Gravity : down to earth model, that will knock your socks off.

[grzegorzsz830402]

2 hours ago, Halc said:

Again, a classical concept inappropriately applied. An electron for instance is matter. It has mass but occupies no volume. It is a fundamental thing. If it had volume, it would have a left half and a right half which would contradict it being a fundamental thing.

Again model you are operating on is flawed at fundamental assumptions in so many ways that it becomes a little funny that you are still defending this temple on fragile foundation. 

[grzegorzsz830402]

2 hours ago, Halc said:

The word is "right??", and no, that statement isn't right. "Wright" means 'maker or builder', like a play-wright.

Spelling mistake. Thanks for pointing that out.

[grzegorzsz830402]

2 hours ago, Halc said:

We wouldn't posit it if we couldn't detect it, so not right.

 

7 hours ago, grzegorzsz830402 said:

Many experiments to detect and study dark matter particles directly are being actively undertaken, but none have yet succeeded.

If you claim Wikipedia lies about it. 

There is no way you believe that people will take things you say seriously if you will insist on that. You would loose credibility and they would accept my arguments simply because they would not trust you. I don't won't that. I do not think that any reasonable scientist would say that. You are not trying hard enough to make it somewhat difficult for me. 

[grzegorzsz830402]

2 hours ago, Halc said:

Dark energy is evenly distributed and does not lose density as space expands. Matter (dark or not) is not evenly distributed (both are attracted to gravity wells and repelled from gravity hills, and the average density of matter goes down as it gets distributed over more space as space expands.

None of this stuff is medium for light. Light doesn't have a medium.

Quoting current model assumptions and inconsistencies makes you look like either you are not trying to defend it or simply can not. And you do not really understand energy right?? Space do not expand it just is. Matter can expand.

"None of this stuff is medium for light. Light doesn't have a medium."

In your model for sure because this is assumption that was made long time ago and it became a dogma. Light is not a wave or medium needed for wave to propagate in your model. Yet you can precisely measure its wavelength. There would be a loud lough in audience if you would chalenge me to debate and defend this temple of yours on fragile foundation. (Garmagon)(lego ninjago)

[grzegorzsz830402]

2 hours ago, Halc said:

It has nothing to do with anybody being a genius, or to do with belief, unbacked assertions, or admiration. It has to do with publishing a model that fits the evidence better than other models. This is pretty much the opposite of the way a church works. Science, unlike a religion, encourages being questioned. But it pays little attention to the ignorant (or in this case, nonexistent) ones since they pose no challenge.

You speak about science and scientists from ages ago. Since Einstein introduced heaven again (time is a useful concept, one year is full earth rotation around Sun, and day around it's own axis)) would you accept concept of love as a dimension?? Words are categories scientists confused themselves because they had no courage to admit that they simply do not understand. It is a downfall of science since then. How many theoretical dimensions are currently considered 12?? 13?? How can you speak about them without laughing. 

As since became religion words lost their meaning, categories have been mixed up. Religious Tower of Babel. Yet they did it to themselves, or who knows they may find deity that they will blame it on in another dimension. 

If you want to reclaim your way to think logically and rationality start before Einstein delusions where proclaimed to be genius theory. That explained nothing yet confused everything. 

And what an elegant cop-out time and space started with Big-Bang. And try to ask question what was before that. You can not as there was no time there was no before. Yet concept of time was actually a human creation that is a useful concept. Einstein after all was a genius. 

[grzegorzsz830402]

Time is useful classical concept, yet terrible non-classical made up dimensions. 

I can go forward and backwards, left and right, up stairs and down stairs. 

Time sucks whenever I check it is always today. I try to be more precise and check closer and whenever I check it is always now. This dimensions sucks ( point dimension). Non-classical, acha that explains a lot.

Same, if you ask some scientists do they believe in retrocausality some admit some strongly denies. They name it post-selection. 

We just gone name it differently and they will stop asking questions. 

And it actually works, yet it is not science anymore. 

Titanic is going down my friend and you are polishing silver forks. Have you really blinded yourself so badly. 

And Jordan Peterson was warning. Do not lie, do not bend that ruler of reality infront your own face, it will snap eventually. 

And do not lie Pinocchio because your nose have grown out off proportion, there is no way to hide it now.

Edited June 15, 2023 by grzegorzsz830402
Spelling

[grzegorzsz830402]

 

Theory of everything:

A theory of everything (TOE[1] or TOE/ToE), final theory, ultimate theory, unified field theory or master theory is a hypothetical, singular, all-encompassing, coherent theoretical framework of physics that fully explains and links together all aspects of the universe.

"Finding a theory of everything is one of the major unsolved problems in physics."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

So can we accept that current scientific model is not meeting criteria and it is not a secret, it is actually accept by scientific society.

Do you feel confident in your abilities enough to assess for yourself alternative theories. Or you would wait for other scientist that are at the top of hierarchy for validation before your would accept it?? Would you trust your personal judgement/evaluation more, if you would personally feel convinced about it's validity. Would you risk your reputation, and openly comunicate that you disagree with group of top scientists or would you let it go.

 

[grzegorzsz830402]

21 hours ago, OceanBreeze said:

Oh, this has definitely started to be entertaining, now that you are having a conversation with our famous member, who now goes by the handle SPBpolymath.

I doubt very much you can knock his socks off though; he has more socks than Imelda Marcos had shoes!

I will drop in now and then when I can use a good laugh. Yes, I do have a sense of humor.

You got my hopes in. I feel slightly disappointed. Why SPBpolymath have  bail out?? Looks like someone is afraid of loosing intellectual contest?? I think so. 

[OceanBreeze]

On 6/14/2023 at 10:12 PM, grzegorzsz830402 said:

Is it because his dwarfed every one before with his intellectual abilities?? Is that why he is famous, because my first impression is that they are exceptional and he could serve some intellectual *** whooping to cocky strangers like me. 

 

 

He is famous for the amount of bullshit he posts And the number of socks he uses to get around bans. Still, we do tolerate him to some degree mainly for the entertainment value he sometimes brings.

 

Quote

If there was some unfinished business beetween some members, guys keep it to yourself. New name suggests it was. And if there is someone in power to remove someone off this conversation then I will cease to post aswell.

 

 

It is entirely up to you whether you stay or go, unless you are banned, then the choice is no longer yours to make. So far, I see no reason to ban you, but you are getting close. See next section

Quote

 

My email:

(removed)

Just in case:)

 

It is against the few rules we have, to post personally identifying information, including your email address.

This is done for your own protection as well as to protect the forum and is standard practice just about on all forums.

You should know about this, so I am issuing you with a warning to not post this again. No other action will be taken at this time; just the warning.

Quote

 

If interested provide me with your evaluation of probabilities about my TOE. And it turning out to be correct once presented in it's full complexity. 

"I doubt very much you can knock his socks off though;"

So, if I will accomplished that will you be bedazzled by my intellectual superiority and humility ofcource??

As only handful of people could validate my model as Unified Theory Of Everything to general public. Achieving that would for sure live you awestruck.

 

I haven't seen anything that even remotely resembles a TOE. In fact, I haven't seen much of anything you have posted that even makes any sense.

The reason you can still post here is the same reason that Poly can still post here; for entertainment value only, but even that is wearing thin.

 

Quote

 

For new to replace old there is requirement to be validated by top alfa małes for others. 

It is interesting that very few people would have courage to do it themselves for themselves.

Jordan Peterson explains venture to unknown masterfully in my humble opinion. 

Vast ocean of possibilities can easily throw your brain into loose associations mode. My personal experience and opinion that it would affect others in similar maner. 

 

Bedazzled :greatly impress (someone) with outstanding ability or .....

Cocky: conceited or confident in a bold or cheeky way. 

 

Your posts fit the conceited category and there is very little content that demonstrates outstanding ability.

[OceanBreeze]

6 hours ago, grzegorzsz830402 said:

You got my hopes in. I feel slightly disappointed. Why SPBpolymath have  bail out?? Looks like someone is afraid of loosing intellectual contest?? I think so. 

I have no idea why he bailed out, if indeed he has. He isn't banned.

[OceanBreeze]

13 hours ago, grzegorzsz830402 said:

 

If you claim Wikipedia lies about it. 

There is no way you believe that people will take things you say seriously if you will insist on that. You would loose credibility and they would accept my arguments simply because they would not trust you. I don't won't that. I do not think that any reasonable scientist would say that. You are not trying hard enough to make it somewhat difficult for me. 

Halc is correct. He is pointing out that we can only detect the presence of dark matter indirectly. That is, from its gravitational attraction and effect on normal baryonic matter., mainly the rotational characteristics of galaxies. We still have not found a way to detect dark matter by any direct method.

[SPBpolymath]

3 hours ago, OceanBreeze said:

Your posts fit the conceited category and there is very little content that demonstrates outstanding ability.

He is a total CLOWN

[OceanBreeze]

6 hours ago, OceanBreeze said:

Halc is correct. He is pointing out that we can only detect the presence of dark matter indirectly. That is, from its gravitational attraction and effect on normal baryonic matter., mainly the rotational characteristics of galaxies. We still have not found a way to detect dark matter by any direct method.

I suppose it is worth noting that scitechdaily.com has just written an article on this same subject, entitled:

"How To See the Invisible: Measuring Dark Matter With Hyper Suprime-Cam Reveals Discrepancy"

This article is about another indirect method of detecting Dark Matter, by astronomers noting how light from distant galaxies bends around it.

What is interesting to me is the DM is being detected from the way it interacts with Light. I was under the impression that DM has no interaction with light so I was a bit surprised that astronomers were able to use this method.

Reading further I felt reassured that the effect they are looking at is indeed a secondary effect, and it is extremely weak.

As stated in the article: "Clumps of dark matter distort the light of distant galaxies through weak gravitational lensing, a phenomenon predicted by Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. This distortion is a really, really small effect; the shape of a single galaxy is distorted by an imperceptible amount. But when we make that measurement for 25 million galaxies, we’re able to measure the distortion with quite high precision.”

Also of interest is there is a discrepancy between the data taken over a 3-year period with the 8.2-meter Subaru telescope equipped with the Hyper Suprime-Camera (HSC), and the data compiled by studying the CMB, as the following chart shows:

 

I feel confident the researchers will figure out why this discrepancy shows up. It isn't all that unusual to get slightly different results from different types of measurements.

Since this subject came up in this discussion, I thought it would be appropriate to mention this new study, dated just yesterday, June 15, 2023.

 

[Halc]

4 hours ago, OceanBreeze said:

What is interesting to me is the DM is being detected from the way it interacts with Light. I was under the impression that DM has no interaction with light so I was a bit surprised that astronomers were able to use this method.

Another piece of evidence that gravity as a force (and thus a contradictory direct interaction with light) doesn't work, but gravity as geometry explains it perfectly well.  DM bends spacetime as does any mass, and light follows a geodesic regardless of the nature of the mass doing the bending.

Oh, and while I'm here, can't resist another ding to incorrect assertions:

On 6/15/2023 at 1:01 AM, grzegorzsz830402 said:

time is a useful concept, one year is full earth rotation around Sun, and day around it's own axis

Earth rotates about its axis every 23:56:04

A day is almost 4 minutes longer than that.

 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Halc

[SPBpolymath]

This is a joke.

 

wasting my time

[grzegorzsz830402]

15 hours ago, SPBpolymath said:

He is a total CLOWN

Me or OceanBreeze?? And intended as complement or in offensive manner. 

Back to your Riddle.  Numbers are not important in context of specific topics ratio of a to r, and not clearly stated what can be accidentally assumed meaning a1=a2 and r1=r2. 

 

No Back to Gravity. 

Assumptions in current model:

Gravity is an attraction force.

If I would start with saying that gravity is actually repulsion (internal pressure/decompression) forces imbalance created and maintained by cyclical implosion (earth core). It would be very difficult for anyone to even consider.

Ok. Mikolaj Kopernik message was simple: Basically, guys it is other way around, this goes around that and you see what you see because this also rotates around it's own axis. 

Yet, Martin Luther harshly criticised his theory. Let just say, that it is not easy to chalenge some initial intuitive assumption regardless of your ability to logically and coherently prove it.

And that connects with your Riddle.

If I would start my topic: "Gravity is a repulsion force not attraction force" you have this other way around, and please don't be like those people in past that defend their initial intuitive assumption just because they go used to think that way. Because if you observe Sun from Sun rise to Sun set then you can understand why someone would make initial intuitive assumption about Sun and Erth. 

You would think about yourself that gonna akt like those silly people that defended Geocentric model, you definitely not like them, right???

I am a JOKER/CLOWN yet naming me that is recieved as complement, regardless of intentions.

And you may have or have not emotions/assumptions about me yet your intellectual abilities are of value in my evaluation so if I could persuade you to join discussion and contribute I think everyone would greatly benefit from that. If not I won't stop trying so easily.

 

And I will connect all that with Riddle I have offered. How feather can be Thors Hammer. 

 

 

[grzegorzsz830402]

11 minutes ago, SPBpolymath said:

This is a joke.

 

wasting my time

So if you could provide me with structure to fallow and information to present that would not be waste of your time I would be more than happy to do my best to meet your requirements, as I  value contribution of others members your intellectual abilities in my estimation are worth effort to find a way to get you to contribute. 

I tried teasing, challenging, slightly offending, now I try to mix a little bit flattery with honesty.