Cygnus X - 1 a BNS ?

So gravity is not a part of Nature? Should I write that GR is approximate theory of gravity which is a part of Nature? Can you describe, for example, the Higgs mechanism, which leads to gravitating objects, within GR?

The Hiigs mechanism does not lead to gravitating objects! It theoretically accounts for the mass of fundamental particles, as in quarks and electrons. Not the total mass of even protons let alone atoms, molecules and stars.

There is no accepted fundamental mechanism that explains the inertia and mass of matter. Those are things that are accepted A Priori. The closest I have seen is the inertia hypothesis of Haisch et al.., and even that deals only with individual partons, in the context of a vacuum model, involving the motion of those patrons relative to the vacuum or zero point field.

What you keep telling yourself is not sufficient reference to support your position, in discussion with others. Even where you tell yourself a thing long enough that you believe it without independent confirmation.
 
Did you read in some most reputable source that my Scale-Symmetric Theory is incorrect? Super!

Where I can read it? A link please.....
How about you supplying a link of a reputable scientist using anything associated with your contrived arithmetic theory for doing science?
 
The Hiigs mechanism does not lead to gravitating objects! It theoretically accounts for the mass of fundamental particles, as in quarks and electrons. Not the total mass of even protons let alone atoms, molecules and stars.

There is no accepted fundamental mechanism that explains the inertia and mass of matter. Those are things that are accepted A Priori. The closest I have seen is the inertia hypothesis of Haisch et al.., and even that deals only with individual partons, in the context of a vacuum model, involving the motion of those patrons relative to the vacuum or zero point field.

What you keep telling yourself is not sufficient reference to support your position, in discussion with others. Even where you tell yourself a thing long enough that you believe it without independent confirmation.


To start with, I want to say that your posts are interesting and instructive.

Sorry for the introduction but it was important to describe in a short the realistic Higgs mechanism and the origin of the inertial and gravitational masses.

Our discussion is difficult because my posts follow from TOE = SST + QM + GR whereas your posts follow from QM + GR. It could be easier to discuss if you would have read a little about the Scale-Symmetric Theory. I know that the task is very difficult because of the 584 pages, size A4. But it is not important because I will try to answer your questions to show the cores of the problems.

Generally, the foundations of the Scale-Symmetric Theory do not contain differential equations (a few of them appear on higher level). It follows from the fact that Nature on lower and lower levels should be simpler and simpler, not complex and complex as it is assumed on base of the quantum physics. Just such assumption acts correctly and leads to a thousand of basic theoretical results consistent or very close to experimental data. Just the Scale-Symmetric Theory is the theory of fundamental structures in Nature and leads to the all needed coupling constants.

Why the foundations of SST do not contain differential equations? It is because the needed fundamental differential equations to describe how Nature acts are already in QM and GR. These two leading theories do not need new differential equations to act correctly. They need a theory to eliminate the infinities, indeterminate forms, approximations, mathematical tricks and, especially, free parameters. The big unsolved problem is associated with the physical properties of the bare particles that in the QM are the mathematical/sizeless points and the mainstream string theory does not solve this problem because this theory is still the useless theory. Contrary to my useful/realistic/unique Scale-Symmetric Theory, the mainstream string theory is very complicated, useless and non-unique - just the initial conditions applied in the string theory are incorrect (You can read my paper “The Scale-Symmetric Physics as the Realistic/Unique String Theory).

The SST starts from expanding superluminal liquid-like Higgs field. It consists of the non-gravitating pieces of space. Their existence follows from the extended GR (I showed here the transformation). The tachyons have only inertial mass i.e. they do not emit any particles because they are the internally structureless objects. We can say that tachyons have not “hairs” i.e. they do not produce gravitational fields. Due to the succeeding phase transitions, which follow from new symmetries of the superluminal Higgs field, there appear the superluminal entanglons responsible for the quantum entanglement and next there appear the luminal Einstein-spacetime components i.e. the neutrino-antineutrino pairs which cannot annihilate (it follows from their internal structure).

The neutrinos consist of the entanglons whereas the entanglons of the tachyons. The tachyons have infinitesimal spin so the entanglons have internal helicity. Due to the dynamic viscosity of the tachyons and the internal helicity of the entanglons, the entanglons in an Einstein-spacetime component transform the chaotically moving tachyons in the Higgs field into divergently moving tachyons. The collisions of the divergently and chaotically moving tachyons produce gradients around the luminal Einstein-spacetime components and they are the gravitational fields. Neutrinos carry the smallest gravitational mass and they are the lightest Principle-of-Equivalence particles. All other particles consist of the confined and/or entangled Einstein-spacetime components and/or single neutrinos. The mathematical description of this realistic Higgs mechanism leads to the gravitational constant G (see my book).

We can see that in the Higgs mechanism described within the TOE = SST + QM + GR, there the inertial mass only of tachyons transforms into gravitational mass of neutrinos equal to the total initial inertial mass i.e. the neutrinos are the lightest Principle-of-Equivalence particles. Moreover, the size of the neutrinos is very close to the Planck size (it is calculated within SST). We proved that the Planck size is the lower limit for the GR and that the Higgs mechanism is outside GR but it is not outside the extended GR which via tachyons and SST shows the origin of the realistic Higgs mechanism.

Recapitulation
Sometimes descriptions based on TOE = SST + QM + GR differ very much from descriptions based on QM + GR.
 
To start with, I want to say that your posts are interesting and instructive.

Sorry for the introduction but it was important to describe in a short the realistic Higgs mechanism and the origin of the inertial and gravitational masses.

Our discussion is difficult because my posts follow from TOE = SST + QM + GR whereas your posts follow from QM + GR. It could be easier to discuss if you would have read a little about the Scale-Symmetric Theory. .........

What you keep telling yourself is not sufficient reference to support your position, in discussion with others. Even where you tell yourself a thing long enough that you believe it without independent confirmation.

How about you supplying a link of a reputable scientist using anything associated with your contrived arithmetic theory for doing science?

Sylwester, you are right I have not read any of your ramblings. Absent some credible third party reference why should anyone?

Yes, this is the Alternative Theories section of the forum, so you can post anything you can imagine.., but that does not mean that everyone dropping in for whatever reason, must accept the fruit of your imagination as a basis for credible discussion.
 
To start with, I want to say that your posts are interesting and instructive.

Sorry for the introduction but it was important to describe in a short the realistic Higgs mechanism and the origin of the inertial and gravitational masses.

Our discussion is difficult because my posts follow from TOE = SST + QM + GR whereas your posts follow from QM + GR. It could be easier to discuss if you would have read a little about the Scale-Symmetric Theory. I know that the task is very difficult because of the 584 pages, size A4. But it is not important because I will try to answer your questions to show the cores of the problems.

Generally, the foundations of the Scale-Symmetric Theory do not contain differential equations (a few of them appear on higher level). It follows from the fact that Nature on lower and lower levels should be simpler and simpler, not complex and complex as it is assumed on base of the quantum physics. Just such assumption acts correctly and leads to a thousand of basic theoretical results consistent or very close to experimental data. Just the Scale-Symmetric Theory is the theory of fundamental structures in Nature and leads to the all needed coupling constants.

Why the foundations of SST do not contain differential equations? It is because the needed fundamental differential equations to describe how Nature acts are already in QM and GR. These two leading theories do not need new differential equations to act correctly. They need a theory to eliminate the infinities, indeterminate forms, approximations, mathematical tricks and, especially, free parameters. The big unsolved problem is associated with the physical properties of the bare particles that in the QM are the mathematical/sizeless points and the mainstream string theory does not solve this problem because this theory is still the useless theory. Contrary to my useful/realistic/unique Scale-Symmetric Theory, the mainstream string theory is very complicated, useless and non-unique - just the initial conditions applied in the string theory are incorrect (You can read my paper “The Scale-Symmetric Physics as the Realistic/Unique String Theory).

The SST starts from expanding superluminal liquid-like Higgs field. It consists of the non-gravitating pieces of space. Their existence follows from the extended GR (I showed here the transformation). The tachyons have only inertial mass i.e. they do not emit any particles because they are the internally structureless objects. We can say that tachyons have not “hairs” i.e. they do not produce gravitational fields. Due to the succeeding phase transitions, which follow from new symmetries of the superluminal Higgs field, there appear the superluminal entanglons responsible for the quantum entanglement and next there appear the luminal Einstein-spacetime components i.e. the neutrino-antineutrino pairs which cannot annihilate (it follows from their internal structure).

The neutrinos consist of the entanglons whereas the entanglons of the tachyons. The tachyons have infinitesimal spin so the entanglons have internal helicity. Due to the dynamic viscosity of the tachyons and the internal helicity of the entanglons, the entanglons in an Einstein-spacetime component transform the chaotically moving tachyons in the Higgs field into divergently moving tachyons. The collisions of the divergently and chaotically moving tachyons produce gradients around the luminal Einstein-spacetime components and they are the gravitational fields. Neutrinos carry the smallest gravitational mass and they are the lightest Principle-of-Equivalence particles. All other particles consist of the confined and/or entangled Einstein-spacetime components and/or single neutrinos. The mathematical description of this realistic Higgs mechanism leads to the gravitational constant G (see my book).

We can see that in the Higgs mechanism described within the TOE = SST + QM + GR, there the inertial mass only of tachyons transforms into gravitational mass of neutrinos equal to the total initial inertial mass i.e. the neutrinos are the lightest Principle-of-Equivalence particles. Moreover, the size of the neutrinos is very close to the Planck size (it is calculated within SST). We proved that the Planck size is the lower limit for the GR and that the Higgs mechanism is outside GR but it is not outside the extended GR which via tachyons and SST shows the origin of the realistic Higgs mechanism.

Recapitulation
Sometimes descriptions based on TOE = SST + QM + GR differ very much from descriptions based on QM + GR.
LOL. No calculus no derivations no predictions. Like I said a contrived arithmetic theory. You used to claim neutrinos > light but now you fixed that. LOL. Now you claim that your SST is a component of a theory of everything. LOL. Name 1 reputable scientist that thinks your SST contrived arithmetic theory is a component of a theory of everything. In your last sentence you claim predictions derived from SST + QM + GR, LOL ^2, differ greatly from predictions derived from QM + GR. that means your contrived arithmetic theory has been falsified by experiment and observation. LOL.
 
LOL. No calculus no derivations no predictions. Like I said a contrived arithmetic theory. You used to claim neutrinos > light but now you fixed that. LOL. Now you claim that your SST is a component of a theory of everything. LOL. Name 1 reputable scientist that thinks your SST contrived arithmetic theory is a component of a theory of everything. In your last sentence you claim predictions derived from SST + QM + GR, LOL ^2, differ greatly from predictions derived from QM + GR. that means your contrived arithmetic theory has been falsified by experiment and observation. LOL.

You do not understand what you are reading. Try once again and read the other posts as well.

TOE does not need new differential equations.
SST causes that GR and QM become the complete theories.
And it is a big nonsense that SST "has been falsified by experiment and observation."
SST starts from smallest number of initial conditions and gives best theoretical results i.e. a thousand of basic results consistent or very close to experimental and observational data and many of them we cannot calculate within the mainstream theories from some fundamental conditions.
For example, we cannot calculate the physical constants, mass and charge of electron or perfect mass, spin and muonic radius of proton - they are the fundamental quantities. If someone cannot calculate these quantities then admits that theories which was used are at least incomplete.

Your post is totaly wrong. You write untruths about the neutrinos as well. Just read my posts once again. I wrote many times that, generally, neutrinos are luminal. Only when the weak decays take place IN THE STRONG FIELDS IN BARYONS the speeds of neutrinos should be shifted but in the neutrino experiments such neutrinos were eliminated.
 
You do not understand what you are reading. Try once again and read the other posts as well.

TOE does not need new differential equations.
SST causes that GR and QM become the complete theories.
And it is a big nonsense that SST "has been falsified by experiment and observation."
SST starts from smallest number of initial conditions and gives best theoretical results i.e. a thousand of basic results consistent or very close to experimental and observational data and many of them we cannot calculate within the mainstream theories from some fundamental conditions.
For example, we cannot calculate the physical constants, mass and charge of electron or perfect mass, spin and muonic radius of proton - they are the fundamental quantities. If someone cannot calculate these quantities then admits that theories which was used are at least incomplete.

Your post is totaly wrong. You write untruths about the neutrinos as well. Just read my posts once again. I wrote many times that, generally, neutrinos are luminal. Only when the weak decays take place IN THE STRONG FIELDS IN BARYONS the speeds of neutrinos should be shifted but in the neutrino experiments such neutrinos were eliminated.
You don't understand and saying it's me is just your bullshit. So you get to just eliminate the bad predictions. You get to do this because the prediction was contrived bullshit to start with. What kind of glue do you use to hold contrived bullshit together? Nobody understands your bullshit but you. I don't need to read your posts. I'm not into bullshit contrived arithmetic theories. Your choices are to pretend that everyone who has read enough of your theory to know it's contrived bullshit must have some kind of agenda for calling it bullshit, or .... Admitting a theory is wrong when it makes predictions that are experimentally falsified. The first choice is what cranks do. The second is what science demands from you. You picked the neutrino thing because it was available to be contrived. LOL. Good luck with future endeavors.
 
Last edited:
You don't understand and saying it's me is just your bullshit. So you get to just eliminate the bad predictions. You get to do this because the prediction was contrived bullshit to start with. What kind of glue do you use to hold bullshit together?

Your post is nonsensical. You are just a liar. You cannot prove no one of your "revelations". Just a mumble.

Can you cite at least one my post to show that you are right? Of course, you are unable because as a few others on this Forum you as well are a dishonest person. Just you violate the Forum rules.

My theory is in my papers and all can read it. There are the dates of publication so it is very easy to show that you are a big liar.
 
Your post is nonsensical. You are just a liar. You cannot prove no one of your "revelations". Just a mumble.

Can you cite at least one my post to show that you are right? Of course, you are unable because as a few others on this Forum you as well are a dishonest person. Just you violate the Forum rules.

My theory is in my papers and all can read it. There are the dates of publication so it is very easy to show that you are a big liar.
I told you your theory was bullshit several years ago. Alphanumeric told you before that. The facts are. You have to post your work in a journal that requires very little scholarship to qualify for publication. You're using this site to archive the nonsense you call science. You claim that QM and GR are a subset of the bullshit you've been archiving in this public science forum. If you actually understood QM or GR you wouldn't be making such bullshit claims. You're to big a crank to get off the pile of bullshit. Your theory stinks.
 
Can you cite at least one my post to show that you are right? Of course, you are unable because as a few others on this Forum you as well are a dishonest person. Just you violate the Forum rules.

My theory is in my papers and all can read it. There are the dates of publication so it is very easy to show that you are a big liar.


Yet all your "hypothesis" continue to languish in the alternative sections and your papers continually published in less than reputable quarters.
You do not have a theory, you have an hypothesis that keeps gathering dust, and you often show less than a complete understanding of the matter at hand, with your use of the word "prove"
 
I told you your theory was bullshit several years ago. Alphanumeric told you before that. The facts are. You have to post your work in a journal that requires very little scholarship to qualify for publication. You're using this site to archive the nonsense you call science. You claim that QM and GR are a subset of the bullshit you've been archiving in this public science forum. If you actually understood QM or GR you wouldn't be making such bullshit claims. You're to big a crank to get off the pile of bullshit. Your theory stinks.

It is very difficult to discuss with dishonest dunces.
So once more.
I wrote many times (in this thread as well but you are too lazy to read it or you do not understand what you are reading) that my theory leads to the initial conditions applied in GR and QM. Whole my book and the 88 papers show that it is true. All can read it. Just your "conclusions" are nonsensical.

But all know that in the leading mainstream theories appear infinities, indeterminate mathematical forms, approximations, mathematical tricks and free parameters so the leading mainstream theories are the incoherent/incomplete theories. All know it but not the dishonest dunces. The incompleteness of the mainstream theories causes that together with the good solutions there appear the nonsensical solution as well. But it does not mean that the initial differential equations are incorrect, just they are incomplete.

Because you are a dunce so once more: the initial conditions applied in GR and QM are correct but they are incomplete so there appear the nonsensical interpretations as well.

It leads to the conclusion that the two leading mainstream theories are very messy and scientists try to unify them within the same methods to obtain the complete TOE to eliminate the fact that today the GR and QM are not the unique theories. Do you understand it dunce? For example, even the Nobel laureates assume that the observed acceleration of expansion of the Universe can or cannot follow from the fact that GR is the incomplete theory. There as well are the other attempts to explain the "acceleration" - just you should read more.

It is such obvious that GR and QM need a theory to eliminate the nonsensical solutions as the time loops or the many-worlds interpretation and so on. One of such attempt is the mainstream string theory but it is as well the non-unique theory so useless. On the other hand, the extended GR leads to the superluminal Higgs field and such field is the starting point in my Scale-Symmetric Theory. It leads to the needed limitations for GR and QM and the obtained results are beautiful - all can see it in my papers.

Scientists assumed that we need theory more complicated than GR and QM to limit them (the string theory with extra dimensions and superpartners we never detected). It is a nonsense. Nature on lower and lower levels must be simpler and simpler, not complex and complex and my beautiful results show that I am right.

TOE does not need new differential equations, TOE needs a very simple theory to limit the two leading mainstream theories. It follows from the fact that on lower and lower levels of Nature physics should be simpler and simpler. And it is.

My theory shows that superpartners are not in existence (we will discover only the neutrino-antineutrino pairs), that gravitational waves are not in existence, that the neutrino-antineutrino pairs are the dark matter particles, that the time loops are not in existence, that the many-worlds interpretation is nonsensical, I predicted the 1.93 result concerning the proton-proton collisions, and so on.

So once more: Nature needs very simple theory to limit the GR and QM and it is the Scale-Symmetric Theory.
 
It is very difficult to discuss with dishonest dunces.
So once more.
I wrote many times (in this thread as well but you are too lazy to read it or you do not understand what you are reading) that my theory leads to the initial conditions applied in GR and QM. Whole my book and the 88 papers show that it is true. All can read it. Just your "conclusions" are nonsensical.

But all know that in the leading mainstream theories appear infinities, indeterminate mathematical forms, approximations, mathematical tricks and free parameters so the leading mainstream theories are the incoherent/incomplete theories. All know it but not the dishonest dunces. The incompleteness of the mainstream theories causes that together with the good solutions there appear the nonsensical solution as well. But it does not mean that the initial differential equations are incorrect, just they are incomplete.

Because you are a dunce so once more: the initial conditions applied in GR and QM are correct but they are incomplete so there appear the nonsensical interpretations as well.

It leads to the conclusion that the two leading mainstream theories are very messy and scientists try to unify them within the same methods to obtain the complete TOE to eliminate the fact that today the GR and QM are not the unique theories. Do you understand it dunce? For example, even the Nobel laureates assume that the observed acceleration of expansion of the Universe can or cannot follow from the fact that GR is the incomplete theory. There as well are the other attempts to explain the "acceleration" - just you should read more.

It is such obvious that GR and QM need a theory to eliminate the nonsensical solutions as the time loops or the many-worlds interpretation and so on. One of such attempt is the mainstream string theory but it is as well the non-unique theory so useless. On the other hand, the extended GR leads to the superluminal Higgs field and such field is the starting point in my Scale-Symmetric Theory. It leads to the needed limitations for GR and QM and the obtained results are beautiful - all can see it in my papers.

Scientists assumed that we need theory more complicated than GR and QM to limit them (the string theory with extra dimensions and superpartners we never detected). It is a nonsense. Nature on lower and lower levels must be simpler and simpler, not complex and complex and my beautiful results show that I am right.

TOE does not need new differential equations, TOE needs a very simple theory to limit the two leading mainstream theories. It follows from the fact that on lower and lower levels of Nature physics should be simpler and simpler. And it is.

My theory shows that superpartners are not in existence (we will discover only the neutrino-antineutrino pairs), that gravitational waves are not in existence, that the neutrino-antineutrino pairs are the dark matter particles, that the time loops are not in existence, that the many-worlds interpretation is nonsensical, I predicted the 1.93 result concerning the proton-proton collisions, and so on.

So once more: Nature needs very simple theory to limit the GR and QM and it is the Scale-Symmetric Theory.


Yes, yes, you've given us 39 pages of that sort of bullshit in your own personalised thread.:rolleyes:
 
It is impossible to discuss the relatively difficult areas of knowledge as particle physics and cosmology with dishonest dunces who do not understand the trends in modern science.

They do not understand what they are reading and even 10 times wrotten a scientific justification is for them a tabula rasa.

It causes that there appears a bigotry. It looks as a paranoia.

So I am waiting for posts characteristic for the Alternative Theories Section i.e. for posts with some ideas how solve the tremendous number of unsolved problems in the mainstream theories and it concerns the GR and QM as well - all can read it, for example, in Wikipedia (there is the list of unsolved problems).
 
So I am waiting for posts characteristic for the Alternative Theories Section i.e. for posts with some ideas how solve the tremendous number of unsolved problems in the mainstream theories and it concerns the GR and QM as well - all can read it, for example, in Wikipedia (there is the list of unsolved problems).


So you are the "shining light" that will lead present cosmology out of the darkness?
Everyone knows what problems are left to solve, and every level headed person knows that GR is a theory of gravity.
What you don't realise is that all these dishonest dunces that cannot understand what you have written over 39 pages in your own personalised thread, see you as highly delusional. Hence the crazy unsupported claims by yourself.
 
Back
Top