Gravity is Energy moving towards lower Energy

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Pincho Paxton, Mar 6, 2012.

  1. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,883
    This is what is fondly refered to as word salad. A word salad is made by adding some scientific terms from physics, math and cosomology. Then a dash of half understood scientific theory is added, then the whole thing is mixed together. The result is word salad which is what we have here.

    It is great to be interested in science and physics. I recommend that you spend time in the science section of the forum and you will learn alot. The overwhelming majority of what can be learned in the fringe section amounts to the antithesis of science.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    Hi Peters,

    Answering two questions will help at least me evaluate some of this.

    1. Where are you on this big blue planet?

    2. What do you do for a living, including schooling.

    Some of the members here have difficulty thinking beyond a couple measurements at a time aka 2 dimensional thinking. It doesn't mean they are right or wrong, it just means they have limitations to their imagination and find it perhaps even threatening when someone envisions things differently. Some often expect to see the chicken before it's hatched.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. peters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    17
    Sydney; pool tiler
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. peters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    17
    I'm a Sydney tiler. The reason for the word salad is that i'm trying, earnestly, to describe something that has not been scientifically identified yet. I'm looking, with our science at the edge and outside the universe. Current science is mostly looking towards the edge and are still grappling with something coming from nothing. The science beyond stretches our logic, sort of like a particle appearing uninvited in the middle of an atom. I find everyone is looking for something way too complex instead of a simple answer connecting everything. That particle, I believe, is acting like in entanglement or infinity + infinity where particles have reverted to pure energy and are everywhere at once until you look. Like an electron cloud. My unscientific education is inhibiting my ability to impart my thoughts though. sorry, but I do love the ultimate science.
     
  8. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    You can pick up a lot of input here from differing perspectives. As a tiler, you are likely familiar with patterns. Doing repetetive tasks that we could nearly perform in our sleep gives us time to think of other things in the process. Faraday was not formally schooled, but through imagination combined with a sense of logical reason, he developed a theory of electric fields that realized itself as the capacitor. Without his imagination we would not be using these machines today.

    As for your query, it can be demonstrated as infinite cold x infinite vacuum x arbitrary time will give us infinitesimal mass x infinite velocity x infinite time. In thermodynamics cold is defined as negative heat and a vacuum is defined as negative pressure. The math is elementary.

    A particle is born traveling at infinite velocity, still the same forces that generated it will work against it from the get go, so it will decelerate and eventually be forced back to its origin. Imagine this happening fast enough to expand into the volume of the universe in 1/43 billionths of a second. The primordial pattern begins.
     
  9. peters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    17
    Thank you for your generosity.
     
  10. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304


    This is simply nonsense.
     
  11. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    THIS is unimaginative nonsense.
     
  12. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    The term "pseudo" is a prefix in the English language that Webster defines as false, sham, fictitious, counterfeit, etcetera. Definitions evolve, often for the convenience of new conventions in science. In this case, pseudonumeric or perhaps pseudogeneratric, would be used in the context that we use "pseudocode" to describe an intended process our true code will perform. It is generic, in that example, because it would not matter what chosen language or compiler the programmer used, the pseudocode would still mean the same.



    In this we can derive the application of pseudo as "temporary" similar to its usage in "Pseudopodium." Thus we can apply the pseudo prefix to numeric, for example, in finite mathematics where a variable might be described, not as an actual set of integers, but as a description of the meaning. We can aptly form the term "pseudonumeric" from this case. Similarly we can apply to most anything that is "a rough or thumbnail sketch" of a concept as pseudopodious after the pseudopod definition used in cellular biology.



    It is from this process of pseudodefinition that we can derive and exchange ideas without the burden of spending a frustrating amount of time in arguments with those who so unimaginatively want nothing more than to argue. Unfortunately those who insist on purveying nothing more than pomp are left out because imagination and multi-dimensional thinking confuses them, so they have nothing more to offer than an insult to those discussing something imaginatively.
     
  13. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    I am lying.
     
  14. anonymous1 Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    peters, i think your right. space and energy, like how in binary there are only ones and zeros and you describe anything with only one and zero. gravity would be the relationship between the two, holding the ones and zeros together. when we look up at the night sky we see systems of systems within systems of ones and zeros, stars and space.
     
  15. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    :thumbsup:
     
  16. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    Gravity is energy moving toward lower energy:

    If we assume the equivilency of mass and energy, the movement of mass via gravity, goes in the direction of increasing mass density. As such, when gravity acts, mass/energy will flow from lower to higher mass/energy density.

    For example, if we have a large star and a bunch of space debris, the debris will move toward the star, and collect there. This is the direction of the zone of higher mass/energy. This is interesting because mass/energy, due to gravity, goes in the opposite direction of just energy. The heat from the star will flow toward the cooler space debris.

    In chemical engineering, entropy is modelled in terms of open systems, where mass and energy will flow across boundries and work cycles might also be in effect. These all impact energy conservation.

    The movement of a cloud of stella gas toward a star lowers the entropy because it will increase pressure and lower the volume. The loss of entropy will give off energy. This energy within an open system, will not go back to entropy like it will in a closed system. Rather the energy loss from the open system means a net entropy loss.

    The combined effect implies sparse mass has extra potential energy as entropy. When gravity acts, this mass-entropy lowers resulting in the output of heat. Because we have an open system, some of this heat energy is lost and can't go back into the exact amount of entropy; net lowering. Although gravity causes the mass/energy density to increase, there is a net loss of energy as heat from the lowering entropy, allowing energy to flow from higher to lower energy; into space.
     
  17. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
  18. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    There is a difference between discussing something with an open mind and simply making up random nonsense. If you think the superficial vacuous nonsense put forth in the last few posts is viable science discussion then you have a lot to learn about science. No one should be afraid to pitch novel ideas but if you don't temper the idea suggestion with some semblance of rationality and relevance than you might as well be just making up random words, since you're already making up random sentences.

    For example, you talk about multidimensional thinking. It's been my experience that those who have the worst conceptual grasp of multidimensional systems are laypersons. It's second nature to mathematicians and physicists to deal with high dimensional systems, even develop intuitive understanding of them based on lots of experience. The systems in quantum mechanics are infinite dimensional!

    Another example is your comment about 'the maths is elementary' in regards to infinite cold etc. I doubt you've ever actually done any such maths, actual working maths, because if you had you'd know how nonsensical what you said is. Unless you did some maths so trivial it is meaningless and physically irrelevant, as is often the case with laypersons trying to do mathematical physics.

    Can you provide this 'elementary maths'?
     
  19. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    I am lying.

    Any halfway decent math guy knows this.
     
  20. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
  21. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    hint: #36: I Mudd.
     
  22. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    It's obvious you don't understand the relevant physics but that doesn't give you license to be deliberately dishonest. What purpose does it serve?
     
  23. HectorDecimal Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    438
    Why? Because I gave you a math quiz you couldn't pass because it involved logic?

    So now you resort to name calling.

    From my perspectivbe you haven't demonstrated any understanding of, example of any physical model and you are asking me for math in a problem of logic as well as math and physics, when you can't even propose an antilogic to any of these theories. If you can't follow the concept of a pseudogeneratric definition of a proposed process, then how could you handle a multiplex list of numbers to crunch?

    Creative, imaginative people think differently than you do, AN. Doesn't make either dishonest. If there is no logic in the pseudocode, how can one expect his process to run properly?


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    This out of "Cosmos" by Baudmann/Hopkins/Nollett

    It is a planetary disk and there appears to be no ignited star. There might be a Brown Dwarf in the center.
     

Share This Page