In another thread in the science section dark matter came up. Pincho Paxton said that he knows what dark matter is, I assume through his model somehow(?). As I'm curious to hear this explanation of what dark matter is, Paxton suggested to create a new thread in this section of the forum where he is free to post his ideas.

So here it is, what is dark matter Paxton? :)

Einstein some years ago added a cosmological Constant to his theory of Relativity. It was a sort of equalization of Gravity. He had the usual Gravity, and envisaged an out flow. Not bad. His outflow however should meet. And I will now explain how...

There are proposals that space-time is a grain. In my theory it is a grain. It is infinite. It obeys Newtons Kissing problem laws, so it obeys ball stacking rules. It self scales UP until it touches a particle, and then self scales DOWN. This self scaling is a bump, and we call the bump TIME.

The reason that the particle can self scale is because scale is relative. The very first particles had no other particles relative to themselves, they also contained a negative mass hole. The total sum of these particles works like this...

+1 + - 1 = 0

Which is a particle with a shell volume identical to its hole volume. It's central hole is negative mass. Negative mass, is Dark Matter. This is a hole with properties that we are not familiar with, but it is very simple to understand.

A hole in the fabric of space-time is actually a negative sphere. A spherical particle inside a shell. You can think of it as a black particle inside a white particle. The black particle works like a hole in the white particle. We can't see the black particles even if they are streaming past us.. they obey the rules of holes, but also obey the rules of black sphere. They are holes that can bump one another.

Anyway the description isn't that important. It is the rules that are important...

An atom contains holes. Gravity flows into, and around atoms. Gravity is a flow from space like a liquid. The flow into the atoms creates weight. The flow towards the Earth creates a weight which holds us to the Earth. We act like a sponge, the Earth acts like a bigger sponge.

The atoms then squeeze Gravity (which is like a liquid). And Gravity scales down. Gravity which was positive, now scales down to negative. So the white particle slowly becomes a black particle. The black particle obeys the rules of a hole. It can now escape the flow towards the Earth. The black particles are now flowing out, away from the Earth.

Gravity IN... Magnetism OUT.

The Magnetism is Dark Matter. Magnets attract because firstly they let Gravity in, then they release holes, and holes are not substantial except to other holes.

So we have an outflow. The outflow starts to scale back up, but it takes quite a long time. It will travel quite a distance away before it becomes a force again. It then becomes a bubble membrane. A positive force again. Two Galaxy forces will eventually work against one another, and you get expansion of the Universe. You get a valley in the middle of two Galaxies, you also get a valley around atoms. The valleys are quickly filled by Gravity liquid. Virtual particles can also pop into valleys.

So the fix required to the Cosmological Constant is the outward push of magnetism changing up to become valleys in space-time that are quickly filled by gravity, and virtual particles.

There are other important things about dark matter. It flows from particles due to scaling down inside atoms. The scaling down is speeded up by velocity. This slows down clocks, and also creates a bow shock. A bow shock is the release of faster negative mass holes that fold out to become a positive mass wave at a distance from the original particle.

My ideas often cause confusion, so I'm used to it. :D

. . . reminds me of the "Black Photons" posted a couple of months ago . . .

My ideas often cause confusion

Your ideas are always confused.

. . . reminds me of the "Black Photons" posted a couple of months ago . . .

They aren't black photons. In fact they can make more negative particles. A Neutrino is one.

Sometimes it is kind of cute how you seem to actually beleive the inane garbage you spew, other times it is just annoying.

Einstein some years ago added a cosmological Constant to his theory of Relativity. It was a sort of equalization of Gravity. He had the usual Gravity, and envisaged an out flow. Not bad. His outflow however should meet. And I will now explain how...

What an arrogant clown. You have less chance of understand Einstein's physics than you do of out playing David Beckham on a football field. That is actually a fairly good analogy.


There are proposals that space-time is a grain. In my theory it is a grain. It is infinite. It obeys Newtons Kissing problem laws, so it obeys ball stacking rules. It self scales UP until it touches a particle, and then self scales DOWN. This self scaling is a bump, and we call the bump TIME.

This explains nothing and is a waste of space. Clown college stuff.


The reason that the particle can self scale is because scale is relative. The very first particles had no other particles relative to themselves, they also contained a negative mass hole. The total sum of these particles works like this...

+1 + - 1 = 0

meaningless drivel. At least we got a demonstration of your most advanced mathematics.


Which is a particle with a shell volume identical to its hole volume. It's central hole is negative mass. Negative mass, is Dark Matter. This is a hole with properties that we are not familiar with, but it is very simple to understand.

Dark matter is negative mass? Then why does it act like normal mass? Oops, why would I encourage more garbage - never mind just more garbage piled on garbage.


A hole in the fabric of space-time is actually a negative sphere. A spherical particle inside a shell. You can think of it as a black particle inside a white particle. The black particle works like a hole in the white particle. We can't see the black particles even if they are streaming past us.. they obey the rules of holes, but also obey the rules of black sphere. They are holes that can bump one another.

Another way to think of it is, 'an utterly stupid idea developed by a deluded individual who is completely ignorant of all physics and reality.


Anyway the description isn't that important. It is the rules that are important...

No they are both completely devoid of importants and rational meaning.


An atom contains holes. Gravity flows into, and around atoms. Gravity is a flow from space like a liquid. The flow into the atoms creates weight. The flow towards the Earth creates a weight which holds us to the Earth. We act like a sponge, the Earth acts like a bigger sponge.

Crap, crap, clown crap and crap. Useless absurd psychotic trash.


The atoms then squeeze Gravity (which is like a liquid). And Gravity scales down. Gravity which was positive, now scales down to negative. So the white particle slowly becomes a black particle. The black particle obeys the rules of a hole. It can now escape the flow towards the Earth. The black particles are now flowing out, away from the Earth.

Great mounds of crap mingeling with garbage infiltrated with rivers of Santorum.


Gravity IN... Magnetism OUT.

Darn, I just threw up in my mouth.:(


The Magnetism is Dark Matter. Magnets attract because firstly they let Gravity in, then they release holes, and holes are not substantial except to other holes.

I thought negative mass was dark matter? Is magnetism negative mass - wait don't explain for the love of god don't explain! This is becoming a mountain of stinking putrid crap.


So we have an outflow. The outflow starts to scale back up, but it takes quite a long time. It will travel quite a distance away before it becomes a force again. It then becomes a bubble membrane. A positive force again. Two Galaxy forces will eventually work against one another, and you get expansion of the Universe. You get a valley in the middle of two Galaxies, you also get a valley around atoms. The valleys are quickly filled by Gravity liquid. Virtual particles can also pop into valleys.

The only valley are the valleys in the entire mountain range of clown crap that has spewed so freely from your lips. You have typed words but the word are deviod of anything even remotely having the faintest hint or wisp of a scintilla of meaning. Pure unadulterated clown crap.


So the fix required to the Cosmological Constant is the outward push of magnetism changing up to become valleys in space-time that are quickly filled by gravity, and virtual particles.

This is becoming the Mons Olympus of crap.


There are other important things about dark matter. It flows from particles due to scaling down inside atoms. The scaling down is speeded up by velocity. This slows down clocks, and also creates a bow shock. A bow shock is the release of faster negative mass holes that fold out to become a positive mass wave at a distance from the original particle.

How is it possible for each new sentence to be more absurd and crap filled than the last? This is exquisitly horrific!


My ideas often cause confusion, so I'm used to it. :D

I would not classify your ideas as confusing I think they are more along the lines tramatic brain injured, persistent vegatative state, mind numbingly ignorant.

The really terrifying part is you think they make some sort of sense! Damnit, I threw up in my mouth again.

Sometimes it is kind of cute how you seem to actually beleive the inane garbage you spew, other times it is just annoying.


What an arrogant clown. You have less chance of understand Einstein's physics than you do of out playing David Beckham on a football field. That is actually a fairly good analogy.



This explains nothing and is a waste of space. Clown college stuff.



meaningless drivel. At least we got a demonstration of your most advanced mathematics.



Dark matter is negative mass? Then why does it act like normal mass? Oops, why would I encourage more garbage - never mind just more garbage piled on garbage.



Another way to think of it is, 'an utterly stupid idea developed by a deluded individual who is completely ignorant of all physics and reality.



No they are both completely devoid of importants and rational meaning.



Crap, crap, clown crap and crap. Useless absurd psychotic trash.



Great mounds of crap mingeling with garbage infiltrated with rivers of Santorum.



Darn, I just threw up in my mouth.:(



I thought negative mass was dark matter? Is magnetism negative mass - wait don't explain for the love of god don't explain! This is becoming a mountain of stinking putrid crap.



The only valley are the valleys in the entire mountain range of clown crap that has spewed so freely from your lips. You have typed words but the word are deviod of anything even remotely having the faintest hint or wisp of a scintilla of meaning. Pure unadulterated clown crap.



This is becoming the Mons Olympus of crap.



How is it possible for each new sentence to be more absurd and crap filled than the last? This is exquisitly horrific!



I would not classify your ideas as confusing I think they are more along the lines tramatic brain injured, persistent vegatative state, mind numbingly ignorant.

The really terrifying part is you think they make some sort of sense! Damnit, I threw up in my mouth again.

Unfortunately you need to be intelligent to understand my theory.

Unfortunately you need to be intelligent to understand my theory.

Pssssst... you have no theory. Intelligence is the last thing that you would want in your audience.

Pssssst... you have no theory. Intelligence is the last thing that you would want in your audience.

Lol by default you are the audience. Ok audience! :D

You really struggle with paradox don't you...

Please provide a rigorous model which outputs the correct galaxy rotation profiles, the correct black body spectrum perturbation profile of the CMB and accounts for observations of the Bullet cluster. Until then you don't have an 'explanation of dark matter' because you cannot account for the phenomena in the real world pertaining to it. Until then you have nothing but vacuous claims and delusions of grandeur.

Please provide a rigorous model which outputs the correct galaxy rotation profiles, the correct black body spectrum perturbation profile of the CMB and accounts for observations of the Bullet cluster. Until then you don't have an 'explanation of dark matter' because you cannot account for the phenomena in the real world pertaining to it. Until then you have nothing but vacuous claims and delusions of grandeur.

That isn't what science is about. Science is about finding out where everything came from. If you create a self building model of the Universe, even if some of the patterns are a bit different, you have still shown how the Universe began. So long as you have all of the parts, they can be a bit different. Then for some time, people can work on getting the perfect balance, but by then, everyone already knows that the program works. They are really just looking to build stuff with it. For example, I know I have Dark Matter, because I predicted it, I know I have the bubble around the Galaxy, because I predicted it. I know I have the push force on Voyager, because I predicted it. I know I have the ingredients, I don't know if they are 100% same scale.

There are proposals that space-time is a grain. In my theory it is a grain. It is infinite. It obeys Newtons Kissing problem laws, so it obeys ball stacking rules. It self scales UP until it touches a particle, and then self scales DOWN. This self scaling is a bump, and we call the bump TIME.

This might be a bit trickier to understand than I originally thought. I am quite unfamiliar with most of the terms you are using, so I feel I can't accurately gauge what you're saying.

What do you mean by a "grain"? I am unfamiliar with that term. I am also unfamiliar with Newton's Kissing problem. I found something on wiki that talks about a kissing number problem of a ball that Newton worked on, but I don't see how that ties into the discussion.


The reason that the particle can self scale is because scale is relative. The very first particles had no other particles relative to themselves, they also contained a negative mass hole. The total sum of these particles works like this...

+1 + - 1 = 0

I understand that the total net energy within the universe is 0, and mass/energy are two sides of the same coin. But I don't get this self scaling thing. It may be relative to other particles, but that relativeness doesn't change the substance of that particle as far as I know.


Which is a particle with a shell volume identical to its hole volume. It's central hole is negative mass. Negative mass, is Dark Matter. This is a hole with properties that we are not familiar with, but it is very simple to understand.

Just making sure I understand what you're saying: Dark Matter is negative mass and is present in the center of at least some particles? What particles are these, all of them, a select few, theoretical particles?

What are the properties of negative mass? I've heard of the concept before; is it where mass attracts and negative mass repels proportionally?


A hole in the fabric of space-time is actually a negative sphere. A spherical particle inside a shell. You can think of it as a black particle inside a white particle. The black particle works like a hole in the white particle. We can't see the black particles even if they are streaming past us.. they obey the rules of holes, but also obey the rules of black sphere. They are holes that can bump one another.

What is a negative sphere? What are the rules of holes? Are the white particles the "shells" around the black particles, which seem to be the holes?


Anyway the description isn't that important. It is the rules that are important...

An atom contains holes. Gravity flows into, and around atoms. Gravity is a flow from space like a liquid. The flow into the atoms creates weight. The flow towards the Earth creates a weight which holds us to the Earth. We act like a sponge, the Earth acts like a bigger sponge.

Are the holes in the atom the same as these negative spheres? Are these negative spheres the negative mass and consequently the dark matter?


The atoms then squeeze Gravity (which is like a liquid). And Gravity scales down. Gravity which was positive, now scales down to negative. So the white particle slowly becomes a black particle. The black particle obeys the rules of a hole. It can now escape the flow towards the Earth. The black particles are now flowing out, away from the Earth.

Gravity IN... Magnetism OUT.

What do you mean by atoms squeeze gravity? I'm afraid I don't comprehend your explanation. What makes gravity scale down, what does that mean? How does changing gravity change this white particle to a black particle?


The Magnetism is Dark Matter. Magnets attract because firstly they let Gravity in, then they release holes, and holes are not substantial except to other holes.

If I understood you so far, magnetism is negative mass as dark matter is negative mass and magnetism is dark matter?

One problem I see with gravity and magnetism coming from the same source is that I know of no correlation between gravity and magnetism; shouldn't we see a correlation between mass and magnetism proportionally?


So we have an outflow. The outflow starts to scale back up, but it takes quite a long time. It will travel quite a distance away before it becomes a force again. It then becomes a bubble membrane. A positive force again. Two Galaxy forces will eventually work against one another, and you get expansion of the Universe. You get a valley in the middle of two Galaxies, you also get a valley around atoms. The valleys are quickly filled by Gravity liquid. Virtual particles can also pop into valleys.

I don't think I understood half of what you said here. But I am confused as to how galaxies cause the expansion of the universe. As far as I know, the expansion is more or less uniform across the universe, and since galaxies (or clusters of galaxies) are not sprinkled in the universe uniformly, I am seeing a disconnect between model and data. If galaxies are the cause, shouldn't we see a larger expansion rate near clusters of galaxies, and a smaller expansion rate in the depths of space?


So the fix required to the Cosmological Constant is the outward push of magnetism changing up to become valleys in space-time that are quickly filled by gravity, and virtual particles.

There are other important things about dark matter. It flows from particles due to scaling down inside atoms. The scaling down is speeded up by velocity. This slows down clocks, and also creates a bow shock. A bow shock is the release of faster negative mass holes that fold out to become a positive mass wave at a distance from the original particle.

My ideas often cause confusion, so I'm used to it. :D

I am quite confused. Perhaps it would be best to take this idea one or two steps at a time, there is a lot in there I am simply not familiar with.

D-9: . . . ditto for me . . . . simply not having a full understanding of PP's hypothesis . . . is no reason for the SM-ers to try and sh*t-can his ideas . . . at the very least PP is an original thinker who doesn't strictly adhere to the staus quo

This might be a bit trickier to understand than I originally thought. I am quite unfamiliar with most of the terms you are using, so I feel I can't accurately gauge what you're saying.

What do you mean by a "grain"? I am unfamiliar with that term. I am also unfamiliar with Newton's Kissing problem. I found something on wiki that talks about a kissing number problem of a ball that Newton worked on, but I don't see how that ties into the discussion.



I understand that the total net energy within the universe is 0, and mass/energy are two sides of the same coin. But I don't get this self scaling thing. It may be relative to other particles, but that relativeness doesn't change the substance of that particle as far as I know.



Just making sure I understand what you're saying: Dark Matter is negative mass and is present in the center of at least some particles? What particles are these, all of them, a select few, theoretical particles?

What are the properties of negative mass? I've heard of the concept before; is it where mass attracts and negative mass repels proportionally?



What is a negative sphere? What are the rules of holes? Are the white particles the "shells" around the black particles, which seem to be the holes?



Are the holes in the atom the same as these negative spheres? Are these negative spheres the negative mass and consequently the dark matter?



What do you mean by atoms squeeze gravity? I'm afraid I don't comprehend your explanation. What makes gravity scale down, what does that mean? How does changing gravity change this white particle to a black particle?



If I understood you so far, magnetism is negative mass as dark matter is negative mass and magnetism is dark matter?

One problem I see with gravity and magnetism coming from the same source is that I know of no correlation between gravity and magnetism; shouldn't we see a correlation between mass and magnetism proportionally?



I don't think I understood half of what you said here. But I am confused as to how galaxies cause the expansion of the universe. As far as I know, the expansion is more or less uniform across the universe, and since galaxies (or clusters of galaxies) are not sprinkled in the universe uniformly, I am seeing a disconnect between model and data. If galaxies are the cause, shouldn't we see a larger expansion rate near clusters of galaxies, and a smaller expansion rate in the depths of space?



I am quite confused. Perhaps it would be best to take this idea one or two steps at a time, there is a lot in there I am simply not familiar with.

Well yes, that's why I didn't post it in the other thread.

Space time grain is quite a common term in science. It's just what it says, space time could be a grain.

Kissing problem is particle physics of same size sphere.

Scale is inflation, so not much different to science apart from it can scale down as well.

Dark matter is negative mass inside the first particles. I only have 1 type of particle in my theory.. it just repeats.

Negative mass is a hole. I have no attractive forces. You fall in a hole. Magnetism is a hole, iron filings fall into it.

Atoms are the same particle. It's the bonding, and scale of them that has changed. They have been forced to share a location due to a flow that doesn't give them enough space to move apart.

Scale of Gravity is the same as scale of zero, you can scale my particles, its free energy.

1 + -1 = 0
2 + -2 = 0
3 + -3 = 0

See, scale is free energy.

Yes, magnetism is Dark Matter, this is Alternative Theories. It doesn't have to obey the standard model. That's why it's in here.

Gravity, and magnetism, are mass, and negative mass. One will hide the other. You will not notice the correct amount of change. For example two bodies of different weight fall in a vacuum at the same speed. The magnetism is flowing out faster from the heavy body, and the Gravity is going in faster. The net result is no change. I predict that it will slow a clock down in the heavy object however. because an atomic clock works on bump pulses, and more negative mass will result in less bumps, because negative mass doesn't bump mass.



I don't think I understood half of what you said here. But I am confused as to how galaxies cause the expansion of the universe. As far as I know, the expansion is more or less uniform across the universe, and since galaxies (or clusters of galaxies) are not sprinkled in the universe uniformly, I am seeing a disconnect between model and data. If galaxies are the cause, shouldn't we see a larger expansion rate near clusters of galaxies, and a smaller expansion rate in the depths of space?

I have something called a bow shock that compensates for that. It is like things falling on the moon, but works proportionally to velocity, and weight. This also slows down clocks.

Lol by default you are the audience. Ok audience! :D

That is the problem - I know 10X (that means 10 times) the physics and math that you do and it is plainly obvious to me that you do not have a clue.;)


You really struggle with paradox don't you...

I don't really see any paradox, what I do see is a pathetic case of self delusion.

That is the problem - I know 10X (that means 10 times) the physics and math that you do and it is plainly obvious to me that you do not have a clue.;)



I don't really see any paradox, what I do see is a pathetic case of self delusion.

But that's a bad thing, not a good thing. I write computer models like Neural Networks. I am deliberately trying to remove the maths, and physics from my computer models to get them to self build. This project of mine is to write a self building simulation of the Universe with no formulas.

See, I did some tests, and it looks very active, which is what I hoped for, and needs finishing...
http://www.youtube.com/user/Pincho333

But that's a bad thing, not a good thing. I write computer models like Neural Networks. I am deliberately trying to remove the maths, and physics from my computer models to get them to self build. This project of mine is to write a self building simulation of the Universe with no formulas. Could you build something a little smaller than the universe for a start? Will it produce something? Even graphically. For it is one thing to write it out but to make it work in real life. There could be some useful application that the program. :)

Could you build something a little smaller than the universe for a start? Will it produce something? Even graphically. For it is one thing to write it out but to make it work in real life. There could be some useful application that the program. :)

It will be a repeating loop, so writing a Universe Generator is the same as writing a Galaxy Generator, the same as writing a sun generator, and the same as writing a planet generator. Whatever you end up with depends on how fast your computer is, and how long you want to sit, and watch.

This test was just to see if a small loop could do much...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggRxyHjimxM

Unfortunately you need to be intelligent to understand my theory.

Pincho, your 'theory' is nonsensical garbage.

It always has been, and unless there's a drastic incorporation of actual science, it will remain so.

Pincho, your 'theory' is nonsensical garbage.

It always has been, and unless there's a drastic incorporation of actual science, it will remain so.

Well my version of science is to write a Universe Generator from as few formulas as possible. That's my project. I want to re-create what particles can do, and I think they only bump together. So that's all I want in my simulator.

Well my version of science

Enough said.

Enough said.



Well my version of science....


... is reality.

And every physicist in the world is wrong.

Pincho, you're delusional.

And every physicist in the world is wrong.

Pincho, you're delusional.

So?.. you just quote the same as the people who said that there were no bubbles. I am obviously going to believe myself based on my history on forums.

So?.. you just quote the same as the people who said that there were no bubbles. I am obviously going to believe myself based on my history on forums.

You keep talking about bubbles this and bubbles that. Any time you see anything in an astronomical picture that is sphereical you get all giddy and say look it proves my theory. This is just more evidence of your delusional attitude.

PP: . . . "politics-as-usual" . . . from your SM detractors!

You keep talking about bubbles this and bubbles that. Any time you see anything in an astronomical picture that is sphereical you get all giddy and say look it proves my theory. This is just more evidence of your delusional attitude.

In about Feb 2004 I predicted them. I contacted NASA, and asked if Pioneer was slowing down, they said no. Then about Nov 2004 NASA announced that Pioneer was slowing down. They had checked DATA going back to about 1980, and found something amiss. I also said that there was one around the Galaxy and it was found. I said that Voyager would move into them...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WeaYlwU_RQ

I predict them because I have Gravity as a push, and Magnetism as an outward push. I have no attractive forces in my theory.

PP, I've gone over your two responses, and this is what I have so far.

If I understand you correctly, every particle has a hole in its center, and this hole is negative mass and thus dark matter (making it magnetic)?

Again, if I understand you, this hole is identical in volume to the rest of the particle - so by volume 50% of a particle is dark matter and 50% is regular matter? Does this volume ratio hold over to mass ratio, thus making the 1 + -1 = 0 of mass/energy come into play with positive and negative mass?

One thing I'm confused about is how do you fall into a hole that has no attractive forces? If I go outside and dig a hole I'll fall into the hole because gravity attracts me down there whenever I go over it, at least according to the standard model. Or to paraphrase Newton's first law of motion, an external force needs to act on me in order to change my velocity so I go into the hole, even if that force isn't gravity per se. Or does your model not coincide with Newtonian physics either?

You talked about particles scaling up and down, and this is inflation (or deflation depending on direction?). When you get inflation you get your famous

1 + -1 = 0
2 + -2 = 0
3 + -3 = 0 right?

So the first particle would undergo inflation up to X, and this particle is the universe?

You've talked about negative mass, and from what I understand it's a theoretical concept that states that it is the same as mass but opposite sign - analogous to electron-positron. So negative mass should have a repulsive force proportional to an attractive force it would have if it were positive mass. Is this how your negative mass works, or does it work differently? You also talked about how there is no attracting forces in your model, please explain.

I'm not sure I'm reading your post right, but it sounds like part of your model entails that normal matter squeezes out gravity and becomes dark matter, which will then be "flowing out" (whatever that means, flowing out of the atom?) as magnetism, aka dark matter.


Yes, magnetism is Dark Matter, this is Alternative Theories. It doesn't have to obey the standard model. That's why it's in here.

I understand it doesn't have to obey the standard model, all the great revolutionaries went counter to the status quo, but at the same token any hypothesis to gain acceptance still had to account for the observations and data. From what I understand, the greatest fault in rogue physicists is that their pet hypotheses may account for a new or mysterious phenomena but fail at explaining already known phenomena.

For example, as far as I know, all the data on dark matter suggests that it simply doesn't interact with magnetism, and I'm pretty sure magnetic waves interact with other magnetic waves - like forces repel opposite forces attract (whether or not the repelling or attracting is a repelling or attracting force or something else doesn't change the observations).

There's more, but I think that's enough for now, and I think better understanding this will help me understand the rest.

PP, I've gone over your two responses, and this is what I have so far.

If I understand you correctly, every particle has a hole in its center, and this hole is negative mass and thus dark matter (making it magnetic)?

Again, if I understand you, this hole is identical in volume to the rest of the particle - so by volume 50% of a particle is dark matter and 50% is regular matter? Does this volume ratio hold over to mass ratio, thus making the 1 + -1 = 0 of mass/energy come into play with positive and negative mass?

One thing I'm confused about is how do you fall into a hole that has no attractive forces? If I go outside and dig a hole I'll fall into the hole because gravity attracts me down there whenever I go over it, at least according to the standard model. Or to paraphrase Newton's first law of motion, an external force needs to act on me in order to change my velocity so I go into the hole, even if that force isn't gravity per se. Or does your model not coincide with Newtonian physics either?

You talked about particles scaling up and down, and this is inflation (or deflation depending on direction?). When you get inflation you get your famous

1 + -1 = 0
2 + -2 = 0
3 + -3 = 0 right?

So the first particle would undergo inflation up to X, and this particle is the universe?

You've talked about negative mass, and from what I understand it's a theoretical concept that states that it is the same as mass but opposite sign - analogous to electron-positron. So negative mass should have a repulsive force proportional to an attractive force it would have if it were positive mass. Is this how your negative mass works, or does it work differently? You also talked about how there is no attracting forces in your model, please explain.

I'm not sure I'm reading your post right, but it sounds like part of your model entails that normal matter squeezes out gravity and becomes dark matter, which will then be "flowing out" (whatever that means, flowing out of the atom?) as magnetism, aka dark matter.



I understand it doesn't have to obey the standard model, all the great revolutionaries went counter to the status quo, but at the same token any hypothesis to gain acceptance still had to account for the observations and data. From what I understand, the greatest fault in rogue physicists is that their pet hypotheses may account for a new or mysterious phenomena but fail at explaining already known phenomena.

For example, as far as I know, all the data on dark matter suggests that it simply doesn't interact with magnetism, and I'm pretty sure magnetic waves interact with other magnetic waves - like forces repel opposite forces attract (whether or not the repelling or attracting is a repelling or attracting force or something else doesn't change the observations).

There's more, but I think that's enough for now, and I think better understanding this will help me understand the rest.

You get bumped into the hole from behind. Like water bumps into a plughole. A boat floating some distance from a plughole will have a low force at the front, and a heavy force at the back. This low/high balance is all you need to make a hole look like it is attractive.

Yes the volume must add up to zero total, so the hole must be -1 to match the +1. In a dim you could get away with -1, because it could be scale not volume... I'm not totally sure which.

Yes the first particle is the Universe, because zero can be any scale. This means that the Universe already contains the -1 particles, because you are in the -1 hole, all you have to do is add the +1 particles at first.

Negative mass is a hole, you get bumped into the hole, so its negative. Any time that a particle is negative it is a hole. If it has mass in science then its a hole full of gravity. So you need to decide if to use the mass or not. But being as Quantum Physics needs to be precise, it is better to ignore the mass, and give Gravity the mass instead. Then you are being precise.

I have no attractive forces because they are a paradox like chicken, and egg. You shouldn't allow it to happen. There are about 3 paradox in attraction (cause and effect are the wrong way around, you need a pull on a sphere, but sphere are easier to push, and you need a particle that knows it has found another particle.) In fact it was this reason that I didn't allow the paradox that caused me to predict Dark Matter bubbles. I never allow any paradox in my theory. If you think of a paradox as energy, the universe doesn't use energy where it doesn't need to. So being bumped into a hole is more efficient than a new particle having to be created to pull you into the hole (The Graviton for example). Gravity is more efficient than a Higgs Boson as well, and we have also got rid of Space-Time bending, because a flow bends. So that's 2 particles, and physics less already.
Magnets repel each other, but my holes bump one another, so its perfect. You just need to imagine the flow direction.

In about Feb 2004 I predicted them.

It has nothing to do with gravity. The word bubble appeared and you just got all giddy again.


I also said that there was one around the Galaxy and it was found.

There is no bubble around the galaxy. There is roughly spherical concentration of dark matter theorized but it is hardly a bubble. Like I have said before if there is anything roughly spherical you excitedly start shouting bubbles.


I predict them because I have Gravity as a push, and Magnetism as an outward push. I have no attractive forces in my theory.

Which essentially proves your ideas are rubbish.

It has nothing to do with gravity. The word bubble appeared and you just got all giddy again.



There is no bubble around the galaxy. There is roughly spherical concentration of dark matter theorized but it is hardly a bubble. Like I have said before if there is anything roughly spherical you excitedly start shouting bubbles.



Which essentially proves your ideas are rubbish.

Origin, you should change your name to Origin of Stupidity.