Sharky Posted July 27, 2003 Report Share Posted July 27, 2003 Will somebody with any real intuition and cognitive way of thinking have a look a my warp mechanics posting and tell me that every other topic discussed on this site cannot be explained and broken down in to simpler expessions of a solid field theory. Seriously, come on now; the mechanics and workings behind its main idea are unorthodox in the least. If no one can tell me, then that shows me that they are just lazy thinkers and my explaination for zero point energy and quantum gravity ( which in turn explain the stucture and funtion of the very nature of space itself ) are too complex of a concept for even the most intelligent people to grasp. My challenge is for any one man or woman to understand the fullness of my expendatures and give me thier version of my own explaination of the phenomenons. Therfore alowing me to see that somebody out their in the world understands why this is so important to me that it be known! Not for the fame and fortune but for the advancement of man kind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted July 27, 2003 Report Share Posted July 27, 2003 Just to help Sharky out a bit - read more about his theories here: Warp Mechanics/ Apathetic Conflux & Universal Structure (the grand scheme) Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted July 29, 2003 Report Share Posted July 29, 2003 Sharky, Okay, you'll probably kick me for this, but I have spent quite some time reading your article and frankly, it doesn't make any sense to me. I might not fall into the category of people you want (those with "any real intuition and cognitive way of thinking"), but I simply can't grasp what your paper is trying to say. For example:"The measurement of zero degrees is equal to 360°³. 360º³ is the cubing of a circle. This action makes a sphere. A sphere has the ability to be measured from its surface in any direction and it will always be a forward motion. A sphere also has two sides, an inside and an outside. The inside is the center and the outside is the sphere." I just don't get this. What does "cubing of a circle" mean? How does it make a sphere? A sphere may have two sides. It may also have one, if it is a solid. If it is hollow, however, or if the sphere is simply a mathematical construct, the boundary of said sphere must be infinite for it to have two sides. It will only have two sides in 3D space. You state that electrons are created when protons decay into neutrons ("depletes its warp kinetic energy"). You then claim that "This is why an electron cannot be divided further". I am not so sure that it is so simple. According to quantum physics, the electron can be perceived as both a particle and a wave. On this web page, The electron and its properties, the author states that the radius of the electron has never been measured. In fact, it claims the electron seems to have no structure at all. How can you be so sure the electron is a sphere? Please explain. I am probably reading your theory in the wrong way. And that is my point - while you might expect people to understand just what your theory is about, you can hardly expect them to understand how it should be applied to the fundamental understanding of mathematics! Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deamonstar Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 well... from what I understand, cubing of a circle is the same thing as expansion in 3 spatial dimensions and forward movement through time. and this implies a non-static model. not the thing that most people are familiar with when trying to comprehend a new idea. and several points to this theory requires one to let go of classical notions as to the workings of the atom. don't worry, sharky. I do understand your theory... I have no problem seeing it in action in my minds eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 deamonstar, do you mind enlightening me a bit? What is Sharky's theory all about? What are it's applications, and why is it interesting? I'm struggling to get the point of it all. Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharky Posted July 31, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 So finally some intelligent responses on my theorum and all I had to do was insult the intelligence of the science world inhabitants. Let me see if I can enlighten you. Everything has a center. If one were to find the center of any object or entity having confinments and expansion restrictions that cause said object to take its natural form he/she could divide that object into four equal parts. Each one of those equal parts has a center, so on and so forth. A cirlce has a center but it is an expansion restriction as seen by mathmeticians because it is a measurement of zero degrees. Any number beyond this point opposite of the positive ( which we can actually see ) is in reality a non-existant number. You cannot have less than nothing. That is the expansion restriction. If the same cirlce were to be sphered by means of cubicalization ( multiplying it by itself three times ) The expansion restriction disipates; here's how. There are two sides to every equation. In the circle it was three-hundred sixty degrees vs. zero degrees. What you do to one side you must do to the other. By cubing the circle one should presumably cube the center ( even if it is still uniformly zero degrees. ) The center of the sphere being cubed allows for relativity to continue and can now measure from that center infinitly to a fixed point, starting over each time that point is reached until it covers the entire surface of the cubed center and one would have a sphere. Therefore zero degrees ( cubed or not ) is equal to three-hundred sixty degrees cubed. This proves that everything is made of centers and those centers are actually spheres making all particles and all matter spherical. Now, as of forward motion, One can easily see that traveling from one point to another is actually a vortexial movement. I'm getting to the explaination of gravity if you bare with me. If one were to, in thought, stand on the surface of a sphere and some how shrink down small enough to stand on the surface of the center there would be yet another center so on and so forth. Getting down to sub atomic patricles one would get closer and closer to what gravity actually is. Gravity is not a particle duality at all but is in fact, according to the above stated, the absolute center in which no matter can inhabit. This absolute center is the background of space and what holds the gluons together. The gluons are believed to be the gravity particles. The above stated on cubicalization is why everthing is symetrical. With this paragraphical explaination, you guys should be able to go back to my Warp Mechanics posting and understand it this time a lot more than last. Sorry my invention of words to describe the phenomenons that occur in my posting but you should be able to use your imagination! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deamonstar Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 well, tormod. sharky's theory concerns the fundamental structure of the atom and its implications and effects on the very fabric of space, matter, mass, electromagnetic force, strong and weak nuclear forces...the whole gamut of quantum physics etc.. etc... its applications, to bring it out of a mere theoretical framework into real-world scenarios are seemingly endless. heck the implications of it could possibly open new doors to a higher level of thinking concerning the very nature of our universe! this could be the key to a grand unified theory... or at least put us on the right road to that goal.the only thing lacking is access to research facilities and equipment to actually test this theory. however, the underlying sub-atomic principles could even now be utilized to further explain various phenomenae whose understandings of which, as of yet, remain so elusive using modern-day ways of thinking. as I've stated before, this theory requires a depature from the mindset of classical scientific understandings to be able to understand the universe as we know it in a new light. in other words... this theory can explain in whole the nature of things where modern-day science finds only more questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted August 5, 2003 Report Share Posted August 5, 2003 Sharky, howdoes the theory described at this website compare to yours? http://www.vasantcorporation.com/ Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wholloway Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 Sorry about that blank. First of all cubing a circle does not give you a sphere, mathamatically or figurativly. A circle is two dimensional and a sphere is three dimensional. Only one dimension apart. I don't want to make someone mad but, it looks like this therory is written using double talk meant to confuse people. Also 0 deg and 360 deg are not equal. The end result would look the same, but they are different. Using degrees implies rotation. What are you rotating? If this is legitamate, you need to explain in laymens talk and organize your thoughts. It doesn't start anywhere and ends up in the same place. I can't follow this at all, but maybe I'm ignorant to a much higher intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 wholloway, first of all - welcome to our forums! I agree with you. Maybe we're both ignorant to the extreme. Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deamonstar Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 actually this theory involves ergodic theory, geodesic flows and torus flows which does allow for cubing of circles to make spheres... and it involves higher dimensional mathematical physics. 0 deg and 360 deg do come to equalibrium in these types of systems, which is where the rotation that you mention comes from. the things being rotated are the sub-atomic particles (from the inside out and back again). I don't think that these things can be described in laymans terms due to the fact that it is so far removed from anything that most people are familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharky Posted August 9, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 The cubing of a circle does make a sphere numb nutz. Just the same as cubing a makes a square fool.Despite your ignorance I'll be nice and just say you need to study a little bit more before you open your mouth about things of which you know nothing, wholloway! Does it piss you off that I might be closer than most have dreamed of getting? Turmod, It is the same theory as the one in the website it's my website. Only difference is there are pictures to help explain. I am Michael Dill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharky Posted August 9, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 First before preverbally chewing off holloway's head for being a degenerate... Turmod, That website that you visited is my website and the only difference between that and my posting is that there are pictures on the website to help explain the phenomenons. "K" Now, as for you holloway ( whatever you're calling your self ), Cubing a circle does make a sphere just as cubing a square makes the square a cube dingaling.I suggest studying a little bit on a subject before you jump face first into a shallow pond. Your right, Einstien a circle is two dimensional and a sphere is three dimensional but how do you suppose one gets from a circle to a sphere?! ...Duh, by adding another dimension ( like you said they are only one dimension apart. ) Can you tell me what dimension transforms a circle into a sphere? ...DEPTH! That of which you are in no possession of pertaining to this subject sooo....." You are the weakest link. GOODBYE!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 Sharky,be warned. Youare way out of line. Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharky Posted August 10, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 Hello people, Turmod you must only agree with what he said about not understanding it because I'm pretty sure you know that cubing a square makes a cube so cubing a circle makes a sphere. And duh... of course they are only one dimension apart. What dimension do you think is intricated into a two dimension shape that makes a three dimensional form? Hmmm... let me see.... could it be DEPTH! Johnny tell Sharky what he's won! Well it appears that he has won domination and intellectual superiority! Oh and Turmod the website I had you visit is mine. I am Michael Dill. The only difference between the forum posting and the website is that there are pictures on the website to help better explain the workings of Warp Mechanics. Don't give up on trying to understand it because once you do; you will realize that it actually works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 Sharky, I'm refering to your language and tone. "numb nutz","Despite your ignorance","Does it piss you off","Your right, Einstien","You are the weakest link. GOODBYE""Johnny tell Sharky what he's won! Well it appears that he has won domination and intellectual superiority!" These kinds of phrases do not seem appropriate in these forums. We are not hosting a competition for the brightest minds, least of all a war of words. This is not the place to flaunt your intellectual superiority, it is a place to discuss ideas. If someone questions your ideas, you might want to use a less patronizing language. Please stop your flames immediately. Sincerely,Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deamonstar Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 sharky, just because your theory may have advantages in explaining some things over other theories does not make you superior... it is the way that you conduct yourself which determines if you are better or worse than others. and from the way that you have presented yourself recently makes me want to step back and re-evaluate my opinion of you personally.just for the sake of argument... let's say that you are still in grade school. one of your instructors wants to give your class some insight into what is in store for your future in college mathematics. he gives some examples of advanced triginometry, which you don't understand yet. based on your understanding of basic math, you tell him that he must be wrong because you don't get it. he berates you for your ignorance. how would that make you feel? would it have been fair of him to insult you because you haven't learned a specialized feild in college math?the point is, take into consideration the feelings of others and, understand that what you are presenting to others is not only your ideas of sub-atomic structures and warp mechanics... it is your personality. anyone who would otherwise be open to new ideas will surely be turned off to those ideas by someone who presents those ideas while insulting their intelligence.for a most clear-cut understanding of what I am trying to say can best be shown at the following link. the author is appearantly trying to teach his ideas of time on earth however, he goes about it in a most horrible way. anyone that might be interested in his idea will immediately be offended by this person and never accept even hearing the idea. (just a note... the author is, in my opinion, a total crack-pot.)the link: http://www.timecube.com/ do you see what I am getting at? you do have many valid aspects in your theory. I would hate to see this theory completely disregarded due to your lack of diplomacy and people skills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts