- Thank you received: 0
Big Crunch?
- rousejohnny
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
21 years 3 weeks ago #6839
by rousejohnny
Replied by rousejohnny on topic Reply from Johnny Rouse
North - I am saying there was never a big bang. The Big Split says that the only nothing possible is if all matter were separated into its fundemental energy charges and cancelled out, the pure neutral energy would be the only nothing possible. Just like beta decay of a neutron in an atom, the nothingness (pure monism) split into negative and positive energy, maintaining on the aggragate a gross charge of 0, like the ying/yang (no conservation violation). Electromagnetism created a spin, billions of tiny vorticies and on a grander level a single voticies, where lots of matter accumulate creating the Universal vortex, that I have discussed. The smaller vorticities throughout the system became the galaxies, solar systems, star, planets, atom, etc. But, all of these smaller vorticities are "falling" into the Universal vortex. That is it in a nutshell.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 3 weeks ago #6842
by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />North - I am saying there was never a big bang. The Big Split says that the only nothing possible is if all matter were separated into its fundemental energy charges and cancelled out, the pure neutral energy would be the only nothing possible. Just like beta decay of a neutron in an atom, the nothingness (pure monism) split into negative and positive energy, maintaining on the aggragate a gross charge of 0, like the ying/yang (no conservation violation). Electromagnetism created a spin, billions of tiny vorticies and on a grander level a single voticies, where lots of matter accumulate creating the Universal vortex, that I have discussed. The smaller vorticities throughout the system became the galaxies, solar systems, star, planets, atom, etc. But, all of these smaller vorticities are "falling" into the Universal vortex. That is it in a nutshell.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
i like it!! it reminds me of my theory of two nothings coming together,and when they do,this is the only way they become manifest.although i like the way you put it better!!
the only thing is,how do you get the elecromagnetism to start if you have a neutral begining "0" charge? how would ball start rolling so to speak?
<br />North - I am saying there was never a big bang. The Big Split says that the only nothing possible is if all matter were separated into its fundemental energy charges and cancelled out, the pure neutral energy would be the only nothing possible. Just like beta decay of a neutron in an atom, the nothingness (pure monism) split into negative and positive energy, maintaining on the aggragate a gross charge of 0, like the ying/yang (no conservation violation). Electromagnetism created a spin, billions of tiny vorticies and on a grander level a single voticies, where lots of matter accumulate creating the Universal vortex, that I have discussed. The smaller vorticities throughout the system became the galaxies, solar systems, star, planets, atom, etc. But, all of these smaller vorticities are "falling" into the Universal vortex. That is it in a nutshell.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
i like it!! it reminds me of my theory of two nothings coming together,and when they do,this is the only way they become manifest.although i like the way you put it better!!
the only thing is,how do you get the elecromagnetism to start if you have a neutral begining "0" charge? how would ball start rolling so to speak?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- rousejohnny
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
21 years 3 weeks ago #6783
by rousejohnny
Replied by rousejohnny on topic Reply from Johnny Rouse
North that is the one question I cannot answer with Science. I just know that there are instances of Beta-decay that happen in nature for no apparent or unexplained reasons. But of all the questions put forth to me, scientifically that is the only one I have no answer for and it is ironic that it comes from someone who can see the possibility.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 3 weeks ago #7044
by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />North that is the one question I cannot answer with Science. I just know that there are instances of Beta-decay that happen in nature for no apparent or unexplained reasons. But of all the questions put forth to me, scientifically that is the only one I have no answer for and it is ironic that it comes from someone who can see the possibility.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
maybe what the decay is doing is finding its lowset rest energy,or trying to find a balance between "-" and "+" electromagnetic forces with neutral energy actually being gravity in its most fundimental form.the two forces "-" and "+" can come together here because they won't destroy each other and allows them to aggregate.this perhaps is the recycling of energy.this neutral energy (gravity) would be the weakest force in the universe.which agrees with the current thought (not sure if this is good if you know what i mean!!)
i can see perhaps the gravity energy actually absorb this electro magnetic energy until saturation then excess energy becoming the electromagnetic field which would then cause rotation because of energy flux from "+" to "-".
thought i would give it a whirl!!
<br />North that is the one question I cannot answer with Science. I just know that there are instances of Beta-decay that happen in nature for no apparent or unexplained reasons. But of all the questions put forth to me, scientifically that is the only one I have no answer for and it is ironic that it comes from someone who can see the possibility.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
maybe what the decay is doing is finding its lowset rest energy,or trying to find a balance between "-" and "+" electromagnetic forces with neutral energy actually being gravity in its most fundimental form.the two forces "-" and "+" can come together here because they won't destroy each other and allows them to aggregate.this perhaps is the recycling of energy.this neutral energy (gravity) would be the weakest force in the universe.which agrees with the current thought (not sure if this is good if you know what i mean!!)
i can see perhaps the gravity energy actually absorb this electro magnetic energy until saturation then excess energy becoming the electromagnetic field which would then cause rotation because of energy flux from "+" to "-".
thought i would give it a whirl!!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Lotto Cheatah
- Offline
- Junior Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
21 years 3 weeks ago #7299
by Lotto Cheatah
Replied by Lotto Cheatah on topic Reply from Ron
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />North - I am saying there was never a big bang. The Big Split says that the only nothing possible is if all matter were separated into its fundemental energy charges and cancelled out, the pure neutral energy would be the only nothing possible. Just like beta decay of a neutron in an atom, the nothingness (pure monism) split into negative and positive energy, maintaining on the aggragate a gross charge of 0, like the ying/yang (no conservation violation).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
No Conservation violation? Even in a purely mathematical model you gotta have it before you can cancel it.
Ying,Yang or Flim Flam? The model clearly violates the Law of Conservation.
<br />North - I am saying there was never a big bang. The Big Split says that the only nothing possible is if all matter were separated into its fundemental energy charges and cancelled out, the pure neutral energy would be the only nothing possible. Just like beta decay of a neutron in an atom, the nothingness (pure monism) split into negative and positive energy, maintaining on the aggragate a gross charge of 0, like the ying/yang (no conservation violation).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
No Conservation violation? Even in a purely mathematical model you gotta have it before you can cancel it.
Ying,Yang or Flim Flam? The model clearly violates the Law of Conservation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- rousejohnny
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
21 years 3 weeks ago #6784
by rousejohnny
Replied by rousejohnny on topic Reply from Johnny Rouse
Lotto -1+1=0, It is all about energy.
And inversely 0= 1+(-1). It is not so difficult to understand, really it's not.
And inversely 0= 1+(-1). It is not so difficult to understand, really it's not.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.324 seconds