# Universe Expansion

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by hansda, Aug 24, 2017.

1. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
You know, Newtonian Model(NM) and GR can be correlated. I have another thread for this.

3. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,676
That's nice but that certainly does not answer his question.

5. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,726
Indeed, Newtonian physics can be considered a special case of GR; I never said otherwise. (I also note there's no link to this other thread.)

I'll repeat my question and rephrase it, just in case you misunderstood: please show a derivation of the Einstein field equations from your TOE.

7. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
Correlating NM with GR through my TOE can be seen here http://www.sciforums.com/threads/correlating-newtonian-model-with-einsteins-gr.159332/

Messages:
1,726

Messages:
2,424

10. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,726
I'm not spotting any Einstein field equations in that post?

11. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
See the last sentence in the OP.

12. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,726
This line? "As the motion of a particle is same or common in both these Newtonian Model and Einstein's GR, we can say that there is some correlation between IFS/IRF and curvature of space-time."

How is this the Einstein field equations? Check out the formula here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_field_equations#Mathematical_form That's what I'm looking for, as that's what I asked for.

13. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,676
He has no idea what you are talking about. He thinks field equations are calculations that tell you the amount of corn produced per acre.

DaveC426913 likes this.
14. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,726
Well, deriving that would still be a quite useful result. Perhaps not so much for the theory of relativity, but still.

hansda and origin like this.
15. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
Here I mostly focused on the hidden forces in NM. I observed four such hidden forces. I haven't yet focused on the math part of these forces. That part I will do later. It may require more time.

16. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,726
So in conclusion, right now, you cannot derive the Einstein field equations from your TOE. In other words, you have no idea whether your TOE is compatible with the theory of relativity.

Then how can you claim it's a TOE?

17. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
Good Joke. I like it.

Messages:
2,424

19. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,726
I am reading it right now. Can you point me to the page with the Einstein field equation derivation, because I'm not seeing it when paging through it?

20. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
My TOE is based on Newtonian Model. It is based on the concept of force and not on the concept of space-time.

21. ### NotEinsteinValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,726
So, when I said:

22. ### DaveC426913Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,788
I have a theory that all forces and particles in the universe are a result of the Swishing of the Tail of The Cosmic Unicorn.

Now, STCU cannot explain how these things interact - the masses, charges, forces, or virtually any other observed phenomena - but that's OK, I attribute these to STCU's hidden properties - to be examined some time later.

In the meantime, my STCU is competitively equivalent to Hansda's NewAgeNewton theory.

23. ### hansdaValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,424
First you read my papers completely. Then I can answer all your queries. So have some patience.