What is Quantum Wave Cosmology discussion thread

[AlphaNumeric]

Atoms define the smallest membrane, there is substance inside the membrane. I think that some of those quarks were actually created by the impact causing a new zero effect. Those quarks could have been created by the experiment.

So in other words you aren't interested in checking your ideas with reality, you just want to make shit up. Congratulations, you have made up shit.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

So in other words you aren't interested in checking your ideas with reality, you just want to make shit up. Congratulations, you have made up shit.

I don't need to check. I have explained before that zero creates new material. Atoms are at a scale where any sort of compression is going to create a zero state somewhere. The nucleus of the Atom is already compressed just above zero. It's almost identical to the Bose-Einstein experiment, only instead of cold the experiment uses pressure. When stuff pops into existence you think that it popped out of the atom. Somebody posted earlier that Einstein predicted the outcome of the Condensate, then therefore he also predicted the outcome of atoms colliding at high speeds. There is very little difference.

 

[Dywyddyr]

I have explained before that zero creates new material.

No you haven't.
That was another claim you made and found that you kept having to add something to account for every question asked.
It started off as "nothing", then became an "inverted pendulum" (which you failed to explain), then that plus an electron, then that plus some sort of oscillating gravity field...

 

[Pincho Paxton]

No you haven't.
That was another claim you made and found that you kept having to add something to account for every question asked.
It started off as "nothing", then became an "inverted pendulum" (which you failed to explain), then that plus an electron, then that plus some sort of oscillating gravity field...

Now you just post lies. Look, if you aren't English then do not imagine that I am changing what I say, it's just that you have a problem reading the English language properly, and you keep ruining QW threads.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Now you just post lies.

Ah, I see.
You have comprehension problems:

Originally Posted by Pincho Paxton
2/ How does something begin from nothing?

Original - nothing.

No my answer is simple.. a pendulum. Well, an inverting pendulum full of electrons.

Now we add a pendulum. And the electrons.

Each time it hits the singularity it creates a new electron.

Now we add a singularity.

Static space with a vibration

Now we add the oscillating gravity equivalent...

All from here.
Any more denials to come?

Look, if you aren't English then do not imagine that I am changing what I say, it's just that you have a problem reading the English language properly, and you keep ruining QT threads.

On the contrary I have a perfectly good command of English (unlike you).
And since you've failed (again) to support your position in your own thread then it's hardly me that's "ruining" Q-W's thread.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Ah, I see.
You have comprehension problems:

Original - nothing.

Now we add a pendulum. And the electrons.

Now we add a singularity.

Now we add the oscillating gravity equivalent...

All from here.
Any more denials to come?


On the contrary I have a perfectly good command of English (unlike you).
And since you've failed (again) to support your position in your own thread then it's hardly me that's "ruining" Q-W's thread.

Nothing = pendulum (because the pendulum is just a wave with no mass)
Singularity = nothing as it is a location, and a location is a map reference.
Electron = 1st item produced. Now you have something.

Osculating Gravity.. no, its still that original wave from the first statement, the pendulum force. You just added a new thing.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Nothing = pendulum (because the pendulum is just a wave with no mass)

But a wave isn't nothing, (and must come from somewhere). Failure to understand English.
In addition to which you ALSO stated

so the material just swings in, and out of the hole

So it isn't a wave but some sort of material...

Singularity = nothing as it is a location, and a location is a map reference.

Failure of English again. The word singularity has a specific meaning.

Electron = 1st item produced. Now you have something.

First item produced?
Then why:

Well, an inverting pendulum full of electrons.

You have the electrons pre-existing in the "pendulum".

Osculating Gravity.. no, its still that original wave from the first statement, the pendulum force. You just added a new thing.

And as in the thread, you fail to explain why the electron should keep moving back and forth through the singularity. To do so requires the oscillating gravity (or equivalent), (especially as you claimed also that no energy was lost).

So you're still on a loser, and still talking bollocks.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I don't need to check.

Then you aren't doing science.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

But a wave isn't nothing, (and must come from somewhere). Failure to understand English.
In addition to which you ALSO stated

So it isn't a wave but some sort of material...


Failure of English again. The word singularity has a specific meaning.


First item produced?
Then why:

You have the electrons pre-existing in the "pendulum".


And as in the thread, you fail to explain why the electron should keep moving back and forth through the singularity. To do so requires the oscillating gravity (or equivalent), (especially as you claimed also that no energy was lost).

So you're still on a loser, and still talking bollocks.

You are going round in circles. using the same argument over and over, and each time not understanding the reply. I will let you wait until your science is my science. Then you can read the theory with the rest of this forum. I don't care how long it takes for you to catch up, why should I help you. You and Alphanumeric can be the last to catch up for all I care.

 

[quantum_wave]

So you see a need for Dark Matter, and Dark Energy even though you also have the Aether as well in your former thread? Maybe you are covering every requirement twice? It seems that you don't need all of them. Playing it safe? I mean you have two ways to create gravity in your arena, maybe 3 if you include Gravitons somewhere. Maybe you have gravity, and then you have added some sort of extra dense gravity. Or maybe you have included this new negative mass cheat that people have started using now. Maybe you could remove the Aether in this model, as it also has physics built into the Big Bang. I needed the Aether, because I created the physics, and I couldn't have a Big Bang in a Vacuum, as that is another zero state.

Interesting response. Thank you for reading the post and for making a comparison between QWC and your approach to "cell" theory. I'm afraid that your observations are off target if you think I am invoking aether unnecessarily and if you think that I am covering requirements twice. Actually you are wrong as I will try to explain, but I do welcome the opportunity to try to set your mind at ease in the next few days .

 

[Dywyddyr]

You are going round in circles. using the same argument over and over

That would be because you're STILL talking nonsense and technobabble.
You're inventing your own meaning for words and then complaining that no-one understands what you're talking about.
Either explain what the words (your version) mean or use the correct ones.

I will let you wait until your science is my science.

You haven't got a science. You've got nothing.

Then you can read the theory with the rest of this forum. I don't care how long it takes for you to catch up, why should I help you. You and Alphanumeric can be the last to catch up for all I care.

We're not going to "catch up" since there's sod all to catch up to.

 

[quantum_wave]

Pincho, don’t go and get banned. Your were the person that I least expected to be interested in QWC but yours were the only comments and they were in context. Based on your brief bio, this post to which you replied should be in the format that you can visualize. It represents a physical picture of the segment of QWC that starts from the burst of a big crunch and works through to the present; an expanding arena full of galaxies and galaxy groups moving away from each other at an accelerating pace. That scenario basically demotes our known observable expanding universe to a mere arena within a greater universe that is characterized by a landscape of similar arenas. Can you visualize that?

If so, can you visualize a big crunch developing from the overlap of two expanding arenas? If our arena intersects with another expanding arena there is an overlap formed. Galactic material in the overlap space comes from both parent arenas. A center of gravity is established and gravity causes a portion of the galactic material from two parent arenas to collapse around the new center of gravity. This collapse of galactic material and remnants forms a big crunch. That big crunch is the starting point of the post that I referenced above.

By visualizing the formation of a crunch from two intersecting arenas, and then the burst and expansion of the arena from a big crunch, you have visualized the arena level of order in Quantum Wave Cosmology. Do you have any luck when you try to visualize the physical pictures so far?

You mention that you need the aether. You also mention that when you think about what I described that I may have several ways to cause gravity and you mentioned that I may even have a super dense gravity. I am interested in explaining myself to overcome your concerns. I’m starting by asking you if you can visualize the scenarios I mention above. Can you? Maybe as an artist you can do some better graphics than mine .

 

[quantum_wave]

Since Pincho was concerned about me doubling up on gravity and invoking both dark energy and dark matter even though I also have the aether, I have to defend my speculations. I have said they are speculations for discussion. I speculate about the cause of the Big Bang, the cause of gravity, and what causes the presence of mass. The speculations are reasonable and responsible and follow a methodology that I describe. Claims to the contrary are false. Demands that I quantify what science cannot quantify are insincere. Accusations that my speculations make me a crank are what some resort to when they cannot practice the art of discussion about things for which there are no scientific answers yet. Maybe the best excuse for calling me a crank is that I speculate about things which no one can produce science that refutes. That bugs many people; some of those people resort of unprofessional behavior. None of the professionals defend their professionalism by confronting those types, and so the accusations go un-refuted just like my speculations. End of rant.

Lately in this thread my speculations are described in my scenario of the period from the big bang to the current expanding arena full of galaxies and galaxy groups moving away from each other at an accelerating pace, this post. I followed that scenario with a brief description of my speculations about a possible cause of the big crunch that I have describe as “bursting” in the scenario. That scenario includes speculation about new physics, i.e. a threshold of energy density below which matter forms from expanding dark energy.

In between those two scenarios is speculation about what goes on inside the big crunch that leads to the burst. I’ll give you the short version: Energy density within the crunch gets too high for matter to function, i.e. passes a maximum energy density threshold. Matter cannot function at densities above that threshold and gravity ceases (in QWC gravity is a function of mass). We are left with a core of dense state energy inside the big crunch. Dense state energy is simply the compressed energy squeezed out of the matter that entered the crunch as functioning mass.

Dense state energy has the characteristic called expansion potential and that potential is contained by the gravity of the crunch. As the core grows the compression that is exerted on the core declines until the core bursts out. That point marks the release and expansion of the dense dark energy described in the scenario. I speculate about new physics in that part to the extent that I consider gravity is a function of mass.

Of course these are speculations about things that science cannot yet answer. I post about these things because I like thinking about them and trying to find someone interested in the same things I am . This stuff cannot be easily refuted or easily falsified, but that alone does not make me a crank. If you point out a legitimate error in anything I say I will just admit it and correct my errors. My threads clearly show that I do that. The trouble some people have with me is I can defend myself; failure to be able to show me wrong results in unprofessional rants and accusations from the weak players. Why are there no players who actually practice the art of discussion?

Edit: For AN ... link