The universe building block - a radical theory

[YordanYanakiev]

But where does the energy come from in the first place ?

The energy is consequence of the affection of one to another base building block, with a very specific configurations.
It might or might not present in some universes. This might be one of the most weird things in my theory, since it is common belief that the energy is the base, but so far it explains nothing in the theories than just some word which lack of consistency persisting in there

 

[YordanYanakiev]

energy/physical cannot be created nor destroyed....2nd law of thermodynamics---applied by scientist in late 1800's......there is no source of our finite physical/energy--- aka occupied space ---Universe.

It is has been over a hundred years since this discovery not news to those who are actually paying attention. imho

Well.. I can not accept that there is a word "energy", and everything is build on it. and It have a states, which noone can define, and no one knows from where it came, where it goes, and what exactly it is, and what could be actually be done with it, and what consequences will the actions having into the ether for instance. Even the word "ether" have actually "accepted meaning".
The basics of the modern physics is built upon some words which the peoples can not even explain.
This is one of the issues which I am fighting with.
-The lack of simplicity in the very base things, which should be common for any universe out there.

 

[rr6]

Simple Facts Too Complex For Trolls

2nd law of thermodynamics is one of the many complementary building blocks of our finite Universe.

Simple laws simple concepts simple toys befuddle the trolls under the bridge, driveling dribble onto their reflection, forever distorting their perceptions of truth and the finite Universe( occupied space ) that embraces all humans and trolls under the bridge of life.

1 + 1 = 4 and trolls scratch their heads thinking only of the drivel, dripping onto their reflections of life, truth,

and any dreams of pursuing the grace's of mind/intellect and happiness for all humans and trolls alike.

r6

 

[river]

2nd law of thermodynamics is one of the many complementary building blocks of our finite Universe.

Simple laws simple concepts simple toys befuddle the trolls under the bridge, driveling dribble onto their reflection, forever distorting their perceptions of truth and the finite Universe( occupied space ) that embraces all humans and trolls under the bridge of life.

1 + 1 = 4 and trolls scratch their heads thinking only of the drivel, dripping onto their reflections of life, truth,

and any dreams of pursuing the grace's of mind/intellect and happiness for all humans and trolls alike.

r6

Plato

Plato is wrong

 

[YordanYanakiev]

No, he's spewing out incoherent nonsense peppered with geometry terminology he doesn't understand and has never done anything mathematical with.

I can't argue on this, I am not a mathematician.

If you have no formalisation then you have only supposition and baseless assertions.

This is the most common expression among the peoples studding something for a quite some time, and the thing which is shown to them is very revolting in some way.

Don't delude yourself, it is not. It is just baseless vapid assertions. Giving a few wordy sentences of description is a trillion trillion light years away from having anything remotely like a field theory. Do you even know what field theory is within physics?

I am not deluding myself. It is just a theory which I am finding interesting, and I am sharing it with the world.
And yes. As I said - it have some touch points with the field ideas inside the field theory, but I am not interfering with anything other than the field itself. ( sure thing there is alot to be thinked about ).

Considering you have zero formalisation, no working models and absolutely no ability to say anything about reality with any more justification than "Because I say so" you do not have a theory, you do not even have an hypothesis, you have mumbo jumbo. If you think rr6 is saying something remotely coherently then you really have no idea about science.

It is not "because I said so", i admit, It does look like, but actually any theory invented at any point historically, is based on these words "because I said so", before it became a common sense.
About justification. I have to admit - to prove my theory is much more harder than recreating the big bang.
Anyway - if it does fit to the current theories perfectly then It could at least be considered "interesting", and after all - If one theory can not be directly proven, then It might be considered "interesting" if it can not be disproved, am I correct ?
About having "mumbo jumbo" - I will be really happy if I have some of these, but currently I do not, o well.. probably for a quite some time N. Tesla had the same amount of the mentioned expression. ( but I am not comparing with him, just giving a heavy example ).
As I said early - I am not a mathematician, and I will not argue with any high level equations.
I am keeping the things as simply as possible, since I strongly believe that the simplicity shall rule on the very base level.

 

[Stanley]

Uni means one so it\they would be contained within the universe like eggs, they are magnetically kept apart, unless the polls shift, then they (may) mesh? intermittently.

Edit: I like the term "multi-verse though, but wouldnt they really be alternative realities?

 

[YordanYanakiev]

Uni means one so it\they would be contained within the universe like eggs, they are magnetically kept apart, unless the polls shift, then they (may) mesh? intermittently.

Hello Stanley.
To understand what I mean, as refereed with the definition which i have given in the main post - I will make an example.

Lets have a region of the space with basic building block with none properties. triggered by 2 different events, the base building block switch to "affected states", and start adding the properties in coherent with the event ( there is some work to be done with the explanation in here yet.. ).
The result will be a 2 regions of the space, which having a if not completely, then a different physics, these regions is practically an universes, ruled by different rules, because of the different base building block properties configurations. And as stated - these regions can occupy the same space, but because of their completely different physics never interfere each other.
It could create the bubbling universes, as You have described, but there is no problem if the physics between them is not interferable.
And Yes . - one of the result of the infinity possibilities might be a two universes, which act like 2 same magnets pointing the same polest, kicking away each other, because some result physical properties. But basically anything is possibly with this theory. It really open an infinite universe.

 

[YordanYanakiev]

Seems like the interest to this theory is ginormous. Please at least refer me if You are going to use it as a basis.
I will be happy if there is adoption from a real physician / mathematicians further.

 

[origin]

Seems like the interest to this theory is ginormous. Please at least refer me if You are going to use it as a basis.
I will be happy if there is adoption from a real physician / mathematicians further.

Um, there will be no interest from anyone in a science field about your idea. Your idea basically says "there are are a bunch of rules that the universe follows and if there are other universes they will aslo have rules". What you have is a mixture of the obvious mixed with idle conjecture. It ain't a theory, it ain't a hypothesis, it is really not much of anything.:shrug:

 

[rr6]

Iagnine The Following Expandsion Contraction Set

Graviton is the building block and it has static geometric pattern of a dipyramid that will superficially appear to have two end nodal-vertexial events and central triangular girth of 3 nodal-vertexial events. imho

Since gravitons are part of great tubular of expanded an contracted triangular areas so those superfically appearing single nodal-vertexial events are actually another triangular set of 3 nodal-vertexial events. imho

This can be considered as the follow linear expression of a great geodesci tubular, where the number 3 is representative of both expanded - contracted ares over time, a 2D triangular area irrespective of how small or large. T

3 -3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 3


We can also visualize this as a snake that is swallowing a large rodent, wherein the head is small, the opens wide, and then the neck expands, then the mid-sections expandss and the mouth is now small as is the tail end.

With this concept in mind think of a bicycel tube that is really a torus/tori that can appear nearly flat but if a finite blast( pulse/quantum ) of air were to go through it the tube might expand and then contract as the finite blast/pulse of air travels through. imho

These are relatively simple concepts to imagine so trolls need not apply.

r6

 

[YordanYanakiev]

Um, there will be no interest from anyone in a science field about your idea. Your idea basically says "there are are a bunch of rules that the universe follows and if there are other universes they will aslo have rules". What you have is a mixture of the obvious mixed with idle conjecture. It ain't a theory, it ain't a hypothesis, it is really not much of anything.:shrug:

Regardless it. Still I had to declare it. And yet - on the very base level it is practically a common law described among dimensions and universes. No one before have described it this way. And seems like everything match the idea.
I am not sure if it is not much of anything, or it is practically - everything. Since as simple one law is - the more perfect it is.

 

[YordanYanakiev]

@rr6 - This really have nothing to do with the topic in here. :|

 

[origin]

I am not sure if it is not much of anything, or it is practically - everything. Since as simple one law is - the more perfect it is.

The problem is that it answers nothing, makes on predictions, and it does not lead to a deeper understanding of anything. A simpler law would be - shit happens. This is true but hardly useful.

 

[origin]

@rr6 - This really have nothing to do with the topic in here. :|

On this we agree! His numerology has nothing to with anything.

 

[rr6]

@rr6 - This really have nothing to do with the topic in here. :|

That depends on whether my comments are true or not and that is goes for any one posts in any thread.

When you actually have any evidence or rational logic that invalidates any of my comments, please share. Niether you nor anyone else has ever offered any evidence or rational logic that would even begin to invalidate more than .005 of any of my comments as stated.

Please come back and share when you have something even begins to invalidate my comments as stated, with rational logic and hopefully some kind of verifying evidence. You nor anyone else has yet to do so, because you nor they have anything.

Pleas forgive me if I do not hold my breath waiting for any of the above from you.

Gravitons are the fundamental building blocks of Universe. There great geodesic tubes having gravitonically pulsed behaviour ergo the traveling expansion-contraction symbolism I used having 3 representing the minimal 2D cross section of any gravitonic tube. imho.

This is simple conceptual stuff so I'm sure it is way over your head to grasp, as is the case with the many of the trolls here at sci-forums. Either too much or not enough education seems to be a common theme in most of threads I've partaken in around here. This one is not much differrent. imho

r6

r6

 

[river]

The energy is consequence of the affection of one to another base building block, with a very specific configurations.
It might or might not present in some universes. This might be one of the most weird things in my theory, since it is common belief that the energy is the base, but so far it explains nothing in the theories than just some word which lack of consistency persisting in there

Energy to me means or refers to , Cosmic Plasmas

 

[origin]

When you actually have any evidence or rational logic that invalidates any of my comments, please share. Niether you nor anyone else has ever offered any evidence or rational logic that would even begin to invalidate more than .005 of any of my comments as stated.
r6

That is difficult to refute gibberish, other than to say it is gibberish.

Try refuting this:

Dog fart banana stars orbiting colloquialisms.

 

[CHRIS.Q]

heheee

 

[origin]

Energy to me means or refers to , Cosmic Plasmas

Really? So if I pick up a bowling ball off the ground and place it on a shelf then I have increased it's Potential Cosmic Plasma?:bugeye:

 

[river]

Really? So if I pick up a bowling ball off the ground and place it on a shelf then I have increased it's Potential Cosmic Plasma?:bugeye:

The OP is about , the Universe building block , not bowling balls