently credited for are incorrectly attributed to him. Alternating Current for example was developed by Faraday not Tesla. Tesla certainly improved upon it but he wasn't the first. Tesla was a big proponent of X-rays but was absolutely clueless as to how dangerous they were. He had a great mind but was wrong just as often as he was right. He was no god and his hypothesis should not be taken as gospel.

reply to post by peter vlar


His x-ray was not your x-ray.

He was an inventor and a creative genius. He has a long, long list of inventions. Inventions are what really matter.

Mary Rose
reply to post by peter vlar

 

His x-ray was not your x-ray.

He was an inventor and a creative genius. He has a long, long list of inventions. Inventions are what really matter.

He was very smart but he had no concept of the forces he experimented with. He was not a scientist he was an inventor it wasnt a requirement to understand the science. He produced microwaves and x rays not realizing the dangers they possessed. He has been credited with alot that just wasnt true either he tended to exaggerate and make outlandish claims but in this time period that was normal.His plasma research was all ready done by a German physicist named John Wilhelm.He merely copied alot of work allready established. You can see he didnt understand the forces he played with when you read his reports while playing with static electricity and even plasma's he was clueless as to what was actually happening so he merely tried to describe the effects he saw. Happens all the time with inventors they dont really understand whats going on in there invention and often miss represent what is actually happening.

Mary Rose
reply to post by peter vlar

 

His x-ray was not your x-ray.

He was an inventor and a creative genius. He has a long, long list of inventions. Inventions are what really matter.

You're absolutely correct. His X-ray is not mine. That's because he had no idea what he was working with and tha I to Edison we are aware of his dangerous unfettered use of X-rays are and can build machines to use them more safely and know enough to shield ourselves with lead. Inventing things doesn't make him an expert on matters of cosmology though. I'm not trying to take away from his numerous and amazing contributions but you've got to utilize some perspective here and realize he was human and thus fallible. He made mistakes, the wether being one.

From "The Electro-Magnetic Radiation Pressure (EMRP) Gravity Theory":

Abstract

This paper aims at providing a satisfying theory for the yet unknown mechanism for gravity. It is well known that the law of gravitation was mathematically described as a field theory by Einstein's general theory of relativity as early as 1916, however, although I have no doubt that its mathematics is correct, GR offers absolutely no mechanism to describe why gravity works the way it does. It is hereby proposed that extremely high frequency, electromagnetic waves sourced by diffuse unpolarized cosmic waves in the upper gamma frequency spectrum, sometimes also referred to as zero point energy pervades all space. Radiation pressure imbalance of such highly penetrating extragalactic incoming radiation, acting through all matter is held responsible for pushing matter together. . . .

reply to post by Mary Rose


Imagine looking down at the galaxy and it is so small the planets look like Molecules and Atoms.

If you take a needle and poke the planets and stars around it may be a lot like this:

Moving Atoms: Making The World's Smallest Movie
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA4QWwaweWA
www.youtube.com...

Mary Rose
From "The Electro-Magnetic Radiation Pressure (EMRP) Gravity Theory":

Abstract

This paper aims at providing a satisfying theory for the yet unknown mechanism for gravity. It is well known that the law of gravitation was mathematically described as a field theory by Einstein's general theory of relativity as early as 1916, however, although I have no doubt that its mathematics is correct, GR offers absolutely no mechanism to describe why gravity works the way it does. It is hereby proposed that extremely high frequency, electromagnetic waves sourced by diffuse unpolarized cosmic waves in the upper gamma frequency spectrum, sometimes also referred to as zero point energy pervades all space. Radiation pressure imbalance of such highly penetrating extragalactic incoming radiation, acting through all matter is held responsible for pushing matter together. . . .

there is a similar theory to this i read though they dont try to link it to charges. An electromagnetic field doesnt effect everything gravity does.