# How Do they Know ours is a Zero Energy Universe?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Robittybob1, Dec 15, 2011.

1. ### Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
Nope, I avoided it to make my theory a real attempt at starting from scratch. We never had it at school, and I never did it at college. So I tried to work out the whole of science from a blank page. But that doesn't matter, it was actually a good idea. Besides, fixing the electron actually removes a particle from my atom. So it makes my atom simpler. It already had holes in it, I put an extra particle in there as an electron because science had an electron mass. I now have an electron negative mass, but being as mass isn't understood, I don't mind having a different mass. Gravity in a hole must be mass so my reversed version works fine.

Last edited: Dec 16, 2011

3. ### Robittybob1BannedBanned

Messages:
4,199
It think you can have a mass without having gravity. Subatomic particles may not have a gravitational attraction toward another. I have not heard of it at least.

5. ### AlexGLike nailing Jello to a treeValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,304
That's not what they're measured to be.

7. ### AlexGLike nailing Jello to a treeValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,304
Well no wonder what you post is nonsense.

8. ### Robittybob1BannedBanned

Messages:
4,199
I'm wondering when the Energy Audit will begin?

9. ### wlminexBannedBanned

Messages:
1,587
. . it is doubtful that everyone will agree on the results of the Energy Audit . . . they cannot even agree on the characteristics of the energy components!. . . .

10. ### Robittybob1BannedBanned

Messages:
4,199
I am thinking we could do the energy audit at an early stage of the universe, before it got too big or too complicated.

11. ### wellwisherBannedBanned

Messages:
5,160
Negative energy is a mental abstract. This is not an actual form of energy with mirror properties with respect to regular energy. The concept only reflects less positive energy. Negative energy is an artifact of math speak, but does not reflect reality in terms of mirror energy we can observe.

If I have a volume of space which is hot and I add a block of ice, the temperature of that space will fall. Because energy is conserved, the positive measurable energy remains the same, but only shifts position into the ice. The concept of negative energy is a relative measure of a change in the flow of the positive energy, but in both cases, we use only one type of energy.

Due to energy conservation, the amount of energy in the universe is fixed. It is fixed as positive energy which can shift position in space and time. The negative only reflects the movement of the positive energy and is not a type of energy all by itself that lives in a mirror world. That mirror world if of the imagination, and is an abstraction used to define the flow of positive energy.

Where the mind gets messed up may have to do with money, since this same type of abstraction applies; money is power/energy. If I have $10 and spend$20 I owe \$10. Owing money means I possess negative money. There is piece of paper called a loan, so this negative money is real and can be held in the hand.

This negative money loan is sort of real since, I need to expend energy, such as work, to generate positive money, to fill in this void. If I don't pay it fast enough, I can owe even more as interest. This is where negative money is able to grow at an alarming rate. Or, I can use relative reference, via a lawyer, he can create an type of abstraction that says I owe less. This makes the negative money shrink. But all debts are paid in positive money.

12. ### Robittybob1BannedBanned

Messages:
4,199
Was that really helpful? Money - Universe model? One word is used in common and that is "Inflation".

13. ### Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
I know what I'm doing. I'm keeping the correct mass for my model. I don't have to agree with science, I am not wrong. I know what is causing the science mass, and therefore I know why it is a mistake. My interpretation has to be separate from science, else I end up in a mess.

14. ### Robittybob1BannedBanned

Messages:
4,199
So could it just be called an "artistic impression"?

15. ### AlphaNumericFully ionizedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
6,697
You think PP is threatening? He thinks his claims are 'perfect', yet he can't formalise or model anything. Besides, you're obviously not being impartial yourself. You didn't have any issue with PP saying his ideas are perfect yet you made the statement

So you complain the mainstream is convincing itself it is correct without justification yet PP saying his claims are perfect doesn't get a common? You're being a hypocrite.

I say you and PP and other hacks are hacks because you cannot provide justification for anyone to believe anything you come out with. You complain the mainstream isn't giving enough justification for some of their views but the lack of justification in your views is why I don't buy into it.

It's always the same with hacks. They complain about the mainstream being made up of sheep, not showing enough critical thinking but when someone applies critical thinking to your claims suddenly it's a problem? PP is spouting delusions of grandeur. He once asked on this forum how to go about getting funding to do physics. You complained that I might have gotten government funding and at least I can do demonstrably applicable physics.

You've got double standards, which is yet another reason your claims and pet nonsense are not welcome in the main physics forum.

Our understanding of quantum gravity is too poor to be able to even see if such an analysis is even possible in the future.

As for both creation and destruction I don't see why one wouldn't be possible if the other is.

16. ### wlminexBannedBanned

Messages:
1,587
AN: . . . . Ah . . . SHUCKS! . . . I didn't think you cared! . . .Merry Christmas anyway!

17. ### Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
Don't worry AlphaNumeric has been proved wrong twice in the past few weeks already, and one of the times was his mistake to spot somebody's maths was correct. So even if people use maths he will fail.

18. ### Robittybob1BannedBanned

Messages:
4,199
So that basically you can't say if the universe is Zero Energy or not.
Well if you did say it you would have difficulty proving it.

19. ### wellwisherBannedBanned

Messages:
5,160
The idea of a zero energy universe is based on mental abstracts and not hard physical evidence. It is based on the assumption we will find this mirror energy someday, in accelerators.

The way this mental abstract works can be understood with an analogy. Say you were standing in front of a mirror. There is you and your mirror image. These are opposites, where left is right and right is left.

Your mirror image only exists, when the real you stands in front of the mirror. If you leave the mirror, you will still exist. However, your mirror image will disappears and loses its existence. The mirror image needs you or something of substance to exist.

As long as you hold the mirror in your hand, to help perpetuate your own reflection, your universe will always be divided into two opposites. The mirror of zero energy is the mental abstraction, which is always in the forefront of the mind, allowing its own reflection.

As an example, matter and anti-matter, such as the electron and the positron are equal and opposite (except both are made of quarks). When they combine they only create positive energy that adds up based on the charge/mass/energy balance. We can start with a single photon of postive energy and create matter/anti-matter.

This mental process is connected to the way the human mind works more than the way actual reality is set up. There is no law in science that requires the calibration of the human mind before speculating science. This allows the most important tool of science to add pounds before weighing. Then we look for this unknown extra weight.

20. ### Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
The mirror is a closed loop, it is always a closed loop. This is a zero universe. We don't need to find the opposites, because we can work forwards from zero to create everything instead.

21. ### wellwisherBannedBanned

Messages:
5,160
The mirror is a closed loop, but only the person holding the mirror is tangible in all ways. The reflection is only a shell of this positive reality. If we break the mirror and destroy the closed loop only the reflected shell disappears. The person holding the mirror is still there.

This is why it is hard to do a an energy audit of the closed mirror loop, since it does not add up to two times the real or tangible. But since the construct assumes this, while staring at the looking glass, we keep making machines with the hope of satisfying this prophesy. It does not matter if we can't show this with hard data, since the mirror does appear to show something.

22. ### Robittybob1BannedBanned

Messages:
4,199
Energy Audit time!

23. ### Pincho PaxtonBannedBanned

Messages:
2,387
It's a photon closed loop. You don't count the human.