Jump to content
Science Forums

Question re: Novel expansion and contraction universe hypothesis (crackpot theory)


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

I don’t believe in adhd but I will say the meds for it do raise serotonin enough to improve grades in an academic setting but that isn’t real intelligence. My IQ piqued about where Magnus Carlsen’s not at 25 but 28. I wouldn’t say that a person’s piques at a certain date I believe that an increase, even a slight one much less mine that was about 70 points, piques due to overall adrenaline thresholds not dopamine.

Dopamine is still the more important neurotransmitter chemical that is usually deficient in ADD/ADHD. The medication of stimulants, such as amphetamines is the usual treatment, because it works instantly, by making the brain produce more dopamine imediately. But I do not think it is such a wise drug to use. My medication is primarily meant for bipolar/schizo-effective disorder, and after being on this for four years regularly my dopamine levels were trained to increase by the antipsichotic which is a dopamine reuptake promoter (Third generation atypical 'Olanzapine' and very high-tech). So for a while I could concentrate less, but my brain chemistry adapted, thus producing more dopamine to make up for the lack and so now it is more stable, and balanced.

Serotonin is the other main chemical and is usually treated for depression. Luckily I don't get bad depression, so do not need anti-depressents (Serotonin reuptake inhibitors), thankfully. My medication really has improved my life, it has also treated my anxiety as well as my ADD, which is a real disorder, although the classification was invented in the 1970s, when the psychiatrists split out aspergers into various seperate spectrum disorders, considered as autism generally.

Adrenaline, noadrenaline are also contributers, but adrenaline is not a nervous system chemical. It just gets produced in large quantities when a sufferer is 'high', or experiencing a manic episode. Fight or flight mode encourages the body to make more adrenaline and it keeps you awake.

As for our IQ's it is a useful tool to judge large groups in quantative analysis, but not useful to judge an individual in qualative analysis. It will vary over a persons life and says nothing of their talants or skills that they may have aquired. They could have a low IQ but still be very talented musicians. It is not the be all and end all of the measure of a human being, IMHO.

Edited by silazcarbryck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

16 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

In past year and 1/4th I’ve taught myself how westerners tied lassos and hang-rope after being shown a ‘hitch knot’ and observing that it slips when tugged, I taught myself the finer points of vocal pitch when singing, I taught myself how to position my tongue and mouth and learned how to whistle which is something I never could pull off. You know that’s two different areas of the brain working overtime, which falls in the category of factor 2, cognitive tradeoff and retrofitting working memory to other parts of the brain. All of which I would contribute to cortisol’s role increasing inference or inductive reasoning (logic by induction), in other words attention to detail so it doesn’t take a million tries to get something down to an art form. Smacking the ruler across a persons knuckle will make him think twice, this is good in my experience. A sensitive person has finesse, not a like your common herky jerky clutsz who makes too many mistakes the first time.

🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

I don’t believe in adhd but I will say the meds for it do raise serotonin enough to improve grades in an academic setting but that isn’t real intelligence. My IQ piqued about where Magnus Carlsen’s not at 25 but 28. I wouldn’t say that a person’s piques at a certain date I believe that an increase, even a slight one much less mine that was about 70 points, piques due to overall adrenaline thresholds not dopamine. We can break intelligence down to 3 factors,

1. short term, long term, and working memory - summed up in terms of which one your daily proclivities reinforce the most. A person with an eidetic memory may be what adhd actually is because it can reduce working memory; whereas those with a photographic memory are more prone to the disorder as well as an uncanny ability to increase the gray matter in his or her prefrontal cortex due to over-obsession on one task. Which can actually help with the damage done by certain drugs.

2. Fluid intelligence - we actually see the discrepancies between photographic and eidetic memories in people who have either condition made manifest by the trade-off between working and long term memory. Switching between the two, either because of adhd meds or in the opposite case recreational drug use, can result in savant syndrome. Which is another term for autodidactic behavior. 

3. Stimulation of the CNS - it is a known fact that building and retraining that muscle in other ways not unlike the cross-fit regime is known to increase response times. Hence cortisol’s role in learning.

Now between factors 2 and 3 a persons lifestyle will be more stressful in either case.

 

Here’s another one:

Unfortunately I’ve lost everything else I’ve been doing lately. Except this which I still secretly have the base coordinates for if you want something that you can really sell as my publicist

 

That is a way to view the model I’ve posed in this thread on an animation. It’s not just Newtonian gravity, it’s is supposed to be able to solve the three body problem when one applies my 2 base coordinates systems appropriately (for gravitons 216 coordinates 108 x and y and gravity waves 192 coordinates 96 x and y). As should be advertised.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-body_problem#:~:text=In physics and classical mechanics,Newton's law of universal gravitation.

Edited by JeffreysTubes8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, silazcarbryck said:

Dopamine is still the more important neurotransmitter chemical that is usually deficient in ADD/ADHD. The medication of stimulants, such as amphetamines is the usual treatment, because it works instantly, by making the brain produce more dopamine imediately. But I do not think it is such a wise drug to use. My medication is primarily meant for bipolar/schizo-effective disorder, and after being on this for four years regularly my dopamine levels were trained to increase by the antipsichotic which is a dopamine reuptake promoter (Third generation atypical 'Olanzapine' and very high-tech). So for a while I could concentrate less, but my brain chemistry adapted, thus producing more dopamine to make up for the lack and so now it is more stable, and balanced.

Serotonin is the other main chemical and is usually treated for depression. Luckily I don't get bad depression, so do not need anti-depressents (Serotonin reuptake inhibitors), thankfully. My medication really has improved my life, it has also treated my anxiety as well as my ADD, which is a real disorder, although the classification was invented in the 1970s, when the psychiatrists split out aspergers into various seperate spectrum disorders, considered as autism generally.

Adrenaline, noadrenaline are also contributers, but adrenaline is not a nervous system chemical. It just gets produced in large quantities when a sufferer is 'high', or experiencing a manic episode. Fight or flight mode encourages the body to make more adrenaline and it keeps you awake.

As for our IQ's it is a useful tool to judge large groups in quantative analysis, but not useful to judge an individual in qualative analysis. It will vary over a persons life and says nothing of their talants or skills that they may have aquired. They could have a low IQ but still be very talented musicians. It is not the be all and end all of the measure of a human being, IMHO.

Well in my experience, and I know that’s never a great way to begin a hypothesis, it seems that stress or manic states have been a greater contributor to my ability to learn on my own than dopamine. For instance, I was better at sitting down and really getting through multiple courses at once when I was on ‘focalin’ (adhd meds) but my IQ didn’t change and I struggled to grasp what later came automatically, in a very savant or ‘autodidactic’ sense. 

Now looking at how the hitch knot slipped I ‘inductively reasoned’ that putting the end of the rope through the loop would prevent slippage in the same way that while an l will fit through an o a T will not. Now under pressure, any soon to be hanged Jesse James who had that prior knowledge with his hands tied by that method would quickly ‘reason by deduction’ that the only reason they quadrupled or quintupled that number of hitches above that slip-fix is to prevent anyone with that same prior knowledge from quickly untying that type of knot to free his hands and would count exactly the number of times he’d have to undo it.

You see fight or flight is not the mind-killer it’s made out to be. Imagine how many early humans wouldn’t have had the luxury of fire of just a few of them that lived in a state fight or flight hadn’t noticed that their spears generated sparks when clashing certain types of rocks. What’s that saying in Prometheus Bound? Necessity has twice the strength of artifice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

 

Here’s another one:

Unfortunately I’ve lost everything else I’ve been doing lately. Except this which I still secretly have the base coordinates for if you want something that you can really sell as my publicist

Algebra is a difficult thing to sell to the public. If you are to engage in producing and presenting a more 'popular' science channel on Youtube, there would be a better chance of success. But it would have to be rather dilute content to appeal to a wider audience. But not too stupid. Many Youtube users are intelligent and don't like being talked down to as much as you might think. So dumb isn't always best, like it is with the normal television where dumb is king.

There are still some very good quality pop science presenters on the 'tube though who don't dilute their content too much, I like Sabine Hossenfelder, Scott Manley, Anton Petov to name a few well pitched science presenters. They are certainly more detailed with their desciptions of science than the normal television science documentaries which must appeal to the lowest common denominator and so are generaly very dumb. You have to have excellent English language skills.

Usually the more complicated your science presentation is, the less likely you will get to that magic 100,000 subscribers. The biggest problem with Youtube is that you have to keep at it for a long period of time, producing at least one video that is of consistant quality at least every week, for what might be as long as at least one or two years, with still no income before you have built up a decent subscriber base and one can suffer from burnout where you run out of ideas, so it's best to stick to topical subjects, such as discussing anything that is recent news, such a a new paper that has just been published, or journal article. Essentially media eats media, it consumes itself.

Advertising is no way to make money, even Google don't make much income from the adverts, so content creators get even less, but product placement that you talk about in your videos when you have a large subscriber base is a good way to earn an income. Also you can convert maybe one percent of your youtube subscribers (Percent may vary a little up or down) into Patron subscribers who are willing to pay you a monthly subscription of say $1 to £5. Or perhaps a small amount of money for each video you make. 'Whales' will pay the most but there are very few of them. 'Dolphins' will pay less, and they are slightly more common than the 'whales'. 'Freeloaders' will give you nothing, but they are the largest group in your audience, and so are more likely to share your content with their friends in their own social networking sites, such as Facebook/Twitter/Instagram ect. and so help to promote your channel and drive more subscibers to it. 'Freeloaders' who use ad blocking software are less common and you will get nothing from them much, but just behave in the same way as the usual freeloaders. It's best to appeal to all these groups if you want to be successful as a Youtuber.

Well that's Youtube advice from what I know about it in a nutshell anyway. - Si

Edited by silazcarbryck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, silazcarbryck said:

Algebra is a difficult thing to sell to the public. If you are to engage in producing and presenting a more 'popular' science channel on Youtube, there would be a better chance of success. But it would have to be rather dilute content to appeal to a wider audience. But not too stupid. Many Youtube users are intelligent and don't like being talked down to as much as you might think. So dumb isn't always best, like it is with the normal television where dumb is king.

There are still some very good quality pop science presenters on the 'tube though who don't dilute their content too much, I like Sabine Hossenfelder, Scott Manley, Anton Petov to name a few well pitched science presenters. They are certainly more detailed with their desciptions of science than the normal television science documentaries which must appeal to the lowest common denominator and so are generaly very dumb. You have to have excellent English language skills.

Usually the more complicated your science presentation is, the less likely you will get to that magic 100,000 subscribers. The biggest problem with Youtube is that you have to keep at it for a long period of time, producing at least one video that is of consistant quality every at least every week, for what might be as long as at least one or two years, with still no income before you have built up a decent subscriber base and one can suffer from burnout where you run out of ideas, so it's best to stick to topical subjects, such as discussing anything that is recent news, such a a new paper that has just been published, or journal article. Essentially media eats media, it consumes itself.

Advertising is no way to make money, even Google don't make much income from the adverts, so content creators get even less, but product placement that you talk about in your videos when you have a large subscriber base is a good way to earn an income. Also you can convert maybe one percent of your youtube subscribers (Percent may vary a little up or down) into Patron subscribers who are willing to pay you a monthly subscription of say $1 to £5. Or perhaps a small amount of money for each video you make. 'Whales' will pay the most but there are very few of them. 'Dolphins' will pay less, and they are slightly more common than the 'whales'. 'Freeloaders' will give you nothing, but they are the largest group in your audience, and so are more likely to share your content with their friends in their own social networking sites, such as Facebook/Twitter/Instagram ect. and so help to promote your channel and drive more subscibers to it. 'Freeloaders' who use ad blocking software are less common and you will get nothing from them much, but just behave in teh same way as teh usual freeloaders. It's best to appeal to all these groups if you want to be successful as a Youtuber.

Well that's Youtube advice from what I know about it in a nutshell anyway. - Si

Oh that wasn’t my YouTube channel, he posed a question that he left for the viewers to solve at the end of his video that I automatically answered. But advanced algebra doesn’t fit what I was saying about Pythagorean geometry earlier like the other youtuber I was correcting. But unfortunately my solutions were in those botched images. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

Now looking at how the hitch knot slipped I ‘inductively reasoned’ that putting the end of the rope through the loop would prevent slippage in the same way that while an l will fit through an o a T will not. Now under pressure, any soon to be hanged Jesse James who had that prior knowledge with his hands tied by that method would quickly ‘reason by deduction’ that the only reason they quadrupled or quintupled that number of hitches above that slip-fix is to prevent anyone with that same prior knowledge from quickly untying that type of knot to free his hands and would count exactly the number of times he’d have to undo it.

It is a little disturbing that you talk a lot about hanging and slip knots, ropes and such, I'm not sure your analogy if that is what it is really translates well into English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I really want to sell to the public is my own ability to use a higher dimensional solution to the three body problem in physics and my potential ability to apply it to certain engineering designs involving u-carbon in tubular graphene (carbon nanotubes) in a complex nanorobotic apparatus that can control and manipulate negative ion plasma peripherally. These dynamic solid-plasma states of matter containing negative ion plasma are luminous and also constantly generate electricity to recharge the nanorotor apparatus that uses said luminosity to control the dynamic force field which is both a solid and a plasma.

Edited by JeffreysTubes8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

Oh that wasn’t my YouTube channel, he posed a question that he left for the viewers to solve at the end of his video that I automatically answered. But advanced algebra doesn’t fit what I was saying about Pythagorean geometry earlier like the other youtuber I was correcting. But unfortunately my solutions were in those botched images. 

Oh I see, but you said you wanted help with media marketting advice? That was all I could think about to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

What I really want to sell to the public is my own ability to use a higher dimensional solution to the three body problem in physics and my potential ability to apply it to certain engineering designs involving u-carbon in tubular graphene (carbon nanotubes) in a complex nanorobotic apparatus that can control and manipulate negative ion plasma peripherally. 

People really love robots, and anything 'carbon-nano tubes' related. Basically anything with 'nano' or 'graphene' in the description sounds super high-tech to most people and they will probably fall for it. If you can design and fabricate a graphene pencil case to store graphite pencils that have 'graphene' written on them instead, they will be easily lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, silazcarbryck said:

It is a little disturbing that you talk a lot about hanging and slip knots, ropes and such, I'm not sure your analogy if that is what it is really translates well into English.

The Jesse James analogy was well-placed, but perhaps not a good marketing ploy which apparently requires also that you understand your target audience. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said:

What I really want to sell to the public is my own ability to use a higher dimensional solution to the three body problem in physics and my potential ability to apply it to certain engineering designs involving u-carbon in tubular graphene (carbon nanotubes) in a complex nanorobotic apparatus that can control and manipulate negative ion plasma peripherally. 

What I really want to manufacture and sell is wax paper packaging made from hemp fibre and vegetable oil. It can replace some of the non-recyclable plastic food packaging and many other types of non-recycleable plastic packaging that also goes to landfill from many other products as well. It's not recycleable itself, but can be put in with food waste for anerobic digestion into biogas and agricultrual fertilizer, or just composted. It's not difficult to make transparent paper, and it uses a quater of the energy to manufacture compared to virgin plastic of similar weight. It will save the world! Well, maybe not all the world, just some of it. I'm not really into high tech solutions, mainly low tech ones.

Edited by silazcarbryck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about this?

A guide is giving a class on rope tying. Before he starts, one of his students makes an inappropriate BDSM remark. The next day the guide takes this students on a mountain climbing trip, they tie their ropes separately and the guide descends the mountain first and asks his student to observe before going himself. The student then attempts the same descent but his knot slips. 

Perhaps the student wasn’t worried enough to doubt his guide and check to see if their knots matched exactly the same or if there was a minute difference such as an end through a loop? 

You begin to see the value of MANNERS! 
 

 

Edited by JeffreysTubes8
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...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...