Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Willem, Apr 16, 2019.
What ever energy , is there , In the Cosmic Web , it gives off no light energy .
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I have nothing to do with googleusercontent - it went there automatically.
At least it is not elegant.
Yes, obviously. That's what Google's webcache does.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Edit: Wait, wait, wait. I'm an idiot. This is Willem admitting he's talanum46 over there.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Clearly there is a form of energy , in wave form . That connects quantumly , the two particles , in such a way that it keeps a balance between the two . Up and down .
We can not detect this energy form ; currently
Further what would happen if these two particles orientation were rotated at extremely low and fast speeds ?
Unfortunately, Bells' Theorem showed that, if there were some unknown form of communication between the particles, it could not be Lorentz invariant - it would have to violate relativity.
Yet clearly there is an energy between Quantum particles .
It seems to that Bells' Theorem , and Relativity over rule what is actually happening between quantum particles .
No disrespect to either ; but surely we can understand the inadequacy of either explaining this communication .
Since they can't .
The communication between quantum particles , there is an energy , never the less does exist .
A New theory is needed , obviously .
In my post # 65
I rotate the quantum particle orientation , in order to expose this energy between quantum particles .
Expose the energy of entanglement . So that it becomes detectable .
Because I hope the Density of this energy increases .
Postulate: Energy = property of particles x property of space.
Look: Potemtial Energy is mgh: mh is a property of particles and g is a property of space. E = pc: p is a property of particles and c is a property of space. Now why doesnt Kinetic Energy = (1/2)mv^2 and E = mc^2 fit herewith?
For E = mc^2 we may say this is really: E = mkc, and mk is a property of particles and c is a property of space. Where k happens to be numerically equal to c. Would this fit with the theoretic derivation of E = mc^2?
For kinetic energy we can try to do symmilarly: E = (1/2)mwv, and then mv/2 is a property of particles and w is a property of particles - so this doesn't work out nicely, except if we prove w is really a property of space. Where v happens to be numerically equal to w.
Elastic Potential Energy = 1/2k(Delta x)^2 = kDelta xDelta x. Here x is a property of particles then k delta x must be a property of the medium: the rubber band (standing in for: property of space).
For E = kT we have: T is a property of particles and k is a property of space.
Is there an equation for Energy that I haven't considered?
Even for the Pseudoscience forum, this is a really low-quality discussion.
W=Fd. E=iVt = i²Rt = V²t/R.
Perhaps the idea you are groping ,dimly, towards is that the dimensions of energy are ML²/T². One could describe mass as a property of particles, whereas L and T are dimensions of space and time.
Mass is a property of all physical particles . More importantly ; the many properties of the mass , are actually the Qualities of the Mass .
Magnetic Field , spin , vibration , frequency etc .
Properties of Mass is found . By understanding the Qualities of Mass .
Separate names with a comma.