Has any New Science originated in Sciforums?

Which is your theory.

The one where the Universe emerged from an infinitesimally small, infinitesimally dense black hole.?

Or the one where it emerged from nothing?

Hawking seems to hold both.

And I don't know about his physics, but his straw man theology is extremely annoying.
 
Luis A.C.ROMANELLI said:
Anything for the World that can help humans to USE THE HEAD is GOOD ! ! !
Click to expand...
But does it waste more time than it is worth. The brighter ones seem to suggest staying off the forums and studying other resources, like texts or Google searches.

I found while on the forums, they were tossing me from one topic to another and it just got confusing. I wasn't sure if I was learning.
Well you certainly learn to communicate. That must be worth something.:)
 
Captain Kremmen said:
Which is your theory.

The one where the Universe emerged from an infinitesimally small, infinitesimally dense black hole.?

Or the one where it emerged from nothing?

Hawking seems to hold both.

And I don't know about his physics, but his straw man theology is extremely annoying.
Click to expand...

Mine emerges from nothing. I didn't want any loose ends where people ask what happened before so, and so. So I spent years working out how to start a universe from nothing. I don't have a Big Bang, I just have Galaxies that grow like opening rose petals. Working outwards, creating their own particles.
 
Last edited:
Captain Kremmen said:
And the negative matter that must be produced at the same time.
What happens to that?
Click to expand...

It has properties like matter, holes that bump holes. Strange to think about, but we just don't consider holes to be anything. Holes are just negative mass, like anti-matter. They bump apart. It makes a very interesting computer model. So for example, Gravity bumps us down, the holes bump outwards, it is all working to eliminate a lot of what we are able to see. when a particle is over a hole it is mathematically none existent, but they will move apart, and the particle will become existent again. It is like the Game Of Life but with a very complex pattern. I have started some computer model tests...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggRxyHjimxM
 
My understanding of antimatter is that it is exactly the same as ordinary mattter, and nothing like a hole.

The PET scanner uses Positrons.
They have no resemblance to holes.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
My understanding of antimatter is that it is exactly the same as ordinary mattter, and nothing like a hole.

The PET scanner uses Positrons.
They have no resemblance to holes.
Click to expand...

You can't switch between my theory, and science that easily. You have to just use one theory or the other theory. Science anti-matter is missing the ingredients. Science is sort of 2D, and my theory is sort of a 3D version. You can't see the holes anyway, our eyes have evolved to pick up mass. For example, water, and glass contain a lot of negative mass, and see how they have become semi-transparent?
 
Last edited:
Pincho Paxton said:
You can't switch between my theory, and science that easily. You have to just use one theory or the other theory. Science anti-matter is missing the ingredients. Science is sort of 2D, and my theory is sort of a 3D version. You can't see the holes anyway, our eyes have evolved to pick up mass. For example, water, and glass contain a lot of negative mass, and see how they have become semi-transparent?
Click to expand...
The igloo or the hole in the dessert and the hill beside it both don't just happen.
When you can come up with analogies where they just happen I will believe it just happened from nothing, but until it is done and while there is the need to intentionally to move stuff from A to B, I will still take the revelation that it was God who put the Energy into void to create the Universe.

You might think of that as splitting the void into positive and negative matter but it had to be done.:)
 
Robittybob1 said:
The igloo or the hole in the dessert and the hill beside it both don't just happen.
When you can come up with analogies where they just happen I will believe it just happened from nothing, but until it is done and while there is the need to intentionally to move stuff from A to B, I will still take the revelation that it was God who put the Energy into void to create the Universe.

You might think of that as splitting the void into positive and negative matter but it had to be done.:)
Click to expand...

They can happen because they equal zero. You don't need a reason to create 0 from nothing. Although the reason is that the first particles that equal zero also have no relative scale either, so they can be any scale. The Universe has a particle around it that is identical to the smallest particle in the Universe, they are the same particle. We are inside that particle, and also made from that particle. Scale is relative. Energy is in/out, so you have X/Y/Z/in/out. In/Out is like water pressure in a hose, it comes from a scaling factor. Squeeze down a drain, squirt out a hose. If you look at a Galaxy, and the Black Hole the 'IN' is the hole, and the 'OUT' is the vortex type bubble.
 
Last edited:
I get nervous in these sorts of discussions when people use gratuitous capitalization, such as "New Science". It often indicates that they have redefined the words or terms which are capitalized.

As someone noted, these Forums are public social interaction sites - sometimes with an element of education thrown in. I participate in them because often they are they Forums in which people like creationists, or the proponents of ID, like to present their ideas, and I refuse to let them do so unchallenged. I don't debate with them to try to change their minds, but rather for the benefit of the onlookers who might otherwise be led to think that their ideas have merit. I know for a fact that a number of people who were observers of Forums I participated in, or hosted, have gone on to understand science, and choose it as a path they'd like to pursue. That alone makes it worthwhile.
 
RichW9090 said:
I get nervous in these sorts of discussions when people use gratuitous capitalization, such as "New Science". It often indicates that they have redefined the words or terms which are capitalized.

As someone noted, these Forums are public social interaction sites - sometimes with an element of education thrown in. I participate in them because often they are they Forums in which people like creationists, or the proponents of ID, like to present their ideas, and I refuse to let them do so unchallenged. I don't debate with them to try to change their minds, but rather for the benefit of the onlookers who might otherwise be led to think that their ideas have merit. I know for a fact that a number of people who were observers of Forums I participated in, or hosted, have gone on to understand science, and choose it as a path they'd like to pursue. That alone makes it worthwhile.
Click to expand...
More like New Scientist rather than New Science. Good that you get some pleasure from that. I started this thread with the intention of finding out if some benefit comes out of participating in the forums.:)
 
kwhilborn said:
Congratulations Emil.

That is sweet. Lets hope they go mainstream soon.
Click to expand...
Thank you.
Nasor said:
Since you joined in 2010 and the patent application was filed in 2006, it's not clear to me how sciforums could have been responsible...
Click to expand...
The applications are multiple. I presented these and if you want we can discuss other applications or improve those already presented.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top