My theory 1 step at a time

AlexG said:
Pincho has stated that this computer simulation does not yet exist. He has run it in HIS HEAD.

Everything he's talking about with regards to his simulation is in his imagination only. None of it actually exists. It's all just in his head.
Click to expand...

There are tests on Youtube. I want to complete the whole thing.
 
Originally Posted by Pincho Paxton
No, I am running it in my head. It is so small that I can run that part. It is the later parts that get more difficult. I am ready to get started now. I wanted to make sure that I was lining the particles up correctly, I test it in my head
Click to expand...

Only in your imagination.
 
Pincho Paxton said:
Yeah, well I'm an artist, and designer that's my job. I make computer games, and so I have to imagine how they work before I program them.
Click to expand...

Fine. But the point is, the computer simulation you tout so often doesn't exist, except in your imagination.
 
AlexG said:
Fine. But the point is, the computer simulation you tout so often doesn't exist, except in your imagination.
Click to expand...

I still like to make predictions before it is finished. I think that's what you are supposed to do. You wouldn't write it if you had no theory to go with it.
 
Pincho Paxton said:
I still like to make predictions before it is finished. I think that's what you are supposed to do. You wouldn't write it if you had no theory to go with it.
Click to expand...

You have no theory. You evidently do not know what a theory is. What you have is known as conjecture, baseless conjecture.
 
origin said:
You have no theory. You evidently do not know what a theory is. What you have is known as conjecture, baseless conjecture.
Click to expand...

It's based on 10 years of work. Computer simulations, computer models, analysis, nature, predictions, experiments taken from science, rearranging the two slit experiment, action at a distance, rethinking gravity, rethinking waves in a vacuum, fractals in nature that are built from a grain, newton's kissing problem, atom analysis, particle reconstructions, pressure analysis, flow analysis, heat analysis, Bose Einstein condensate experiments, electron analysis, mass analysis, magnet analysis, and reconstruction, paradox removal, paradox reconstruction, maths to nature conversion, spherical properties, black hole reconstruction, and re-analysis, gravity, and crystal reconstructions in simulators based on kissing problem, orbits, pioneer, and voyager discoveries, telescopic observations, sun observations, dna reconstructions in 3D models using the kissing problem, properties of limbs in organic life, growth of biological life using the kissing problem, roots in soil based on the kissing problem, feet pressure on various surface reconstruction, studies of the brain, studies of light, photon speed, and propagation through a kissing grain pattern reconstruction in 3D models, galaxy model prediction, and reconstruction, evolution of the universe reconstruction, maths evolution through a self building loop from simple maths seeds like fractals, fractal studies, pressure studies on animal growth, liquid studies, transparency studies, reflective studies off materials, studies of the eyes, 3D reconstruction of Galaxies in 3D models.

All I said was I haven't finished my final program which creates the universe from scratch.
 
Anyway carrying on from the snowflake. When I started figuring out Physics experiments I noticed that there was a constant pattern that I could use to merge quantum physics with physics. The pattern was found in nature, and when I saw Newton's Kissing problem I realised that the pattern was starting from particles kissing together. When I applied Gravity as a Y force, I got a 2D kissing problem of 6. The 2D kissing problem is a hexagon, and it's created by pressure on a 12 particle Icosahedron. Then I noticed that the Bose Einstein experiment on temperature moved atoms to a central position. So I took all of my information, and moved it to a central position in a computer simulation. So I wrote the computer program to combine the kissing problem with Gravity, and temperature, and I got a snowflake. Here is a computer simulation that I wrote. You must press the space bar to see what happens...

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxton/Snowflake.rar
 
So in that model we have a central point which is the time point. Gravity normally flows around the time point, and magnetism normally flows out. But temperature appears to be able to cause pressure on the hole. The hole gets blocked, and time is bought to a halt. Also notice that the bending of space time is just particles moving towards these areas. Gravity is a flow from space to holes in atoms which looks a lot like a curvature. The central hole is normally an OUT hole, but electrons are In holes which are rotated like cogwheels to pass particle information in a wave pattern created by the kissing problem.

Reverse my model, and you get a sun, with a rapid out flow.
 
Pincho Paxton said:
So in that model we have a central point which is the time point. Gravity normally flows around the time point, and magnetism normally flows out. But temperature appears to be able to cause pressure on the hole. The hole gets blocked, and time is bought to a halt. Also notice that the bending of space time is just particles moving towards these areas. Gravity is a flow from space to holes in atoms which looks a lot like a curvature. The central hole is normally an OUT hole, but electrons are In holes which are rotated like cogwheels to pass particle information in a wave pattern created by the kissing problem.

Reverse my model, and you get a sun, with a rapid out flow.
Click to expand...

You are basically trying to simulate everything . Why you are calling this simulation a theory ? ... A simulation and a theory are not same .
 
hansda said:
You are basically trying to simulate everything . Why you are calling this simulation a theory ? ... A simulation and a theory are not same .
Click to expand...

Yeah well it's based on observations, and the computer program wasn't designed to make a snowflake, it was designed just to move the points towards a central point.

Another very interesting thing is that if you hold down the space bar, and move the cursor around it reproduces the snowflake all over the screen. This is how we move. We are reconstructed through space from a central particle. This is how a grain structure works in space, and this removes the Michelson Morley problem. The rebuilding at each stage has no Aether wind.
 
Pincho Paxton said:
Yeah well it's based on observations, and the computer program wasn't designed to make a snowflake, it was designed just to move the points towards a central point.

Another very interesting thing is that if you hold down the space bar, and move the cursor around it reproduces the snowflake all over the screen. This is how we move. We are reconstructed through space from a central particle. This is how a grain structure works in space, and this removes the Michelson Morley problem. The rebuilding at each stage has no Aether wind.
Click to expand...

How you can compare your simulation with the reality ? ... A reality can only be compared with a reality .
 
hansda said:
How you can compare your simulation with the reality ? ... A reality can only be compared with a reality .
Click to expand...

My next simulation is animated, so you can watch the universe begin, and watch it create whatever it creates. I know certain things that it will create, but the program is only obeying the rules of the snowflake simulator, sending particles to points. So I don't know all of the things that we will see. It's a matter of observation. I could put tests in my simulator. I could make it so that you can drag a sphere around an area to get information from inside that sphere, so it could tell you the scale of particles in that area, the average speed, the speed of time coming from the holes, the average mass, the weight, the colour. You will see the orbits, and flows visually. You could for example look inside a sun, or the centre of a planet. Scale right down to see the paths of photons, and electrons.

The whole universe in a computer with the drawback of not being able to run it on most computers to see an entire Galaxy.
 
Pincho Paxton said:
My next simulation is animated, so you can watch the universe begin, and watch it create whatever it creates. I know certain things that it will create, but the program is only obeying the rules of the snowflake simulator, sending particles to points. So I don't know all of the things that we will see. It's a matter of observation. I could put tests in my simulator. I could make it so that you can drag a sphere around an area to get information from inside that sphere, so it could tell you the scale of particles in that area, the average speed, the speed of time coming from the holes, the average mass, the weight, the colour. You will see the orbits, and flows visually. You could for example look inside a sun, or the centre of a planet. Scale right down to see the paths of photons, and electrons.

The whole universe in a computer with the drawback of not being able to run it on most computers to see an entire Galaxy.
Click to expand...

What are the real-time applications of your simulation/theory ?
 
hansda said:
That is OK . But how your simulation will be useful for the society ?
Click to expand...

Well, you can test space travel in it, various types of propulsion systems. Somebody will figure out how to put DNA Data in it so that you don't have to wait for it to evolve. You can test quantum experiments in it, and make new materials. You could somehow recreate cancer in it with data (the future uses of it are unlimited). You could improve optics by watching photons. You could see the invisible world like Dark Matter, Gravity, and Magnetism. You could learn about energy from it by trying out various ways to get energy to self propagate. You could maybe find a way to make anti-gravity devices. It's really unlimited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top