[URAIN]

Urod, on 03 September 2011 - 12:33 PM, said:

Nothingness has the following perfect properties for an universal reference system :

1) it is Universal , nothingness is the same everywhere and never changes
2) nothingness is also absolute and universal for that it doesn’t have a numerical value , not even zero since it doesn’t and can not exist , it is just a concept to express the absence of everything .
3) Nothingness is immune and independent of Size , Movement and Speed , it will always be the same
4) since it is not physically existent , the nothingness does not enter , participate or interferes with any formulas , it is absolutely neutral
5) nothingness , representing the non-presence of Somethingness , it is not just universal but an absolute Negative of Somethingness , always present in concept , unaltered by anything .

But let's not misunderstand it , nothihngness is not a reference point for the movement of a bycile , it is only for the general concept of Somethingness in order to clerify the general properties of the Universe .

I am sorry. I have mistaken. I thought your thinking same as mine (Metaphysics theory).

I have just read this post.

These properties are seems to me, you are calling space (absence of matter and energy) as nothing.

But space is not nothing it is also something or existence.

According to P.P principle 'Nothing' is that which has never existed at past.

which is not exist in present

and which will never exist in future also.

Other than this, everything is existence. Hence space (absence of energy and matter) also an existence.

Do you not think, the space avoid of matter and energy has existed now.

Then, How this will be nothing ?

Only nothing is that which has never existed in all three times. Other than this everything is existence.

Your property 1) says nothingness existed. It is false as per P.P. Principle.
2) Property accepted.
3) Again it is false. It indicates that nothing is space. But space is not nothing.
4) It again says about the space.
5) It again space.



Please don't call the space as nothing.

The space (absence of matter and energy) has the main role in this world. World will know it, in some days.

[sigurdV]

Hi U-rod and U-rain !

Your nicks are similar,your treatment of language are similar and your opinions on the U-niverse are similar...

Are you sure your not the same?

[Urod]

URAIN, on 17 January 2012 - 11:33 PM, said:

I am sorry. I have mistaken. I thought your thinking same as mine (Metaphysics theory).

I have just read this post.

These properties are seems to me, you are calling space (absence of matter and energy) as nothing.
........

Please don't call the space as nothing.

Sorry , your statement shows clearly that you did not read my theory , the UPN , simply because NOwhere UPN states what you are saying .
IN CONTRARY , to prove further that you did not read my UPN , my theory clearly states that ALL of the Universe is FILLED and MADE by a non-granular SuperFluid .
Please read UPN first .
Thank you !

[Urod]

sigurdV, on 18 January 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

Hi U-rod and U-rain !

Your nicks are similar,your treatment of language are similar and your opinions on the U-niverse are similar...

Are you sure your not the same? :)

OMG , Sig , you let me down , I though you are one of the few that read the UPN First before making comments ...
Please read above my reply to Urain who , also , did not read my UPN .
So to answer you comment , Sig , NO , Urain and me are Totally different eventhough we both butcher the English language . Sorry .

[URAIN]

Urod, on 18 January 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

Sorry , your statement shows clearly that you did not read my theory , the UPN , simply because NOwhere UPN states what you are saying .
IN CONTRARY , to prove further that you did not read my UPN , my theory clearly states that ALL of the Universe is FILLED and MADE by a non-granular SuperFluid .
Please read UPN first .
Thank you !

I have commented to only what you have said.

Nothingness property also only you have said, know?

Please think again, those are not the property of nothingness.

In properties, you have repeatedly said that nothingness is same. Nothingness same means what?


Which has existed that may be same or different.

But how can you say the properties of a nothing, which has never existed at any time ?

Nothingness is out of imagine.

You can not say that's property.

If you say any property (means, How that is) of that, then that is not nothing. Else something or existence.

Please once again you think about nothing property which you have given in your posts.

[URAIN]

sigurdV, on 18 January 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

Hi U-rod and U-rain !

Your nicks are similar,your treatment of language are similar and your opinions on the U-niverse are similar...

Are you sure your not the same?

sigurdV, good joke

It made to me enjoy the moment. Thank you for it.

I have used P.P.Principle to show the world that there is a

1)Base for reincarnation

2)Base for Law of conservation energy and invariance

3)Base for Existence of God.


I was requested you also, for reading but you have not read.

[sigurdV]

Hi urod I tried to make a joke...

I claimed that urod = urain... Thats to say in reality urain IS urod.

Ha Ha Ha!

No i dont think your theories are identical:

IF urain and urod is the same person

THEN the explanation behind that extraordinary fact

could be the testing of variations on a yet hidden theme...

Please smile urod

[Urod]

sigurdV, on 18 January 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

Hi urod I tried to make a joke...

Please smile urod :iamsmiling:

Dear Sigurd and Urain ,

First of all I would smille if we would read the darn UPN so we can start a fruitfull discussion .

Untill then Sig what do you say of making an atheist out of dear Urain , because , Urain , the only type of god that my UPN allows for is an Advanced Alien Super Specie , self genetically modifyed to correct the crude nature yet open to either being bad or good . See my essay about it under the same title and part of my book Recipe for a Nation .

The UPN allows ( a thing that floored me ) for instant transmission of certain type of movements accross the infinity of the Universe simply because the foundation of the Universe , the SuperFluid ( what fills up the Universe and makes us ) it is uncompressible even though , as you see in deep space , it is very 'thin', extreme low viscosity . However , the Type of such 'movement' I am not able right now to dischifer .... how about you guys help a bit ?

Best regards to both ,
Doru

[sigurdV]

Urod, on 19 January 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

Dear Sigurd and Urain ,

First of all I would smille if we would read the darn UPN so we can start a fruitfull discussion .

Untill then Sig what do you say of making an atheist out of dear Urain , because , Urain , the only type of god that my UPN allows for is an Advanced Alien Super Specie , self genetically modifyed to correct the crude nature yet open to either being bad or good . See my essay about it under the same title and part of my book Recipe for a Nation .

The UPN allows ( a thing that floored me ) for instant transmission of certain type of movements accross the infinity of the Universe simply because the foundation of the Universe , the SuperFluid ( what fills up the Universe and makes us ) it is uncompressible even though , as you see in deep space , it is very 'thin', extreme low viscosity . However , the Type of such 'movement' I am not able right now to dischifer .... how about you guys help a bit ?

Best regards to both ,
Doru

Well... on first sight turning a theologician into an atheist seems a good idea...But what if our honest work result in three theologicians instead? Is it worth the risk?

But why not line out the strategy? I DID read your UPN! Ill recheck to make sure, maybe i read something else instead?

cya soon

PS I feel confident we all three will scrutinize the foundational work done by any of us

[URAIN]

sigurdV, on 19 January 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

Well... on first sight turning a theologician into an atheist seems a good idea...But what if our honest work result in three theologicians instead? Is it worth the risk?

Correct guess.

sigurdV, on 19 January 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

a soon

PS I feel confident we all three will scrutinize the foundational work done by any of us

Not by mine, but by any of us.

Great words

I appreciate.

[Urod]

sigurdV, on 19 January 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

Well... on first sight turning a theologician into an atheist seems a good idea...But what if our honest work result in three theologicians instead? Is it worth the risk?

But why not line out the strategy? I DID read your UPN! Ill recheck to make sure, maybe i read something else instead?

cya soon

PS I feel confident we all three will scrutinize the foundational work done by any of us

THANK you dear Sig !
First , there are NO risks taking in converting to atheism since the UPN proves ONE FUNDAMENTAL THING : the SuperFluid came First !

Secondly , regarding the UPN , before we work out the math and the rest , we must prove its logic is solid so Please , use the ( numbered ) Logic Steps when re-viewing the UPN in order to keep all very simple as intended by me for troubleshooting .
Please remember , this is not a Competition but a Cooperation , multiple Names on a science works is common ...
Many thanks again for being serious about it , Sig ! AND , no offence to god believers , no insult , I am only trying to make sense of all BUT if the Result says NO to religion than do not blame me , instead .... adjust !


Cheers Sig !

[Urod]

sigurdV, on 19 January 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

I DID read your UPN! Ill recheck to make sure, maybe i read something else instead?

I see you were suspended ?? What in the world happened ??

I am looking forward to see you back so we can discuss what you read in the UPN .
I plead with the Moderators to let Sig back in , Thak you !

[Urod]

First of all I want to say an honest Thank You to the ScienceForums moderators for making sure that we all can post freely and without being sabotaged because our views ! Thank You !

Coming back to the UPN , here is the best comment so far on a subject that is occupying my mind for a long time : I know I had to pick from the blue ( measurements ) the speed of light but of course I am not happy .
As the Observer pointed out , the UPN should provide ALL the info , formulas , speeds , dimensions ( all that Marcus at al spell more punkishly , such as ‘flavour’ and ‘colour’ of sub-particles trying to assimilate the UPN via the Quantum theory , not a good idea ) .

So how does logic connects the dots to determine with Absolute precision the formation of Bright Vortices , BV , ( formerly known as Black Holes ) , their rotational speed/size and the speed / size / characteristics of the Micro Vortices , MV , ( formerly known as the absolute sub-particle ) that the BV produces ( spins ) continuously until it disappears ?
So far the level of the UPN is just cracking the door and since I am not a genius I posted it here so more can try to open it wider , hence is a Collective Fun .

BUT , besides that first one has to read all the Logic Steps and be confident they Stand , my direction of explaining how BV are formed ( which if we do we demonstrate how the MV – sub-particles – are formed + their properties , i.e. everything around us ) follows the foundation that I already set and confirmed so far as solid ( still open to scrutiny as long as you don’t waste time comparing it with the Quantum theory ) .
Therefore , based on the foundation so far , the BV can only be Harmonics , i.e. an Amplification of the 2.7 Kelvin motion ( energy ) that we see all around us , and I am happy with this little yet firm step .

Going further on this logic path , only waves that coincide in their Picks can add their motion ( energy ) to induce Harmonics ( amplification ) , and the intensity of those harmonics is directly proportional with both the number of coincident waves and their intensities .

Continuing to reverse engineer the creations of BV the last question is How do those waves in the SuperFluid occur ?
Shamelessly referring to Granular Super fluids already observed in laboratory ( see links in the UPN ) I take a hint towards the reported Spontaneously Occurring Vortices !! Jeee , should we take the bait , Markus Observer ?

As I pointed in the UPN text , I suggest analysing the fine point of the ( UPN ) SuperFluid having to be extremely fine such as its viscosity is approaching minus infinity YET not possible to disappear ( hence there Must be a Bottom level ) .
So what does it mean such an extreme small viscosity in a non-granular fluid ?
INSTABILITY ! Hence Waves … QED !
But that’s just a gut-feeling ‘logic’ , guys , How do you explain this Instability ?
Because explaining it is a Major Prize , since it will demonstrate the existence of the Spontaneous Waves in the SuperFluid , hence the guaranteed possibility of them Harmonizing , hence the creation of the BV , therefore their spun creation of MV ( matter and energy as we sense it , i.e. EVERITHING ) .

Again , I suggest ( please confirm acceptance ) to focus on this instability due to the extreme low viscosity of the SuperFluid . I’m going briefly to exchange views with Mr. Heineken and I’ll BRB , thank you ( just because I like humour it doesn’t mean I am not serious ) .

P.S. : No need to visit my web site ( as in my Sig , unless you want to read The Recipe for a Nation ) , Thanks to ScienceForums I have room enough graciously given by the Administration to update Here the UPN as it happens .

[Urod]

Demonstrating that Whatever makes up the Universe it is UN-compressible at its foundation :

I wanted to present this very important logic Step ( 2.0 ) in the UPN that it is under construction and not yet officially in the UPN text .

Part of 2.0 is Logic Step 2.3 which demonstrates that Whatever makes up the Universe it is UN-compressible at its foundation with Huge effects ( described already in the UPN ) .

Your constructive criticism is Highly Desired , please help the Cause , Thank you !


Initial subject : logic Steps 2.0 , Spontaneous movement in the non-granular SuperFluid .

Here is demonstrated that the non-granular SuperFluid ( SF ) is in continuous micro-motion behaving like a dynamo producing motion that represents the Fundamental Vortexes ( FV ) which are the fundamental source of energy in the Universe surrounding and happening non-stop all around us .
Those FVs are extremely small and weak . However , by association they can form the equivalent of Harmonics , amplifying their power collectively .

( Talking about Spontaneous formation in a highly organized Shape – sphere - 'Ball Lighting ' the size of a soccer ball , as I seen it my self from one and a half meters in a small room as an early teen during a summer night electrical storm , had the surface strikingly moving like the patterns on soap bubbles , the colors were orange and red . That motion is still in my mind ) .

Over time , by haphazard , the FVs can occur in a pattern or formation that triggers the formation of Bright Vortexes ( formerly named ' black holes ' ) .

2.0 - Why is the SuperFluid continuously moving at its most fundamental level , the creation of the Fundamental Vortexes ( FV ) :

In the UPN has been shown that the SuperFluid has an extreme low viscosity besides being UN-compressible and non-granular . The details are in the body of the UPN , I'll save space here and just pick-up the conclusions .

2.1 ) The extreme low viscosity of the SuperFluid ( SF ) as a property necessary to satisfy the complete absence of Nothingness means that the SF can fill the smallest possible 3-D volume/space but without disappearing ( Nothingness can not be created and Somethingness can not disappear or became nothingness ) .

2.2 ) This means that the final space , the absolute smallest space that the SF can fill is Finite . The Logic says that if Somethingness is not Nothingness than it has , or it occupies Space . Hence the smallest possible space is not an abstract number ( going towards minus infinite in Size , i.e. Smaller , the Smallest , not negative space as someone interpret it ) but it is a number representing the limit at which the SF can fill a space .

2.3 ) This smallest yet finite space also Explains the UN-compressibility of the SF : it can not be Squeezed any further , it can not became any smaller , hence it is not compressible . This has many consequences concerning other properties and the Behaviour of the SF .


2.4 ) ... Under work right now and to be continued even if some one else beats me to it

As you can see Step 2.3 firmly establishes the UN-compressibility of the foundation of the Universe .
How Huge this is and Why the UPN is still classified as " Strange " represents an Unfair clasification : no other accepted ( or not ) theory including the Quantum/Relativity ever explained such an important and fundamental property of Nature !
And this is just the begining , demonstrating the Perpetual Source of energy in the Universe ( the FVs , Logic Steps 2. under construction and looking good ) should place the UPN at the front of Accepted theories and give us a better way to understand Nature .

Cheers !

This post has been edited by Urod: 22 February 2012 - 07:27 PM

[Urod]

About the Relativity theory , the UPN theory proves it wrong , right here in this thread .

Matter of fact proving that the 'fabric' of the Universe is un-compressible immediately disqualifies the Relativity because the 'fabric' can not be stretched nor compressed as the Relativity claims . QED .

2.1 )  The extreme low viscosity of the SuperFluid ( SF ) , as a property necessary to satisfy the complete absence of Nothingness , means that the SF can and must Continuously fill the smallest possible 3-D volume/space but without disappearing ( Nothingness can not be created and Somethingness can not disappear or became nothingness ) .

2.2 )  This means that the final space , the absolute smallest space that the SF can fill is Finite .The Logic says that if Somethingness is not Nothingness than it has , or it occupies  Space . Hence the smallest possible space is not an abstract number ( going towards minus infinite in Size ) but it is an extremely small  number representing the limit at which the SF can fill a space ( before it would ‘vanish’ becoming Nothingness which would be impossible since Nothingness can not be created nor Somethingness can became Nothingness ) . The difference between Somethingness and Nothingness is absolute .

2.3 )  This Smallest yet finite space also Explains the UN-compressibility of the SF : it can not be Squeezed any further , it can not became any smaller or disappear , hence it is Not Compressible .

Take the time to read the UPN and see its simplicity :
Http://www.TheRecipe...n.WordPress.com , future shocking .