grzegorzsz830402

One thing I am definitely not afraid of is to be wrong about something. Unfortunately in this case I am not, yet if I was in some other hypothetical example then SPBPOLYMATH would be proven correct, and you would be jest parrot on his shoulder.

And as you not stated what you are against and why that could not be. We all can assume that you are against Heliocentric model. Maybe you are one of that flat earth guys. taunt: a remark made in order to anger, wound, or provoke someone. provoke or challenge (someone) with insulting remarks. Nod : to make a quick downward motion of the head whether deliberately (as in expressing assent or salutation)

For first video: it is for you to decide every single time you have to, not for me to declare. Metamorphic key that I might have found it could not be the key that opens any specific door it could be key that opens specific door for a specific person. What one may find behind that door may be dependent on his intension. I like playing with Metaphors. Yet, if one is not into coded in them patterns in his eyes it may look like crazy talk:)

So if you could provide me with structure to fallow and information to present that would not be waste of your time I would be more than happy to do my best to meet your requirements, as I value contribution of others members your intellectual abilities in my estimation are worth effort to find a way to get you to contribute. I tried teasing, challenging, slightly offending, now I try to mix a little bit flattery with honesty.

Me or OceanBreeze?? And intended as complement or in offensive manner. Back to your Riddle. Numbers are not important in context of specific topics ratio of a to r, and not clearly stated what can be accidentally assumed meaning a1=a2 and r1=r2. No Back to Gravity. Assumptions in current model: Gravity is an attraction force. If I would start with saying that gravity is actually repulsion (internal pressure/decompression) forces imbalance created and maintained by cyclical implosion (earth core). It would be very difficult for anyone to even consider. Ok. Mikolaj Kopernik message was simple: Basically, guys it is other way around, this goes around that and you see what you see because this also rotates around it's own axis. Yet, Martin Luther harshly criticised his theory. Let just say, that it is not easy to chalenge some initial intuitive assumption regardless of your ability to logically and coherently prove it. And that connects with your Riddle. If I would start my topic: "Gravity is a repulsion force not attraction force" you have this other way around, and please don't be like those people in past that defend their initial intuitive assumption just because they go used to think that way. Because if you observe Sun from Sun rise to Sun set then you can understand why someone would make initial intuitive assumption about Sun and Erth. You would think about yourself that gonna akt like those silly people that defended Geocentric model, you definitely not like them, right??? I am a JOKER/CLOWN yet naming me that is recieved as complement, regardless of intentions. And you may have or have not emotions/assumptions about me yet your intellectual abilities are of value in my evaluation so if I could persuade you to join discussion and contribute I think everyone would greatly benefit from that. If not I won't stop trying so easily. And I will connect all that with Riddle I have offered. How feather can be Thors Hammer.

You got my hopes in. I feel slightly disappointed. Why SPBpolymath have bail out?? Looks like someone is afraid of loosing intellectual contest?? I think so.

Theory of everything: A theory of everything (TOE[1] or TOE/ToE), final theory, ultimate theory, unified field theory or master theory is a hypothetical, singular, all-encompassing, coherent theoretical framework of physics that fully explains and links together all aspects of the universe. "Finding a theory of everything is one of the major unsolved problems in physics." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything So can we accept that current scientific model is not meeting criteria and it is not a secret, it is actually accept by scientific society. Do you feel confident in your abilities enough to assess for yourself alternative theories. Or you would wait for other scientist that are at the top of hierarchy for validation before your would accept it?? Would you trust your personal judgement/evaluation more, if you would personally feel convinced about it's validity. Would you risk your reputation, and openly comunicate that you disagree with group of top scientists or would you let it go.

Time is useful classical concept, yet terrible non-classical made up dimensions. I can go forward and backwards, left and right, up stairs and down stairs. Time sucks whenever I check it is always today. I try to be more precise and check closer and whenever I check it is always now. This dimensions sucks ( point dimension). Non-classical, acha that explains a lot. Same, if you ask some scientists do they believe in retrocausality some admit some strongly denies. They name it post-selection. We just gone name it differently and they will stop asking questions. And it actually works, yet it is not science anymore. Titanic is going down my friend and you are polishing silver forks. Have you really blinded yourself so badly. And Jordan Peterson was warning. Do not lie, do not bend that ruler of reality infront your own face, it will snap eventually. And do not lie Pinocchio because your nose have grown out off proportion, there is no way to hide it now.

You speak about science and scientists from ages ago. Since Einstein introduced heaven again (time is a useful concept, one year is full earth rotation around Sun, and day around it's own axis)) would you accept concept of love as a dimension?? Words are categories scientists confused themselves because they had no courage to admit that they simply do not understand. It is a downfall of science since then. How many theoretical dimensions are currently considered 12?? 13?? How can you speak about them without laughing. As since became religion words lost their meaning, categories have been mixed up. Religious Tower of Babel. Yet they did it to themselves, or who knows they may find deity that they will blame it on in another dimension. If you want to reclaim your way to think logically and rationality start before Einstein delusions where proclaimed to be genius theory. That explained nothing yet confused everything. And what an elegant cop-out time and space started with Big-Bang. And try to ask question what was before that. You can not as there was no time there was no before. Yet concept of time was actually a human creation that is a useful concept. Einstein after all was a genius.

Quoting current model assumptions and inconsistencies makes you look like either you are not trying to defend it or simply can not. And you do not really understand energy right?? Space do not expand it just is. Matter can expand. "None of this stuff is medium for light. Light doesn't have a medium." In your model for sure because this is assumption that was made long time ago and it became a dogma. Light is not a wave or medium needed for wave to propagate in your model. Yet you can precisely measure its wavelength. There would be a loud lough in audience if you would chalenge me to debate and defend this temple of yours on fragile foundation. (Garmagon)(lego ninjago)

If you claim Wikipedia lies about it. There is no way you believe that people will take things you say seriously if you will insist on that. You would loose credibility and they would accept my arguments simply because they would not trust you. I don't won't that. I do not think that any reasonable scientist would say that. You are not trying hard enough to make it somewhat difficult for me.

Spelling mistake. Thanks for pointing that out.

Again model you are operating on is flawed at fundamental assumptions in so many ways that it becomes a little funny that you are still defending this temple on fragile foundation.

A little bit closer yet not quite there. Yes. It fills up all gaps. And there is a a matter in clasical point of view, and separation (dark matter, dark energy) came from lack of understanding not from actual empirical data. Current model have incorrect assumptions about elementary particles and forces that govern their interaction. Therefore explains fraction about 5% and admits to know virtually nothing about 95% of univers.

Yes there is logic and consistency.