The Fractal Nature Of Geometry & Benoit B. Mandelbrot

The 'something to make it spin' is the unknown force of Creation. This will always be a mystery whether one considers it to be from a point of singularity or anything else. The 'something to prevent it' is the structure of matter. This again is from the unknown, just like in other theory of the creation process. Structure is the most fundamental of physical qualities and is more important than just considering 'mass'. This is something that Newtonian/Einsteinian thinking is lacking IMHO.

Apologies for that. The spin creates the wave nature of the helix structure. It is easier to visualise with a side view, yes. The wavelength would be the distance between the grooves of the stationary helix.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You have no 'advanced idea', you have no model or description or quantitative framework at all, you simply having vague pictures in your head based on your poor understanding of things you never bothered to learn.

You have never done any topology or general relativity but you think you've got an explaination for dark energy?! And do you think the concept of a toroidal space-time is new or innovative? And you don't have the analytic knowledge to actually describe such things.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You are just repeating yourself like a parrot and adding nothing constructive (or funny) to the proceedings. It's not very entertaining for everyone else. Can you try and be a bit wittier please..

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So you're claiming you have an explaination for dark energy which involves saying things like "The 'something to make it spin' is the unknown force of Creation." and "This again is from the unknown, just like in other theory of the creation process.". How does that explain anything?

And the fact I'm repeating myself doesn't mean what I say is worthless or ignorable, as it's a follow on from the fact you keep making claims you can't back up and never follow up on. So what's your 'advanced idea'? Do you have any quantitative description of a toroidal universe? Can you explain how your helix idea leads to fractals, because you haven't managed that yet.

I'm just waiting to see if you've got anything to say other than vacuous buzzword BS.

 

failed..

 

You're right, you did fail to answer any question I put to you. And you think I'm being repetitive?

 

So we have two obnoxious no-it-alls in AlphaNumeric and Prometheus; low life trollers who want to suppress discussions, Pseudoscience discussion not hard science discussions, between sincere people and who want to drive home their ego driven obsession with a few of us whom they have deemed not worthy to be here and discuss anything. Their obsession is a window into their character and their posts are a reflection of their self image. AN and Prometheus are science elites with inflated views of their worth and anti-social behaviors who’s lives outside the forums are doomed to be failures if they act this way at work and home. They are failures here in the Pseudoscience forum because they act like it is the Physics and Math forum where hard science is discussed. Either that or they are slumming over here where they should know the standards for discussion are not aimed at hard science but just discussion of ideas. Pseudoscience should be moderated to encourage discussion instead of discourage it.

 

Incoherency?

I thought so.
Why haven't we seen any?

 

'Know-it-alls'.

Couldn't resist.

I do wonder how sincere you and CSS are. For instance, I quote him saying he's got 'advanced ideas' but when I ask him to follow that up, nothing appears. Was he sincere in his belief in him having an 'advanced idea' at the time of writing, only to realise he's actually got nothing when I press him or was he never sincere at all?

There's a difference between saying "I've been wondering something, is there any validity or justifiable discussion in the idea the universe is curved back on itself to make a torus" and what CSS says, which is "I've got an advanced idea which explains dark energy in a simple way". The notion of a toroidal universe does have some credibility, though few things related to it are considered 'mainstream'. Discussion of that is not 'mainstream' but I wouldn't call it worthless or pointless by any stretch. The claim CSS makes is quite different and we can all see that when pressed he's got nothing actually to say.

Tentative discussion of somewhat outlandish or uncommon ideas? Sure. Claims you've got some simple explaination to a difficult to understand phenomena? Let's see it. Oh, you can't provide? What a shame.....

You and CSS think you both have worthwhile contributions/explainations/ideas. CSS is particularly straight talking in the regard. Neither Prom nor I think our work is paradigm shifting, neither of us think we've got some view of things noone has ever considered and it's revolutionary. You and CSS certainly think you're somehow above the usual dross. So which group of us have inflated views of our worth? Prom and I have published work we never claim to be amazing. You and CSS have nothing to show and plenty to claim.

Prom is married and quite happy. I'm in a long term relationship, close to finishing and looking forward to getting a job. My attitude to cranks is not the same as my attitude to people in everyday life. If someone sitting at a table having lunch with me makes the claim "I've got a theory which overturns Einstein, here I'll draw it on a napkin" then I'll rip it to shreds but generally that isn't the topic of conversation I have with people and I'm perfectly polite. Infact, I avoid science discussion with people because few people enjoy hearing about other people's work so I don't open discussions with "I'm a physicist, don't ya know?", I simply say "I'm a PhD student".

But thanks for trying to generalise how we treat people we deem to be liars online to how you think we treat everyone. Besides, would you deem a doctor who says to a quack "I dont think you know any medicine" someone 'doomed to failure'? Or do you think doctors who stand their ground are just being confident in what they know? You happen to be making claims in areas Prom and I work in. I don't correct mechanics or doctors, I don't try to make up my own engine models or my own medicine and I don't think someone trained in htose things is 'doomed to failure' because they are confident in their training.

I think your comments about us say more about you than us. You view people who have knowledge and experience as somehow 'egotistical elites'. I suppose you don't go to doctors when you feel rough, you just pray or do homeopathy? Damn smug money grabbing doctors telling you how your body works!

As I said to you when you PM'd me, I'll stop saying "Oh really, can you show it?" when you and CSS stop saying "I've got something which describes [X], which isn't mainstream". I don't make claims I can't back up, why should you?

If a moderator clarifies that the difference between Pseudo and the usual forums is that any old hack can make wild claims which they are not required to back up ss equivalent to saying "You are not allowed to press home the questions of "Can you back that up?" or "So where's your workings?" when outlandish and extraordinary claims are made" and it'll clarify that Prom and I aren't allowed to badger people like you to put up or shut up. If the moderator says we're allowed to ask you to put up or shut up then tough to you. You'll just have to keep pretending you're some free thinker being persecuted by the 'egotistical elite who are doomed to failure' a bit more.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Can you get lost. Your speculations are on a par with something an eight year old child would dream up. (I know this for a fact, because when I was seven or eight, that was the kind of inventive nonsense I generated for my friends, to amuse them.) It is is not the sort of exposition one expects from an adult. Grow up for ****'s sake.

 

Thanks, and make that three know-it-alls. And how many times do you have to be told that "noone" is not a word?

I understand why you couldn't resist because I sometimes can't resist pointing out you egtistical arrogance. Go back to the Physics and Math forum where you can contribute something appropriate and when you come to Pseusoscience try to learn how to discuss a topic without the need to be an arrogant, unnecessariuly critical, name calling geek.

 

This is a gross slander against the illustrious Peter Noone of Herman's Hermits, a quintessential 60's band.
www.peternoone.com

 

I stand corrected.

 

Tell that to Einstein. Our first interaction and the insults are already flying.
Gotta love fear based reactions.

You think you got it all figured out, but let me re-assure you, nobody does.

 

Interesting point that reminds me of what Max Planck said about Einstein when he proposed Einstein be elected as a regular member of the Prussian Academy when Roentgen declined.

He lavished Einstein with praise and concluded with a single reservation. He pointed out that Einstein sometimes was guilty of overspeculation.

 

Because being a geek (aka knowledgable on a topic) is not something you're interested in becoming by learning things from geeks. How wonderfully open minded of you.

 

I just posted this on one of the other threads that you insist on trolling.

FYI, I have learned that you never intend to discuss anything with me. You have said you like to make fun of me, you said you don't like me, you have used a variety of ad homs to describe me, and you say I am your entertainment. If I respond to you in a discussion mode you always revert to one of those behaviors and pretend you have slapped me down. That leaves the issue of following me around to perform those objectives; that is trolling.

 

What do you mean exactly?

Because they're too small. We haven't probed the lowest level of structure yet.

quantum_wave; my apologies, but regretfully I find the dialogue with AN et al too tedious. I'm changing tack and intend to talk to the religious fraternity instead: Thinking About Time Before The Big Bang

 

That is what I was afraid would happen. I credit you for the courage to post your ideas and I credit AN for a long history to turning a budding interest in science that could have been brought out and focused on valid science into a discouraged seeker who may never pursue an interest in science again. Our loss, AN's fault.

 

No it is common_sense_seeker's fault and your fault for engaging in intransigent stupidity, a refusal to try to understand the scientific method, a persistent desire to conflate open mindedness with the complete absence of critical thinking, the arrogance borne of ignorance that leads you to think casual thoughts equate to original thoughts, the ongoing refusal to learn some basics before speculating widely, the mindless over confidence that leads you to reject advice from practicing scientists, the commitment to stay mired with the though processes of an adolescent. The list could be continued, but since you will reject all of the points without any consideration I shall end it there.

QW, you may not be stupid, but you show all the diagnostic features of someone who is. I shall continue to insult you in the hope that insults may work where patient reasoning of the type displayed by AN and others fails. There is an intersting world out there. Your approach is hiding it from you.