Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Discussion board help and admin topics => Half Baked Ideas => Topic started by: brian334 on June 25, 2009, 10:35:23 PM
-
There is no connection between mass and time.
-
Time is nothing butt a abstract idea created by sober people.
-
Drunk people do not do not
care what time it is.
-
Can time change mass?
If it can than mass can change time.
-
Hi Brian.
I am not really here to answer your questions so I wont.
Time is nothing more than a measurement tool. your last post was the event the time of your last post tells me when that event occurred. if there wasn't any clue to the time then I would have no clue as to when your last post was written and posted. if I wanted to go back in time to read your past events on a precise moment I could only do so if time was measured and recorded.
some people just prefer to say time travel rather than event travel, it sounds so much better but can confuse the issue if taken out of context.
There is a meaning behind Event Horizon. why didn't they choose Time Horizon, because it sounds funny.
Jerry ;)
-
Event Horizon ;)
n. The region, usually described as spherical, marking the outer boundary of a black hole, inside which the gravitational force is strong enough to prevent matter or radiation from escaping.
It's really just alot of complex math though :D
-
How did I know this would occur, if one doesn't have an event horizon then one could make one but without the ill effects of a black hole. a space ship at the speed of light or near it can induce a gravitational influence(even if Massless) to open a zero dimensional throat(Wormhole) to other event horizons simply by traveling an inverse Archimedes spiral at the speed of light or near it.
Jerry
-
Light and the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum travels at C in all reference frames in the vacuum of space. This is well established and accepted throughout the physics community.
If you're traveling at half C in a spacecraft and measure the speed of light coming from your spacecraft in your reference frame, you will calculate light to be traveling at C. This is due to Time affecting your calculations at you're current mass/energy.
If a stationary outside observer measures the same light from your spacecraft in his frame of reference, he will calculate light to be traveling at C also.
Since Time is part of our calculations, both the local and outside observer will come to the same calculations. The light should be calculated at half C when the space traveler is moving at half C, but since Time has slowed down for this space traveler, then he calculates it to be at C and not half of C.
Just because we use Time in our measurements, doesn't mean Time is a constant or is the same in another reference frame.
Time is not a constant. Time is variable according to the mass/energy of the observer who is doing the calculating.
If you think Time doesn't affect mass/energy, then maybe look at how the galaxies are spiraled, which most if not all have a black hole and event horizon in their center. This spiral is directly related to Time. The space being torn open, allows the galaxies to be created and formed through this zero dimensional point which leads to all Event Horizons or Time. The Archimedes Inverse Spiral for Time Traveling makes a lot of sense to me.
Very few people actually understand Einstein's Relativity Theory on space-time curvature. We call it gravity with no explanation to how or why mass causes space-time to be curved. Gravity is nothing more than mass/energy affecting the rate of Time, which cause a space-time curvature for other objects of mass/energy. If something is massless, meaning it has no length, no width, and no height, then Time would not have an affect on it. Time only affects mass/energy within it's Time dimension.
Time can be measured just like measuring distance or space. We don't need to measure time before we use it in our calculations, since it is a near constant for us here on the earth. They constantly have to update the Time on Satellites and GPS systems for them to stay in sync with the earth. If they didn't do this, then your GPS system would lose accuracy of 3-6 meters per day.
Instead of using Time in part of your mathematical calculations in one particular frame of reference, maybe you need to start calculating Time itself with different masses/energies within each frames of references, then you will see how Time is used in calculations, but also how mass/energy affects Time itself that is used in the calculation.
This is really hard for most people to grasp and wrap their mind around. Once you understand the concept, then you will realize how true and simple it really is.
I know your position on this. Please allow me to take my own position on this, even if it isn't the same as yours.
-
If mass and time were related then we would have a grand unified field theory. If mass and time were related then the reactions in the massive sun would take longer to occur. This is trash,
Time is a dimension, it is the fundamental dimension by which all other dimensions are created. Without time you have no length width or height. Why? Because time is required to move from one spot in those dimensions to another, if it doesn't take time to move then you are in both places at once and then the dimension doesn't exist.
Time is equal to dimension 1, zero dimension is nothing.
time begins to vibrate in a line creating dimension 2 length.
That length begins to vibrate in a 90 degree plane of its length vibration creating dimension 3 a plane or lenthg and width.
that plane begins to vibrate in a 90 degree angle creating volume and the height, which also creates a elementary particle.
Since time doesnt exist in time and it doesn't exist in the lesser dimensions it can exist everywhere at once, to it its all the same thing. So everything can be made from the same time vibration, which is why all matter in the universe interacts, its in the same temporal phase, just as data streams on an ethernet cable do not interact with other hz.
our perception of time can be scewed because the devices we use to measure it are made of lesser dimensions, which as they move faster approach a higher energy state in exchange for giving up a dimension. As things move faster they do not stretch, they shrink, from 4d to 3d.
Light does not travel at C our observation of its effects of motion are limited to C, because at C it drops out of 4d and goes into 3d, leaving only evidence, since we can not interact with 3d from the 4d environment. This has to do with the particles acceration to C in the last chronon as it reaches C. the effects causes an effect similar to the sound barrier, the effect is in one place while the object is in another. But since it is a 3d object and we are looking at it from a 4d perspective then we can never actually observe the object. That would be like asking a blind person to observe the exact location of a subsonic jet. It doesnt exist within his observable world.
Start with the right premise and the rest makes sense. start with time as the last dimension and everything is jacked.
-
Interesting thoughts, all.
My two cents:
Time and space(with everything in space) are two sides of the same coin. You bend one side - you bend the other.
The measurement of time between events is a human thing, time was there before us.
Maybe I short changed you, sorry.
-
Space is time, space is created from "time" vibrating.
Time doesn't need length, width, or height to exist, but L,W,H all need time to exist.
Personally I wouldn't worry about bending anything, just figure out how to get to a high enough energy state that one of the dimensions drops out of existance. Then mass goes to zero (a plane has no mass) and you can go as fast as you want with almost no energy.
Also with no mass as a plane, going through a star, planet, or blackhole is not an issue, so long as you don't de-energize while there.
I am not saying its possible, but this is what I see of the system.
-
The measurement of time between events is a human thing...
.
Now -that's- an interesting point.
So, then, can we take 'time' to be a measure of 'memory'? Regardless of the occurrence of events, is it our -memory- of event-occurrences that we are measuring and thus attempting to define through the species-wide use of artificial time-standards?
If we had no memory, would we not find ourselves in a perpetual 'present'?
Of course, that would render us somewhat restricted as lifeforms, if we couldn't retain any memories we couldn't learn and could only exist in an environment to which we were highly specialized.
Do we, then, impose our own species-defined extrapolation of 'time' to 'events' that may have or will in the future occur, in order to provide ourselves with a standardized frame of reference for these relationships?
If this is the case, it seems it is our 'perception' we are continually attempting to resolve rather than any causal external stimuli (which is, itself, based on that 'perception').
.
-
Gibberish
-
Let me elaborate a bit.
As a ship speeds up its energy state increases.
From an outsiders point of view the ship appears to get shorter (not longer like einstein says)
example stand on the side of the road and have a car drive past you at 10mph, it has an apparent length. have it drive past you at a 110mph, it appears in front of you for a short time, therefore it appears to be shorter.
Einstein said it gets longer, it only does this from a time constant point of view, in other words if your lowest time amount is one second, well the 110 MPH car appears to be longer than the 10MPH. But this is apparent from a point of view that is in line to the ships direction of travel.
from the side it appears shorter.
Now increase the speed to that of light, the transverse observer sees nothing, because its moving so fast that it went 2 dimensional. From a linear observer it would appear to exist for its entire ray length.
So as you increase your energy state you get shorter in a transverse reference, so the ship travels away, as it loses one of its dimensions, time slows down, which is why the tests nasa did seems to prove einstien right, at the speed of light time doesn';t exist. Its not the speed, but the energy state. Speed only exists when compared to something else. In the case of the ship its compared to the universe, specifically our planet.
At this moment we are traveling a great speeds on this planet, is our time different than someone else on a planet traveling away from us?
lets say that two observers one on earth and one on mars, a ship leaves earth and heads at great speed to mars, the observers have watches that were in time exactly, tell me compared to the ships clock, what do the observers clocks show?
Well nasa did a test with a ship and found the ships time slowed, well in our case the mars and earth clock would have to still be the same, and if the ships clock slowed, then it had nothing to do with speed, it had to do with energy state.
This doesn't mean that if you go fast than light than time will reverse.
The only way that would be possible, is if light traveled instantly.
-
There is no connection between mass and time.
The corrections of general relativity to the atomic clocks of GPS permit to get a daily accuracy of the order of meters instead of the order of hundreds of meters. General relativity works thus time depends on gravity. As mass creates gravity, time depends on mass.
-
...
Well nasa did a test with a ship and found the ships time slowed, well in our case the mars and earth clock would have to still be the same, and if the ships clock slowed, then it had nothing to do with speed, it had to do with energy state.
...
It doesn't a matter. You can use either special relativity or general relativity to get the solution.
From the viewpoint of general relativity (that one I prefer), acceleration and gravity cannot be distinguished. Then the acceleration when the traveler starts, stops or comes back, causes the slowing of time (as the gravity does it also.) You can easily calculate the time shift at the arrival. I do it myself using only one spatial dimension and the Schwarzschild metric, tensor culculi are not even required. Surprisingly the time shift depends only on the "gravitational potential" (due to acceleration) and this potential depends on the distance at which accelerations (and decelerations) occur.
For a given time of travel, the distance depends on the speed. This is the link with special relativity which finds the same result as general relativity (see the classical calculus used in the twin pseudo-paradox).
My conclusion is that special relativity which deals with speeds, deals in fact with jumps from one inertial frame to another, ignoring the underlying process of acceleration. Nevertheless it gives the correct results because in the underlying process, these jumps do not depend on the absolute acceleration but on potentials (path independant).
-
This conversation is getting completely DAUM.
Time does not have ANY physical properties,
therefore time can not do ANYTHING.
-
This post has changed my entire outlook.
Instead of searching for sources of free energy, I will now embark on a quest to find additional sources of free time. Currently I have little free time, would it break the laws of thermodynamics to rearrange/reprioritize my schedule and generate free time from nothing?
-
This conversation is getting completely DAUM.
Time does not have ANY physical properties,
therefore time can not do ANYTHING.
Write a thesis on why you think time doesn't exist, apply it with math and known laws of physics and document your theory so the whole world can understand what you have to say. get it peer reviewed you that you might have that chance at the Nobel prize.
M.I.T has a few openings so here's your chance.
Jerry ;)
-
Math and time are both abstract ideas.
-
You claim that things that travel at the speed of light have infinity mass, so light must have infinity mass.
-
Math and time are both abstract ideas.
Math can tell you if you have been cheated out of money, how is math abstract?
the computer you're using would not of been possible without math formula. I don't see how math does not apply.
Jerry
-
If light had infinity mass than it wood annihilate everything it runs in two.
-
You claim that things that travel at the speed of light have infinity mass, so light must have infinity mass.
Hi Brian.
According to peer reviewed physics anything with mass can never achieve light speed, only massless objects can achieve light speed. even an electron can only achieve 99.999% light speed and that took the power of 300 Hoover dam hydroelectric plants to achieve it and that was for just 1 electron.
Quantum Tunneling may make 'velocity' requirements obsolete. travel from point A. to point B. without traveling the distance. pop in and pop out and you are there.
Jerry ;)
-
MAth it self is abstract but it describes reality, which makes it an adjective of reality.
Reality happens, it doesnt need math to do so. It needs the properties of reality to do so, and math describes the effects of those properties, therefore allowing a prediction and understanding of what will happen in a given situation.
Obviously light does not have infinite mass, from our perspective.
-
Time, mass, and gravitation are secondary effects.
The signature of the 'prime mover' (s) is, or are,...Voltage and Current. Voltage meaning: polarized differentials in an oscillatory state, when it comes to describing matter.
Perfect current flow - identical across/through a given 'area', or group of oscillatory 2-d stress field interactives (multiple 2-d field interactives integrating - thus a final vector describing subatomics - thus describing 'matter') denotes loss if time and loss of differential as described in 'voltage'. Which leads to collapse of time and mass (local to the current flow). The 'mass' remains in our 'outer world' as the differential to the greater whole does still exist.
These are oscillatory resonant systems based on the given 2-d infinite stress fields at their integrative point thus creating the 3-d world through these 'outer' differentials.
Thus mass, time, and gravitation are external and not primary effects, and can be 'modified' or manipulated through the use of resonant and oscillatory manipulation of current and voltage.
To clarify: all --space, time, matter, energy, gravitation, and dimensional egress can be manipulated via controlled aspects of oscillation of current and voltage-in whatever form it may take.
Thus this entire forum can be seen to be doing exactly that in all aspects of all experimentation.
Do you see it now?
Essentially 'mass' cannot slow 'time', it may do so, but the effect is secondary to the heart of the issue. Manipulation of oscillatory resonant aspects of current and voltage (the essence of the dimensional protrusion of matter into what forms this dimension) CAN do so. And DOES.
Thus the essence of everything on this forum that - works- . Every aspect that is speculative/speculated via observation of and through recorded history of instances, all of them - all point to this exact single point. UFOS, Dimensional egress stories, gravitational manipulation, transmutation, Bedini, Tesla, Gerlacht, Hildiger, (Gabriel) Kron, Pyramids, Newman, Meyer, etc...- all of it works through this single point. Every single anomalous point in science, all relativity and quantum considerations, the whole ball of wax, in all ways can be modified, maintained, created, destroyed, altered, etc..all through this point of resonant manipulation of current and voltage in some applied manner.
Do you see it now?
-
A perfectly good example of gibberish.
Einstein would be proud of you.
-
I think atheists like Einstein can’t deal with the notion that the universe is infinitely big and the universe has existed forever. So daum people like Einstein make-up stuff.
-
Hi Brian.
According to peer reviewed physics anything with mass can never achieve light speed, only massless objects can achieve light speed. even an electron can only achieve 99.999% light speed and that took the power of 300 Hoover dam hydroelectric plants to achieve it and that was for just 1 electron.
Jerry ;)
for something as large as an electron, this may hold true in most instances (not all), but even light itself (photons) have mass.
This has been undeniably proven, though most of science tends to deny it, even in the face of such evidence - such as momentum, impact force, ect of a controlled photon. The mass of a photon is well known, and well rejected by scientific theory as a result of certain fundamental assumptions, with which a photons "mass" would interfere.
until such theorem are accurately corrected to account for these 'fudge factor' assumptions, science will continue having to deny that mass can achieve such speeds.
Ed Leedskalnin demonstrated decades ago, a method of sending electrons at FTL speeds (though that was not the conclusion he had reached at the time).
This was confirmed in the early 90's in an IBM laboratory, when they send electronic signals across a warehouse at FTL speeds. With outrageous claims of "teleportation", IBM was forced to abandon this project.
the mechanics behind this are quite simple, an objects velocity is determined by the resistive magnetic forces associated with propegating matter through space.
Light propegates its own magnetic field, through which it travels, and is not subject to the same resistive forces (except when passing through or very near the strong atomic field or a field of comparible strength).
i propose that the mass of a photon, is derrived from its Energy,
in the form of m= E/c^2 . - this can be conclusively verified by a measurement of the momentum of a photon of known energy.
which correlates to the calculation of P=E* frequency/c^2 . though Plancks relationship tells us that P=E/c . :which only accounts for a portion of the photons energy, and to derrive the full energy requires the use of a fudge factor, commonly known as Plancks constant. remember that Planck's constant is
h = E /c * wavelength = ~ 6.6 x(10^-34) J*s
which is the energy required by the photon to propegate its magnetic field throughout one 'wave', divided by the time it takes to complete that wave(frequency)
and.. since wavelength * frequency = c
E=mc^2 holds true, even in the case of a photon.
Now: how does this relate to slowing 'time'? the mass of a photon does not slow time.
Increasing the mass/energy of a photon will increase its frequency and decrease its corresponding wavelength. From our perspective, the photon's "time" will speed up. From the photons perspective, our "time" will slow down. but the ammount of "time" that passes during any sequence of events from the perspective of the observer remains constant as defined by said unit of measurement.
i.e.: 1 second, is one second from either frame of reference.
though looking from one into the other, things may appear to take a longer or shorter "time" to occur. This is only apparent, because of their relative speeds - "time" itself does not change.
That is one of Einsteins biggest assumptional flaws in his theory of relativity - that "time" can actually be altered by a relative state of motion.
-
anything can be overanalyzed to oblivion
i can make the argument that nothing exists at all
mass can achieve light speed if on the edge of a black hole
time is nothing more than a concept of another perception
its a sense, like tase and sight
sight is having the ability to recognize a specific type of matter due to a specific band of light that allows us to "see" we can barely actually see anything comparatively speaking, yet we still believe sight does exist
so the concept or sense of "time" is more so our ability to observe a small portion of "time" by comparing our bodies decay to that of everything we come into contact with
the center of a black hole time does stop
light can be converted into matter, its merely a form of energy
if a person was able to achieve light speed, their body would decay at an extremely lower rate than that of a person not traveling the speed of light "time traveling" forward
i believe what you are saying is time doesnt not actually exist, therefore something tangible cannot affect something that is a concept
our perception of time can be slowed by large amounts of mass as well as relative speed, were just incapable of generating enough energy to do so
i will agree that time is not real, but i disagree with mass not being able to manipulate our perception of time
-
the theoretical "black hole" has yet to be confirmed. thre is evidence to suggest that the blackness found in the center of most galactic bodies is not a hypermassive "black hole" at all, but rather one of the few places where a 'true vacuum' exists.
spread throughout nearly all of space is tiny particles of matter, spacedust, ect., thus even in the vacuum of space, there is not a 'true vacuum'. evidence suggests that in the center of a galaxy, like for example our spiraling milky-way, the gravitational forces are so great in the outward direction, that it creates a 'true vacuum'. it is this vacuum that holds the galaxy together, and that the lack of matter (space dust, ect) presents nothing for light to reflect off of, and thus it ceases to be "light" as we know it.
both theories represent the same observed phenomena of attraction, but in the latter, there is no "singularity", simply a pure void, a nothingness.
yet, in both instances, when approaching the event horizon (if we still want to call it that) there is no evidence for a distortion of time.
the estimated "life time" of a star of a given mass, appears to be the same in the center of a galaxy as it does at the outer edges.
if mass affacted "time" in such a manner, we would expect the life time of a star in the center of the galaxy to be either much longer or much shorter in the face of great mass, or a lack thereof.
Let's take the simple example of atomic decay
an atom here on earth will decay at the same rate as an atom in space, far from the mass of the earth.
space-based nuclear generators operate on this principal.
thus - mass does not appear to slow time.
-
the theoretical "black hole" has yet to be confirmed.
if Blackholes are theoretical then how come you think you know so much about Blackholes? there are some very wickedly smart people studying them night and day, what about you?
thre is evidence to suggest that the blackness found in the center of most galactic bodies is not a hypermassive "black hole" at all, but rather one of the few places where a 'true vacuum' exists.
I would like to see this evidence and the literature behind these statements.
spread throughout nearly all of space is tiny particles of matter, spacedust, ect.
you seem to be stuck on classical atomics, space is also filled with Quantum particles and waves as well as classical Atomic particles.
, thus even in the vacuum of space, there is not a 'true vacuum'.
you are contradicting yourself here.
evidence suggests that in the center of a galaxy, like for example our spiraling milky-way, the gravitational forces are so great in the outward direction, that it creates a 'true vacuum'.
you just contradicted yourself again.
In quantum mechanics, the vacuum is defined as the state (i.e. solution to the equations of the theory) with the lowest energy.
Even if a region of space contains no particles, the cosmic microwave background fills the entire universe with black body radiation.
it is this vacuum that holds the galaxy together, and that the lack of matter (space dust, ect) presents nothing for light to reflect off of, and thus it ceases to be "light" as we know it.
Are you making this stuff up as you go along? a Galaxy is held together by its fundamental forces, it expands because it still has excess kinetic energy to expand.
both theories represent the same observed phenomena of attraction, but in the latter, there is no "singularity", simply a pure void, a nothingness.
which two theories are you pulling this nonsense from?
yet, in both instances, when approaching the event horizon (if we still want to call it that) there is no evidence for a distortion of time.
you sound like you are saying that Blackholes exist here, another contradiction. time doesn't get distorted outside or while approaching an event horizon, it is still relative, it is theorized that inside of the event horizon is where time gets warped and at the Blackholes core surface time is extremely warped maybe even down to the Quantum level.
the estimated "life time" of a star of a given mass, appears to be the same in the center of a galaxy as it does at the outer edges.
The Star 183027 is the oldest star so far found, it is lighter than our sun, the reason 183027 lived so long is because it has always had a lack of other elements, 183027 always contained more Hydrogen to Helium, 183027 is theorized to of been born about 1 billion years after the big bang which makes it about 13 billion years old.
if mass affacted "time" in such a manner, we would expect the life time of a star in the center of the galaxy to be either much longer or much shorter in the face of great mass, or a lack thereof.
it really does sound like you are guessing here, relativity should already tell you that time does slow down at the center of Gravity and speeds up the further you get from the center of Gravity.
Let's take the simple example of atomic decay
an atom here on earth will decay at the same rate as an atom in space, far from the mass of the earth.
space-based nuclear generators operate on this principal.
the decay rate charted as half life of a radio isotope is an approximation only, all decay rates of all Isotopes decay with a 'random' decay, you can not predict when an isotope will spontaneously decay. if you are talking about Beta Reactors then all they do is collect Beta emissions on charge plates. If you are talking about nuclear thermopiles that is inherent to converting heat through thermoelectric effects, which nuclear generators are you referring?
you can not use a radioactive isotope as a clock because the decay rates are random, you have to use stable isotopes for clocks. radioactive isotopes are used in what's called true random number generators because their decay is random and not predictable.
thus - mass does not appear to slow time.
nonsense.
-
This question is for anyone that wants to try to answer it.
What is the mass of time?
I say the mass of time is 0. I also say something with 0 mass cannot change anything.
-
I say the mass of time is 0. I also say something with 0 mass cannot change anything.
@all
As a concept, I do agree in principal.
Time is a dimension that one perceives as going in one direction(forward, ordinarily) as long as one lives, yes?
A dimension cannot have mass as such. An object inside three dimensions experiences time dilation heading toward lightspeed, right? It has its apparent time slowed, relatively, not the independent space around it as it moves.
Artificial time travel is something else entirely.
--Lee
-
Hi everyone good day ! ;D
to cut it short, it is the WEIGHT that slows time ok ;)
-
The standard model has been good at predicting the elementary particles thus far. All of the elementary particles discovered were predicted to have 0 mass. The truth is, all of the discovered particles of the standard model has mass and this includes the photon.
This left the physicists trying to figure out where the elementary particles were obtaining their mass from. So, they came up with the theory of the Higgs Boson particle. The Higgs boson is the only Standard Model particle that has not yet been observed.
The Higgs boson particle (the God particle) is one quantum component of the theoretical Higgs field. In empty space, the Higgs field has an amplitude of a non-zero vacuum expectation value. The existence of this non-zero vacuum expectation plays a fundamental role: it gives mass to every elementary particle, including the Higgs boson itself. This field is analogous to a pool of molasses that "sticks" to the otherwise massless fundamental particles which travel through the field (space), converting them into particles with mass which form, for example, the components of atoms.
As the elementary particles increase their speed through this field which has mass, the elementary particles obtain more relativistic mass due to the resistance of moving through this field.
Now, take an elementary particle that is massless where there is no higgs bosons sticking to it and no higgs field in space. Let's say it can move from point A to point B instantaneously because it has no mass.
Now, we'll say some mass from the Higgs field has stuck to the elementary particle giving it mass. It can no longer move from point A to point B instantaneously because of the mass it is carrying. It will take Time to move from point A to point B now.
Now, we'll say as it moves from A to B it will be moving through the higgs field. As it moves through this field, the elementary particle's relative mass increases due to the resistance of the field, and this causes it to take even more time to move from A to B.
If it wasn't for the Higgs Field, then the elementary particles would be massless and have an instantaneous speed, and Time would not be a factor (It would be outside of Time).
If the theory of the Higgs Field is correct, then the elementary particles that make up matter, now has mass due to the Higgs Field, which slows Time down. The more mass it has, the slower it can move. For the atom, this means it will tick or oscillate slower. Since we are made up of atoms, then our brain waves will slow down, our heart rate will slow down, our thinking process will slow down, our clocks will tick slower, etc.
Space or the Higgs Field, which makes up space, gives matter or the elementary particles mass. Mass gives the elementary particles or matter less Time. Mass and matter are not the same thing!
0 mass = Infinite Time
Infinite mass = 0 Time
GB
-
kooks
-
Mass makes up the invisible world of space. Matter makes up the visible world of space.
The invisible mass attaches itself to the visible matter, giving the visible matter mass. The missing mass in a galaxy and the universe that physicists theorize about is the invisible mass that is not attached to any visible matter and they call this dark matter/energy.
The mass particle that attaches itself to the matter particle has a polarity and charge that is opposite to that of the matter particle. This is the reason why mass attaches itself to matter, since they have opposite polarities. Mass is a monopole and matter is a monopole. When a particle of mass is attached to a particle of matter, then it creates a dipole. Mass being the "N" and matter being "S", or vice versa.
Physicists have wondered why there is more matter than anti-matter in the universe. This is because most of the anti-matter particles in the universe are making up the invisible particles of mass while the matter particles is making up the visible particles which has no mass.
I will continue this only if there is interest.............
GB
-
I think atheists like Einstein can’t deal with the notion that the universe is infinitely big and the universe has existed forever. So daum people like Einstein make-up stuff.
-
"electrical resistance" can slow down time.
all mass has "electrical resistance".
though some atoms have more than other atoms.
time is slowed down, when it passes through mass.
but ONLY the time that passes through the mass, is slowed down.
the time that flowed AROUND the mass, is not slowed down.
i have noticed that electrical resistance GREATLY increases,
between 2 polarized/electrified objects.
if you placed a copper wire and a steel wire into a cup of water,
then connected a positive multimeter lead to the copper, and the negative lead to the steel,
then set the multimeter to measure the electrical resistance,
than the electrical resistance will likely read in the mega ohms !
that is right.
the mega ohms.
from copper and steel, sitting in water......
does time also slow down, if time passes through the copper, steel, and water ?
does time slow down slightly, if it passes through a capacitor which is holding a strong charge ???
-
There is no connection between mass and time.
Ummm.. you should take that up with Einstein.. and all the scientists that use equations based on his theorys on the relationship between mass and time, they are keeping the satellites from falling on your head. ;)
-
Thank you brian334.You are a deep thinker,I admire that.
sm0ky2,the most amazing "out of the box thinking" I
have seen.Wow and Wow!!
EVERYONE'S post on this thread,deserves much
more study (on my part)
This thread has given me some very constructive
Ideas for experimentation.Starting tonight.
The good thing about studying/researching for a gravity-block is,
since one doesn't exist then any
un-successful attempt is just a learning tool.
sm0key2's post,gives me an Idea for a start.
Not a "Thought Experiment", a hands on experiment,construction.
I will print these three pages..for bed time reading.
Many thanks again to brian33 (and the REST of
you THINKERS.
Respectfully
Joe in Texas
Keep it coming.
-
FROM NASA:
“Although we do not observe the core directly, it’s amazing how much we can learn about
Earth’s interior using magnetic field observations,†said Dickey.
In order to approximate the flow of liquid in the core, the scientists visualized its motion as a
set of 20 rigid cylinders, each rotating about a common point that represents Earth’s axis.
“Imagine that each cylinder is slowly rotating at a different speed, and you’ll get a sense of
the complex churning that’s taking place within Earth’s core,†Dickey said.
The scientists analyzed the data to identify common patterns of movement among the
different cylinders. These patterns represent how momentum and energy are transferred
from the liquid core-mantle interface inward through the liquid core toward the inner core
with diminishing amplitudes.
Their analyses isolated six slow-moving oscillations, or waves of motion, occurring within
the liquid core. The oscillations originated at the boundary between Earth’s core and its
mantle and traveled inward toward the inner core with decreasing strength. Four of these
oscillations were robust, occurring at periods of 85, 50, 35 and 28 years. Since the scientist’s
data set goes back to 1840, the recurrence period of the longest oscillation (85 years) is less
well determined than the other oscillations. The last two oscillations identified were weaker
and will require further study.
The 85- and 50-year oscillations are consistent with a 1997 study by researchers Stephen
Zatman and Jeremy Bloxham of Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.,
END QUOTE
Joe in Texas
-
Browsing this thread brought to mind an article I ran across in New Scientist a while back.
Burkhard Heim (a German theoretical physicist: 1925-2001) developed a theory (1977) and supporting mathematics that resulted in the most precise calculation of fundamental-particle mass to date, exceeding even standard-model calculations such as those derived through lattice quantum chromodynamics.
Few (if any) physicists today claim to understand Heim's math, but they recognise it's efficacy.
The ramifications of this theory extend to inter-dimensional travel, fuelless power and anti-gravity as a fundamental force.
Mainstream Science is, however, conservative by nature and has paid Heim little attention, but that hasn't stopped NASA and Sandia Labs from expressing continued interest.
Original article:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18925331.200-take-a-leap-into-hyperspace.html
Tony
-
Common thinking should always trump theoretical math.
-
Common thinking IS theoretical math.
Un-common thinking is what we (and you) are about.
We can say that up-to-a-point,the less we know the better,education can get in the way of different mind-process branches.The overly educated(the really smart people) are hindered by what they have been taught.
In other words,our perceptions,hearing,seeing,tasting,etc,etc,
are all we have to go on.Throw in a spectrum analyzer,microwave Sig gen,photosynthesis lab,with complete understanding how to use,interpret the data and suddenly we are of a different class.
Those (Highly educated) people are whom our technology comes from.These same people enable this very post.Students who follow a single discipline for years of study enable us to a better,brighter,
future.
Yet there are some (post above this one) who are able to grasp a totally un-ordinary concept,that few of us can visualize.
The break through may be tomorrow,or twenty ,or a thousand years.This FORUM with it's moderators speed the process a thousand-fold.Ideas,thoughts,intuitions,guesses,hopes,,,are thrown about with care-free,joyful,exclamation.This in itself is remarkable.
This enables the second class of (no letters after my name)people to use,discard,explore,replicate,improve on and develop their OWN,thought pattern branches from what the better educated have posted.
If I do not post this then it is of no consequence,if I do post this,It is to congratulate a very well organized,thoughtful group of people(hundreds i'm sure)who have posted here.
This drink is for you"Over-unity Forum"
May 2010 be the year.
Joe in Texas
-
First Joe,
you hit the nail on the head.
We have progressed so far at this point
that the only available model is that of theory.
It may be decades before equipment can catch up to test stuff.
As far as the non private/military sector is concerned that is...
You seem to be thinking along the lines of
Einstein whom was quoted as saying:
"The only thing holding me back from learning
is the education I have received already"
Perhaps what would help would be if...
Each person that becomes (Formally) schooled
in (The sad current status of) science catagories of present
would automaticly gain a wider intelectual stance proportional
to said match in knowledge increase automaticly as a default.
Thus keeping us ever still open mined to the concept of error.
To never stop questioning what we "Think" we know so far.
Our inquisitive nature,
upon being fed solutions,
meets a saturation point instead.
Sadly it seems at this point
the intelect falls back on all the
(Draconly proven) "Stuff"
we think we already know.
We are admirable while persuing
what we see as unknowns.
But once learned,
we sadly have a tendancy to never quesion
what we (Have already) learned
anywhere near enough
as a checks & balances protocol.
So my vote is:
YES,
A collaborative enviroment where people that
HAVE NOT yet learned a stage in the learning process themselves
follow up on things "Assumed/Learned" is a huge benifit to all.
Almost like trickle-down theory of checks and balances.
Now remember,
most of these otherwise well educated people
(Yeah I've had years of torment talking to them too...)
cannot be held at fault due to the entire quadrature section
of electrodynamics theory that was removed from what was
and is (Still 'till today) the best current understanding
of our grand universe so far.
That is before the likes of JP Morgan screwed us over
and had the overunity aspect of all theory symplified
to remove it from being used against all profetiers...
Ask one well educated persen to talk about overunity,
or time verses scaler potentials and vectors...
They got screwed out of learning what is truely possible.
Not their fault,
but they will defend
what they (Think/Assume) they know
to the very bitter end
before they embrase it.
This current enviroment where people of many plateau's
can interact is an awsome realm due to this simple fact.
As each person below an "Understanding" level climbs the ladder
they "Proof-read" each sucessive assumption published
looking for missed phenomena or variations from the assumed
results of most theoretical data considered benchmark today.
Heck,
I may have even made you think/question something...
...Smarty-alec's need not respond and waste forum space...
Now on the "Mass cannot slow time" thingy...,
Mass is a function of time and space.
Without time as one vector,
how can mass exist at all?
And to quote from early in this thread:
Can time change mass?
If it can than mass can change time.
I believe every day we look into a commercial telescope
that is also proven more and more, right?
How can this topic exist questioning that?
The time references sent out in space
return newer timewise than when sent.
Velocity against time must be proportionally linked, right?
I mean...using time as a reference point as example:
A second ago mass didn't exist except as multiple probabilies,
a second from now it no longer exists,
except for the chosen probability path.
The rub is that our perception of time
varies in relation to event.
So we may think it is a variable.
I think only our frame of reference changes
causing taumatic events to appear in slow motion.
or more pointedly,
an airplane that only takes 20 minutes travel
in the bermuda triangle
that should take signifantly longer do occur.
the clocks/watchs will be near the same.
and a vacuum measurement of the speed of light
on the ground AND on that flight will appear to be the same.
GravityBlock puts forth a fairly comprehensible tought construct in post #7.
I mean,
can we really say time changes actually?
or our reference to it does instead?
good thing massless components of atomic structures
can communicate at time references that severely exceed the speed of light
or life on planet earth could not communicate properly and would perish.
I have recently made errors interpretating data
from a battery storage O-Scope in a faraday cage
reading a capacitor effected from a scaler wave emission
and interpreted as "Noise".
Can you say feedback loop greater than the speed of light?
I wound up posting the concept in an EVP forum
(Electro-Voice Phenomenon) do to It's iluminating results.
Sorry O.T. there a sec...
Stuff that can travel through ALL matter
intrigues me as much as it did Tesla too.
If you really wanna steam you noodle...
Why does an emission through two slots
behave has a wave or particle depending
on if some observes the process ?????
Thats the mind-nummer.
If a tree falls in the woods...
I want to give credit to another post quote
as reference to correct thinking.
.....Since time doesnt exist in time and it doesn't exist in the lesser dimensions it can exist everywhere at once.....
Other quotes on the mark:
Space is time, space is created from "time" vibrating.
Time doesn't need length, width, or height to exist, but L,W,H all need time to exist.
And Inarguables:
If we had no memory, would we not find ourselves in a perpetual 'present'?
whats interesting about this one is the recent discovery that all memory is present in all genes.
But that was a personal observation.
While alive we are capable of future and past recognition.
Not sure how/why only some have the future ability...
As a ship speeds up its energy state increases.
From an outsiders point of view the ship appears to get shorter (not longer like einstein says)
example stand on the side of the road and have a car drive past you at 10mph, it has an apparent length. have it drive past you at a 110mph, it appears in front of you for a short time, therefore it appears to be shorter.
Einstein said it gets longer, it only does this from a time constant point of view, in other words if your lowest time amount is one second, well the 110 MPH car appears to be longer than the 10MPH. But this is apparent from a point of view that is in line to the ships direction of travel.
from the side it appears shorter.
Now increase the speed to that of light, the transverse observer sees nothing, because its moving so fast that it went 2 dimensional. From a linear observer it would appear to exist for its entire ray length.
Einstein was refering to observers view.
His relativistic point of reference
indicates he is correct.
True,
your impulse reaction says we must also raise our reference point.
The faster it goes,
the slower it appears IN TIME.
I fully agree at first glance it appears counter-intuitive!
Our currunt incorrect method of looking at time causes this error.
It will appear longer.
Did you think doppler effect was only for audio?
Of course it "Appears" longer.
Reletivisticly speaking...
In his reference it had already PAST the observer it WOULD appear shorter.
This is a wonderful topic.
Iagree with the differing points posted about some facet.
Let us not agree in a constructive manor of comparison please?
-
.
-
Here is my newest theory on how a time traveler could achieve that extra needed velocity by using the Sun's Magnetic field loops as added energy from a super magnetic pinch.
of course the spaceship must survive the intense heat and the magnetic field saturation.
the best material I could possibly think of is some sort of Metglas type Aerogel material or a superconductive Aerogel that has 99.8% heat reflectivity and Metglas's magnetic shielding ability. regular Aerogel by itself has 99.8% heat reflectivity for one inch of thickness and it is very lightweight. they also have a fabric made of Aerogel, could start there.
all in all it will be awhile before we have the ability to do this and it wouldn't be a public event either. no tourist except a selected team of highly qualified scientists would ever get to travel back in time.
Just my conclusions.
Jerry 8)
-
All we know about Gravity,can be summed up in few words.Rockets,brute force against brute force.
Totally un-acceptable for a race who wishes to explore space.GB, has searched for years,as have Phb.,ABC.whatever,Nothing.
The ISS,would look to me much better,if,halfway to the moon.
Isn't there someone out there who would like to SEE this monstrosity at the center of the spiral of our,one,small,galaxy???
The Center of the Galaxy Indeed!!!I generally try to keep my Science and Fiction separated better.
Gravity is a Force
Gravity becomes less,further from Earth.
Gravity is universal
Mass,density equal gravity.
Gravity must be accepted as a problem and one
chosen to answer.
Gravity,does not seem to correlate with atmosphere.
Gravity,fits the electromagnetic level.
If MASS is INDESTRUCTIBLE,then what happened to this 20$ I just lit w/my zippo?(I wish),just kidding.
Is turning gravity against its self,the same as making Gold from Lead?Will we ever know the answer?
For some reason I thought of a single spring or rubber band with a 5 pound weight on it.
Then 4,small car,front springs end,attached vertical overhead w/400 kilo.Then my thought ran to 3 springs,spiral,funnel.The two ends point up,center,base down,hmmmmmm
To long AGAIN,,RATS!!,,Grrrr
Joe in Cold 44F% Texas
After all,,, all of us do know;
But man must admit to himself,that he was made in his Creator's,image.
Brains and all.
Spiral,vortex,but first element of vortex must also be a vortex,can this be done w/electronics?,math I'm sure.Brrrrr,chilly,**** dogs!
-
I think its already been proven that clocks in orbit run faster than the same clocks sitting on the ground.Thats why GPS satellites have to account for the difference.So it would appear that mass slows down the flow of time.Fact not a fiction.triffid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation)
Gravitational time dilation has been experimentally measured using atomic clocks on airplanes. The clocks aboard the airplanes were slightly faster with respect to clocks on the ground. The effect is significant enough that the Global Positioning System's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System)artificial satellites (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite) need to have their clocks corrected.
Additionally, time dilations due to height differences of less than 1 meter have been experimentally verified in the laboratory.
-
So according to my last post here.Our heads age faster than our feet?triffid
-
Can time change mass?
If it can than mass can change time.
Uh...you've heard of the famous: E=MC^2 ? Approaching the speed of light relatively causes the moving object to seem as if time is slowing down as one IN or ON it observes the action occurring to it; AND [/size]as one[/size] observing from the outside the object sees the occupant IN or ON it seems to be moving/acting slowly when the object passes by the observer.[/size]
That's the way I would interpret the Theory of Relativity by Einstein.[/size]
Questions? Comments?
--Lee[/size]
[/size]
Someone unknown to me is inserting the [/size] statements in my posted reply. I have a very high security clearance and whomever has responsibly for this childish prank has the power to hack this firmware package at Overunity.com. They may be 'testing' my reaction to this occurrence, and also---you as well. If they can hack a borrowed computer like this I'm on, they should be able to do the same to yours, as well. No way for me to stop them, also. I just have to put up to it.
--Lee
-
Mass isn't the important quality to consider. Mass is just a property of some configurations of energy. What really creates gravity are the components of the stress energy tensor. Energy, momentum, pressure and shear. Mass isn't the source of gravity. We just think it is because of Newton. Newton was only approximately correct with his theory of gravity.
The components of the stress energy tensor are what causes time dilation.
Some links
http://www.physicspages.com/2014/05/09/energy-not-mass-is-the-source-of-gravity/
https://www.quora.com/Is-energy-the-source-of-gravity