Urod Posted July 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 (edited) ggggggaaa Edited December 1, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted July 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 (edited) Another Breaking Observation supporting the UPN PLUS visualising Gravity ( see picture ) : More Waves at the Atomic level , just as the UPN proves the Universe is ( go to web site to see The picture And the Waves ) : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/03/griffith_university_atom_shadow/ Take a look at atom’s shadow Griffith University boffins ‘see’ ytterbium By Richard Chirgwin • Get more from this author Posted in Physics, 3rd July 2012 21:34 GMT This image is special, according to Griffith University: it’s the first time anyone’s captured the shadow of a single ytterbium atom, at optical wavelengths (images of single atoms are much easier to capture using scanning electron microscopes) ... more and The picture , please note the gentle Spiral emerging from the atom shadow just as Gravity is described by the UPN hence we also can say we have a picture of Gravity generated by that atom ( a vortex of SuperFluid ) : http://www3.griffith.edu.au/03/ertiki/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=37742 And the equipment schematics : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/03/griffith_university_atom_shadow/ UPN : http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com Edited July 4, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted July 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 Gravity captured in picture along with the shadow of an atom ? Take a close look at this historical picture showing the shadow of an atom .Look at the tight spiral emerging from the centre of the atom keeping in mind this is more of a two-dimensional picture , a slice through the shadow projection . Keep in mind , Circles are easier to explain as diffraction, etc , BUT Spirals are not that easy ! This spiral is what the Unifying Property of Nature ( UPN ) theory describes as Gravity ! Gravity is a Wake generated by a spinning Vortex ( the Atom / sub-particles ) travelling in the same SuperFluid that everything is made of and we call the Universe ( including the Vortex/atom and Gravity - simplicity at extreme , ONLY One Component makes up the Universe , the SuperFluid , hence all phenomenon in the Universe can only be the kind that can occur in a fluid : Waves , Vortexes and their Harmonics as Amplifiers and Field phenomenons ) . See the tight spiral here emerging from the atom , could it be as the UPN describe it , the Wakes of Gravity ( a two dimensional view of the actual three-D spheroid appearance of the Gravity Wakes ) : http://www3.griffith.edu.au/03/ertiki/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=37742 And the equipment schematic ( notice the circular – not spiral – waves as the artists interpretation ) : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/03/griffith_university_atom_shadow/ The UPN theory : http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com P.S. : Here is a Test regarding this : bring the tip of an Atomic Force Microscope close enough and Observe how it interacts with that spiral under Both conditions : applying a Charge and no-charge . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted July 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2012 Here is another observation that is confirmed by the UPN : black-holes ( Bright Vortexes in UPN for good reason , explained ) can differ in size and , further , they can Couple to form spheroid shaped fields as observed in the Sun . Only UPN can explain : 1) the Varying Shaped Orbits of stars very near the centre of galaxies ( the coupled black holes / Bright Vortexes ) , 2) AND the Replanishing of Matter by the Sun.stars after millions of tonnes of matter ejected daily by thousands of Streamers And mega tonnes ejected during CMEs ! No other theory explains it , hence the UPN deserves attention . http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9103085732 First Known 'Middleweight' Black Hole TEHRAN (FNA)- Observations with CSIRO's Australia Telescope Compact Array have confirmed that astronomers have found the first known "middleweight" black hole. Outbursts of super-hot gas observed with a CSIRO radio telescope have clinched the identity of the first known "middleweight" black hole, Science Express reports. Called HLX-1 ("hyper-luminous X-ray source 1"), the black hole lies in a galaxy called ESO 243-49, about 300 million light-years away. Before it was found, astronomers had good evidence for only supermassive black holes -- ones a million to a billion times the mass of the Sun -- and "stellar mass" ones, three to thirty times the mass of the Sun. "This is the first object that we're really sure is an intermediate-mass black hole," said Dr Sean Farrell, an ARC Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Sydney and a member of the research team, which included astronomers from France, Australia, the UK and the USA .... more ... The UPN theory : http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted July 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) First of all I want to Thanks to the Members and the Staff at ScienceForums.com for a pleasant atmosphere even though I would appreciate more analysis from you guys , your oppinion and Scrutiny is one important reason I posted here . Thank you all ! UPN Predicts a phenomenon so far unobserved by our instruments . Here is a great opportunity for the UPN to prove itself further by predicting a phenomenon that still is unobserved . The phenomenon is the spontaneous creation of a Bright Vortex , BV ( aka a Black Hole ) in the middle of the intergalactic space , away from galaxies ( their size is much smaller that we imagine today , explanations later ) . If you had ten minutes to read the UPN you would know by now about the Spontaneous Mixing/Agitation occurring within the SuperFluid , SF ( that makes the Universe and us ) , a Fundamental Movement at the ultra-micro level of the SF that represents the Perpetual Source of Movement ( energy ) in the Universe ( that's also why Absolute Zero temperature , i.e. standing completely still , it is impossible ! ) . See the ten logic steps that proves it and explains it ( right , only Ten steps ) at Logic Step set 2.0 . This mixing at the ultra-micro level , that I called Fundamental Vortexes , FV , can occur in a 3-D Harmonic way caused by many FVs that Spatially and by Movement orientation will create a spontaneous Bright Vortex , BV ( aka Black Hole ) . Hence the BV size will tend to be small but also Vary up to certain limits determined naturally by the SF Properties ( all explained in the UPN Logic Steps ) . The Prediction : Therefore our instruments could suddenly see a flash of energy appearing in the middle of “ empty “ intergalactic space , a new Bright Vortex born or a strong FVs Harmonic almost becoming a BV . The Time Line of Occurrence : the chances of having probably Thousands or more FVs coincidentally forming a 3-D Harmonic in such a way to create an Organized Significant vortex spinning at approximately the speed of light or faster is a very , very , very remote possibility ! Proof : look around the mostly empty space of the Universe Plus add the infinite Time allowance and still we can's see to many isolated Bright Vortexes ( 'black-holes' ) except for the ones at the centre of galaxies . Hence we can deduce that the time-chance for a BV to occur AND travel to join others to form galaxies or other phenomenon , is Longer than it would take a newly form BV to Travel to the nearest galaxy ( gravitational union ) . See more on Bright Vortexes and how the UPN explains 'weird' properties including why they move at high speeds and how they cause irregular Orbits to the stars close-by the centre of a galaxy , exciting reading better than sci-fi because it's Real ... http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com Thank you ! Doru Dobrescu Canada Edited July 14, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted July 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Soon Hubbble will spot spontenious bursts of energy and even the birth of a 'black-hole' in the middle of 'empty' space ( inter-galactic ) , see previous post . The UPN depicts an endless Universe in an fairly uniform state hence what we see in our neighborhood is similar to most of the rest of the Universe ( and no Big-Bang as the creation of the Universe , we are not at the centre of the Universe ) . Here Observation supports this against the traditional theories : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/19/ancient_spiral_galaxy/ Hubble spots ancient spiral galaxy that SHOULD NOT EXIST By Brid-Aine Parnell Posted in Space, 19th July 2012 10:49 GMT Astronomers using the Hubble Space Telescope have spotted an ancient spiral galaxy that's so neat and tidy it shouldn’t even exist. Although there are plenty of spiral galaxies these days - including our own Milky Way - in the early millennia of the universe, galaxies were a lot more messed up. "As you go back in time to the early universe, galaxies look really strange, clumpy and irregular, not symmetric," Alice Shapley, a UCLA associate professor of physics and astronomy and co-author of the study, explained. "The vast majority of old galaxies look like train wrecks.” Nevertheless, galaxy BX442 was knocking around just three billion years after the Big Bang and is a ‘grand design’ galaxy, which means it has prominent well-formed spiral arms. It’s also quite a large galaxy for the early universe, one of only about 30 of such magnitude that have been analysed by boffins .... more .... The UPN theory : http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted July 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 More evidence is supporting the UPN ! But it's not just the UPN showing that we all are made of a Super Fluid , here from Cornell University and Grigori Volovik : http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.0597 The Superfluid Universe Authors: G.E. Volovik (Submitted on 5 Apr 2010 (v1), last revised 3 Apr 2012 (this version, v2)) Abstract: " We discuss phenomenology of quantum vacuum. Phenomenology of macroscopic systems has three sources: thermodynamics, topology and symmetry. Thermodynamics of the self-sustained vacuum allows us to treat the problems related to the vacuum energy: the cosmological constant problems. The natural value of the energy density of the equilibrium the self-sustained vacuum is zero. Cosmology is discussed as the process of relaxation of vacuum towards the equilibrium state. The present value of the cosmological constant is very small compared to the Planck scale, because the present Universe is very old and thus is close to equilibrium. Momentum space topology determines the universality classes of fermionic vacua. The Standard Model vacuum both in its massless and massive states is topological medium. The vacuum in its massless state shares the properties of superfluid 3He-A, which is topological Superfluid ... " ... See how the UPN uses only Logic to show we all are made of a SuperFluid : http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted August 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 (edited) zzzzzzxxxxxxxxx Edited December 1, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 I invite you to explore the simple Logic Steps in the Unifying Property of Nature , UPN , that shows the foundation of matter creation by a black-hole , and much more .I might go through when I find the time. I hope you noticed my thread about the SuperFluid Universe as described by Cornell University scientist Grigory Volovik . My UPN arrived to the same conclusion about the SuperFluid but from 'scratch' , no formulas yet .The same goes for Volovik. ... Here I give you two samples , if you are not happy than don't bother reading the UPN :1) Proving in three easy logic steps that Nothingness can not and does not exist . While the concept of Nothingness may appear intuitive , try to find the by-the-book Logic steps solution before reading mine :1.1 – if Nothingness would have occupy all available space in the Universe it would be the Universe therefore transferring its property of non-existence to the Universe , hence the Universe would not exist . 1.2 - but in order for the Nothingness to ' occupy ' any space it Must be that the space already existed .1.3 - but since space as a Real existence , Somethingness , could not be made to disappear and reduced to Nothingness implies that Nothingness could not ' take hold ' or ' appear ' into existing Somethingness and make it disappear .1.4 - hence Nothingness could Never ' exist ' ! QED in three easy logic steps .I will admit you are using a semblance of deduction. I don't think this rise to the rigor and level of a "proof". Working with definitions: "Nothingness" is a property of nothing or no-thing-ness. And nothing is the absence of something. If you remove all the somethingness, then you are reduced to nothingness. In Set Theory, the Empty Set is a member of all sets as an Axiom of Set Theory. Speaking physics your point 1.3 Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle dictates the ability to create (borrow) particles/energy from the Vacuum (Nothing) for a short time only to annihilate in the next instant. Bonus , the Age of the Universe :1.5 - Since Nothingness can not and never existed implies that Somethingness is around since for-ever , Ageless , without a beginning ( because it would imply Nothingness ) . Hence the Universe is Ageless and it will remain that way .Fails since 1.3 is not accurate. Rather than go through the rest, I will just comment this has Nothing to do with the gist of this thread. You could have done an invite to me to go read this somewhere (new/old thread). Just Not mine! P.S. : MadDog and all , did you or others you know played Chess by yourself ? I mean alone , not against a computer , but just changinmg sides after each move . Did you ? Please tell , I'll surprise you of Why , Thanks !Again I'm am not sure the point of this yet to put it to rest - Yes, I did play both sides often (when no one wanted to play me). Your point? maddog Buffy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted August 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) .... Speaking physics your point 1.3 Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle dictates the ability to create (borrow) particles/energy from the Vacuum (Nothing) for a short time only to annihilate in the next instant. Fails since 1.3 is not accurate. 1.3 says what the Text books say : you can't destroy/reduce to Nothingness matter ( somethingness ) .I wasn't aware that's not true anylonger by the Establishment !Are you sure that you are not mixing " quantum vacuum " with the Absolute Nothingness ( which Does Not Exist ! ) Please , there is a big difference between the two , plus that I did Not mention anywhere in my UPN nor rely on the " quantum vacuum " , so no , 1.3 did not failed , because you interpret it as a " quantum vacuum " which is not part of my theory , and which "quantum vacuum" was not proven so far , right ? Right .So please , in all fairness do not judge other theories based on what Quantum only Speculates and which is not even using logic steps as I do in the UPN , thanks . Keep update with the latest finding contradicting the Quantum such as the recently found Organized spiral galaxy in a place far out of where Quantum allows , hence a fatal blow to the theory . BTW , Proof is when you can not Prove it wrong , specially in logic and physics , it's a Standard ... Rather than go through the rest, I will just comment this has Nothing to do with the gist of this thread. You could have done an invite to me to go read this somewhere (new/old thread). Just Not mine! I am sorry you missed my statement in my reply about black-holes which , as I read the title of your thread , it is the 'gist' of this thread . I was pointing out at another interpretation of black holes and how they generate ( spin ) matter hence Life elements by spinning the SuperFluid by pointing to what the UPN Proves by logic .All I did is to save you time by forwarding two sets of logic deductions as samples , I am sorry that upseted you ! Again I'm am not sure the point of this yet to put it to rest - Yes, I did play both sides often (when no one wanted to play me). Your point? maddog As myself just like you and many others I played chess by myself ( and win too ) , a fact that Questions the validity of this statement : "You can not solve a problem with the same mind that created it". - Albert Einstein And I am not bringing in the Tacoma bridge and the Learning Curve ...But if you Realy want to push the envelope on that statement take a bite of this : Albert Einstein was religious , a Problem created by his mind ... Was interesting talking to you ! Cheers ! Edited August 17, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted August 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2012 (edited) Astrophysicists believe that stuff gets into the spheroidal volume defined by a black hole’s event horizon as follows:[*]A sufficiently massive star (about 25 Solar masses) fuses all of its available light elements (one with atomic masses less than iron), and ceases to emit photons and other radiation .... Stop frame ! ( or the vinyl record needle scratch ) . Craig , you are jumping to conclusions : WHAT made that star fuse thoese elements considering there is Plenty of spacea around it ? Your statement is way off being the very first step in this explanation , the Quantum can not even explain a black hole nor black-matter !! So we have no foundation to build on ! The Quantum can not explain the CBR , the non-Absolute Zero temperature , the Dual Slit experiment/the particle-wave duality , can not explain the Source of Energy in the Universe , can not explain sub-sub-sub-particles , gravity , black-holes , why galaxies move so fast , why stars near centre of galaxies have a woble orbit , etc , !!Craig , there is No foundation in the Quantum simply based by those inabilities !The only thing close to reality in the Quantum thory are the experiment-derived formulas .So Volovik found a hidden path through those empiric formulas that leads to the SuperFluid Universe conclusion ... Q : does a SuperFluid Universe nulifies the Quantum/Relativity theory ? Hence the scientific community Silance around it ... On the Other hand my UPN theory explains all of the above and without help from empirical formulas , but only from simple logic that anyone can troubleshoot . Edited August 21, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted November 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) Request to CraigD and the rest of ScienceForum Administrators : In view of the latest updates from MIT supporting the SuperFluid Universe , please be Fair and transfer my UPN theory thread to its rightful location in the REAL Realm of ' Astronomy and Cosmology ' Forum , as no longer is a Strange Claim , and no longer one can be Condenscending to it , thank you ! http://arxiv.org/pdf/1004.0597.pdf Volovik's , Russia http://www.thphys.uni-heidelberg.de/~smp/RETUNE2012/talk-slides/Talk_Huang.pdf Huang's from MIT , USA http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com mine , Canada Edited November 12, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted November 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 (edited) vfvvvvvvvvvvv Edited December 1, 2012 by Urod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urod Posted November 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 Hi Urod, & welcome to hypography! :) ..... Your post mostly consists of vague natural language, but hints at me of a couple of testable predictions: ..... Your reference to “ether” suggests that you are referring to the concept of a luminiferous aether. CraigD , I hope that by now you May find as a good idea to explore how a ' vague natural language ' could Possibly arrive to the same SuperFluid Universe conclusion as two scientists did using formulas . Also I hope that by now you read the UPN and realized that my SuperFluid has nothing to do with the ether that you mentioned above . I also hope that now you noticed my remarks about the UPN being in the course of development and you realized that a s far in science all formulas are based on Logic and/or experimentation hence having a theory that explains how the Universe works without using Formulas or math but only logic is superior to one that needs formulas/experimentation already made to arrive to conclusions , i.e. my UPN WILL deduced the existing formulas and more . Of course , all this if you believe that the Universe is 100 % Logic ... and is only intelligent beings that translate that Logic into formulas to help our standard of living . Hence stating that a theory without formulas is flawed is ... flawed . The formulas are the Translation of Logic ( the Properties of the Universe ) into our language and engineering . But if you find a problem with any of the Numbered Logic Steps please post it , just don't use a ' Vague language ' to make your point , instead address that particular logic step . And please don't apply the Quantum speculations to the UPN since the Quantum theory can't explain the things that the UPN DOES ... Official UPN site : http://UPNtheory.WordPress.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.