13 Pages V  « < 11 12 13  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Inside The Whole Black Sparkly Universe., implications of the black hole universe theory.

post Dec 9 2010, 11:51 PM
Post #241

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875


Superfluidity is a phase of matter in which viscosity of a fluid vanishes, while thermal conductivity becomes infinite.


No viscosity, and infinite thermal conductivity.

Vacuous empty space, as a superfluid.

or perhaps super-gas is more appropriate?

Solid, liquid, gas, plasma, superfluid-space.

The 5 states of matter.

The superfluid space drains toward the center of a volume in matter, as gravity or weight.

There are many sizes of "centers" or cores, in volumes showing mass, between the diameter of the point, and the universe,
where mass shows as gravity or weight.

All matter floats alone in the superfluidity of space,
and is made from that dark-matter superfluid,
draining into larger centers of mass.

i suppose a superfluid is incompressible.
While as space is infinitely compressible.
So space may be better thought of, as a supergas.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 10 2010, 09:13 PM
Post #242

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

The current of space is caused by its' flow into matter,
anything small, caught in this flow, shows weight.
Mass adds momentum and inertia,
that counters this flow of space into matter, through gyroscopic outward force, against gravity.

As a planet in orbit, is building mass in volume,
it is gaining more momentum,
that keeps it orbiting the star,
rather than falling into it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 11 2010, 04:39 PM
Post #243

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

Thanks Tam,
this is so fascinating.

1^ + 2^ + 3^ + 4^ + 5^ + 6^ + 7^ + 8^ + 9^ + 10^ = 385,
or, 385.000 Km = mean distance between Earth and Moon.

Each square contained, sums to the length of a line between the point centers of gravity of the Earth and moon...

and 10 cubed, is 1000.

something about geometric progressions?

Areas in areas...
sum of the parts, give a length?

but squares are 2 dimensional volume-less areas.

Ever get the feeling that all these jigsaw pieces somehow fit together?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 12 2010, 10:12 AM
Post #244

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

It's all the same ratios up and down the scale of size.
It's that ten cubed, the magnitude X 1000.

Our size of point is the electron/positron coupling.
The prime matter particle makes up the aether of my "super gas",
the seemingly, empty vacuous space, that is outside, and inside everything.
Space, constantly "venting" into the matter floating in it, and making more matter around the larger cores of the gravitational centers, within it.
Dimensionally building volume in protons, at the 2 dimensional "skin" of the core, within, to a barely significant magnitude of volume.

Almost 1000 of these point particles of the universe adhere, around a positive charged half-particle-positron, that still attracts a negative half-particle-electron to orbit. Forming another piece of matter, out of volume-less points.

So a neutron, would be a, low or no, orbital hydrogen atom. With the electron being in the proton, instead of orbiting that proton.

Proton 1.007276 u
Neutron 1.008665 u
Hydrogen atom 1.007825 u

i'm close,
but remember all gravity, comes from all the mass in the universe, and is drawing empty space, in through a diameter of volume of matter, into the center of its' mass.
If the diameter is too small, then not much space can be "vented" through it.

This nuclear binding energy makes the mass of all atoms (except hydrogen-1, which only has 1 proton) slightly lighter that what you'd get by adding up the mass of the sub-atomic particles. Einstein's famous equation E = mc2 shows us that we can get the necessary binding energy from the mass of the sub-atomic particles. So the mass of any multi-nucleon atom is less than the sum of the weights of its separated parts. Its this change in mass when the nucleus changes size that is the source of the enormous amount of energy in nuclear reactions.

(Bold text mine)

Binding force?
No, i think it's just the same gravity,
in another magnitudely smaller scale of the same geometry.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 13 2010, 10:58 PM
Post #245

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



Every kind of matter particle has a corresponding antiparticle. Charged antiparticles have the opposite electric charge to their matter counterparts. Although antiparticles are extremely rare in the Universe today, matter and antimatter are believed to have been created in equal amounts at the Big Bang.

No, i think, matter and antimatter are created in equal amounts inside large gravitational centers constantly.
Volumes of matter are built out of neutral points made of united electrons and positrons:


The antiparticle of the electron.

Cherenkov radiation

Light emitted by fast-moving charged particles traversing a dense transparent medium faster than the speed of light in that medium.

Matter, moving faster than light can go through dense transparent space, makes light,
...who would have thunk?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 14 2010, 07:41 PM
Post #246

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

Time for some music:

Oh, what is the point of the universe?
it seems to have no point at all.
And everything in it so small-
that's the matter, the rest of it,
vast empty hollow-ooo

The gravity of this situation,
must come from the heart of its' core.
there isn't a place
to find mass in space,
So really there's nothing to follow-to.

Gravity must come from a center
a center of volume and mass.
A universe thats' volume is infinite
has a center at all points, within, in it.

But matter can only show gravity,
from the center of even its cavity,
it needs its' diameters
to show that it matters,
an aperture for gravity,
to swallow-through.

The whole is the sum of its' parts
All parts give the sum of the whole.
The volumes in volumes of volumes in volumes,
Combine to the mass of the universe.

Oh, what is the point in the universe?
No volume without showing mass,
that must go unnoticed and pass-
in the vacuum,
with no volume,
showing nothing,
of its' position,
in the universe.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 16 2010, 05:47 PM
Post #247

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

It's all astronomical and infinitesimal.
With energy radiating out, and gravity drawing in.
Space concentrating, as it flows into matter and eventually forms into atoms around larger inaccessible prime-cores of volume, between the point, and the universe.
With each prime core, the starting point for a greater magnitude of scale, starting from that point.

Gravity, becomes the line, between 2 volume-less, point-centers of mass, whether they are planets, moons, stars, or galaxies, in a greater magnitude of dimension than ours.

At our level of magnitude,
gravity, is the flow of empty space,
into the matter that is floating in it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 21 2010, 10:50 AM
Post #248

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

There is only one universe.
It is a volume that contains all matter/energy and space.
Within this volume are smaller, finite volumes,
built from even smaller finite volumes.

The smallest volume, is no volume at all.
This is the point.

There will be an infinite number of points,
in every angel, dancing on the head of a pin,

The universe being an unbound volume,
would have a center of gravity,
at all points within it, because all the points, inside of it,
will always be equal distance from the edges,
of the volume of the universe.

As every measurable volume, containing mass,
has a (point) center of gravity;
All the mass of the universe,
must exist at every point within,
in it.

But the point, has no volume,
so there is nothing there to show that mass,
(of the entire universe) through.

Matter has inertia,
because it has a volume, to show mass.
A point has mass, but no volume,
so it has no inertia.
...points that are infinitely compressible and expandable.

Outer space is the point mass of the universe, and it flows as an infinitely conductive "super-gas" that conducts heat and light with no resistance,
pouring vast amounts of its emptiness, into the matter floating in it,
that it caries along with it.
Like light pouring in, to the darkness.

So we have one infinite volume of universe,
made out of infinite number of volume-less points.

A prime number is a number, that is only divisible by one and itself.
A prime number (or a prime) is a natural number that has exactly two distinct natural number divisors: 1 and itself. The smallest twenty-five prime numbers (all the prime numbers under 100) are:
2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97.

An infinitude of prime numbers exists, as demonstrated by Euclid around 300 BC


...So, perhaps prime numbers have something to do,
with the different volumes of cores, in the universe.
Each prime, being a starting place for the volume-less point,
up through the dimensions.
Point, edge, boundary, volume; center point, edge, boundary, volume, point center...
on up, (and down)
repeating the same geometrical dimensions,
through scale.

(edit) added
or perhaps, Prime Fibonacci numbers, like:
2, 3, 5, 13, 89, 233, 1597, 28657, 514229, 433494437, 2971215073, 99194853094755497, 1066340417491710595814572169, 19134702400093278081449423917, 475420437734698220747368027166749382927701417016557193662268716376935476241


An exponentiation sequence of prime-volumes.

It's curious that the Fibonacci sequence begins with 0, 1, 1.
And 1 is a unique prime, of sorts.
but zero, divided by 1, and itself?
Perhaps zero divides in two,
as (-)1 and (+)1.
An electron and a positron.
Matter and anti-matter.

Dark matter=0,
and a positron(+1)

(i'm not sure if this sequence reflects the exact series of objects but the exponentialness of cores of objects in the universe, seems to fit.)

Another sequence, is the Indices of prime Fibonacci numbers:

Remember the mass vs volume chart?!

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 27 2010, 06:25 AM
Post #249

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

Fibonacci's Fractals

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 5 2011, 03:51 PM
Post #250

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

What if gravity was the other side (or inverse) of radiant energy (light)?

Gravity draws into the point center of density, (like inside a star)
and light radiates outward, from the outside, of a volume of mass,
into the less density of space.

Energy flowing outward, into the gravity of the universe,
drawing inward. Just like an electric circuit.

And matter is polarized towards the gravity side.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 16 2011, 11:54 AM
Post #251

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

what if...

we are living on the top of a negative field of an electron?

The electron is the inner core of the Earth.
The other planets and their moons, have cores, as well.
Each one, is and electron, and the surface of that planet or moon is the negative field around that electron, very strong at the crust, but becoming weaker with the atmosphere.

at our scale this "field" is the solid, physical, reality, of matter, in all its' common states, solid, liquid and gas.

The planets, (electrons), with their spheres of increasing density, (negative fields) are in different orbits, (shells) around the sun (the atomic nucleus), with its' massive volume and corona (positive field).

Now here is where it gets interesting.
The mass of a proton is about 1838 times the weight of a single electron. The mass of all the planets, together is about 1/100th the weight of the sun. But the cores of all the planets are, i'm estimating, about 1/10th the weight of the planets.
Now we are up in the range of a 1000 to 1 ratio, if we only take the mass of the cores of the planets and compare that to mass of the sun.

1000 is 10 cubed.
This is an important ratio because this shows volume.
for instance the ratio of steam, to water is in this range, as well.


There is that ratio again. 1000:1
or 2000:1 if the electron is only half of a pre matter particle,
and taking off the corners of a cube to make it round, brings it down to ~1838.

How many corners does a cube have?
8?! The same number as the maximum shells of an atom?!

Atoms are very small, we only can theorize what the look and behave like.
we only know them, by their fields around points of centers.
We may have our design of the atom incomplete,
it may look exactly like our solar system at a scale just too small to see, where its' time is separated from ours. through sheer magnitude of scale.

So are there 8 corresponding anti-planet cores in the sun?
like a proton for every electron?
If the Earth is growing, does this mean that the negative field around electrons is slowly growing too?

Anyhow, what we see as electrical charge at the atomic scale must be the physical matter of our scale. Yet, at the atomic scale, this energy would be matter.

As time is a variable, real measure of distance,
is dependent on time.
Where time is slower than ours, distance is greater.
what we measure in nanometers would be light-years,
if time was slow enough there.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Mar 13 2011, 10:29 PM
Post #252

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

Here is another thought, well perhaps i have covered it somewhere already.
The universe is 1.
The whole, complete, containing everything, yet unbounded, except in thought; One.

One is divisible only by 1 and itself, which is 1 anyway.
So it fits the definition of a prime number, i think.

A prime number is only divisible by one and itself.
So. every prime number can be thought of as having the same "properties" as 1 does.

The thing is, that throughout the universe most "things" seem to have inaccessible inner cores. of varying sizes.
The atom has it's nucleus, the moon has a core, the Earth and sun have cores, too.

All these cores are contained within our "one" universe.

it is my conclusion, now, since i began this thread, that within every core, this same "one" universe exists. This theory extends to the idea that vast distances of travel can be achieved by just passing into any "core" that's big enough to be entered.

A sort of "stargate", that would exist in every star, planet, and atom.

An entrance to any part of the universe, in everything.

So what are these "cores"?

i think that they are prime fractions of 1.
Each only divisible by 1 and itself.

in music these would be harmonics, prime divisions of the whole string, i think.
And the size of the cores get exponentially smaller, but go on forever, like the sequence of primes in the whole numbers.

Now, how to access, inaccessible cores...

first we spun magnetic disks, to hold data;
then we spun reflective disks to hold more data;
Now we spin electrons in thumb-drives to hold even more data.

More and more data, is stored through the spin.
What if we could do the same with matter or energy,
...or time?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Apr 8 2011, 04:00 PM
Post #253

Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617

The “Crap” they can sell on the History Channel…

Michio Kaku and Alexei Filippenko on the “Cosmic Apocalypse” state that all objects in space will become “Black Holes” and the Universe will become very cold. [Big Freeze]

Next something…Big Crunch…

After that, all the “Black Holes” will evaporate away.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Apr 23 2013, 08:54 AM
Post #254

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

Ever heard of a monopole magnet?
It's just the South or North pole of a magnet.

Earlier in this thread i wrote about Kelvin Water Dropper/thunderbolt device


The interesting thing is that if you freeze the separate negative and positively charged water in the collectors, into ice,
you have a north and south monopole magnet!

The electrical charge, becomes a bound magnetic field in the solid ice.

Magnetic ice!

Thanks to
MrTeslonian for discovering the monopole!
(i apologize for my exuberance, but this could be the biggest physics discovery in written history)


(from comments at youtube)
If you froze water, on a super cold surface, through this device, could you make magnetic ice?!
Good idea! and my assumption would be yes it will work.
· in reply to rongrite
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Aug 12 2013, 09:30 PM
Post #255

Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,983
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875

The meaning of lift:

"The explanations of lift were initially pushed with air speed differences, equal transit times, and other blather, and now they are pushed with angles of attack and other misdirection. But once we know of charge, the answer is relatively simple"


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

13 Pages V  « < 11 12 13
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 6th December 2019 - 06:34 AM