Jump to content
Science Forums

What If We Give Some New Descriptions?


inverse

Recommended Posts

Judging by your footer message, very likely, I should think.

 

I remember you had asked it in the past too.

 

Well,I have some projects for this. 

 

but as a summary,I would say that the equation will have a new form in the different areas. 

but not regular areas (regular mean :ordinary)

 

my project claims that in different subspaces (or here math -spaces) some equations will have different  forms.

 

Just consder a subregion  of [math] R^{3} [/math] and consider please that region is closed region. (more generally the closed subspace of [math] R^n [/math]

 

I do not think that everything would be same like elsewhere. but of course not at everywhere.

Edited by inverse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember you had asked it in the past too.

 

Well,I have some projects for this. 

 

but as a summary,I would say that the equation will have a new form in the different areas. 

but not regular areas (regular mean :ordinary)

 

my project claims that in different subspaces (or here math -spaces) some equations will have different  forms.

 

Just consder a subregion  of [math] R^{3} [/math] and consider please that region is closed region. (more generally the closed subspace of [math] R^n [/math]

 

I do not think that everything would be same like elsewhere. but of course not at everywhere.

 

What is it with people and thinking the Strong Nuclear Force's collapse into the Weak Nuclear Force doesn't follow E=MC, Do you people realize how silly this is to say E=MCis false given that Nuclear Fusion and Fission Reactors and Bombs work and have been in operation for 50 years which have always followed this equation or a form of it? It is probably one of the most experimentally tested things in physics, Fission Reactors test it constantly even while I type this.

 

power.jpg

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

What is it with people and thinking the Strong Nuclear Force's collapse into the Weak Nuclear Force doesn't follow E=MC, Do you people realize how silly this is to say E=MCis false given that Nuclear Fusion and Fission Reactors and Bombs work and have been in operation for 50 years which have always followed this equation or a form of it? It is probably one of the most experimentally tested things in physics, Fission Reactors test it constantly even while I type this.

 

power.jpg

 

 

I think we are remarking something more different than yours.

we are not psycist but  presumably you will be able to have some clues or details if you consider this question

 

does light have mass ? OR 

 

is everything complete in the universe? (we are neglecting something in the implementations stage)

Edited by inverse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...